I'm still skeptical that this will happen anytime soon outside of selected small zones. I may be wrong, but I feel like the US or wherever these get deployed need a major infrastructure update to be better or more consistent. Even with the most advanced automated driving system imaginable you will still have poor and inconsistent infrastructure everywhere.
Driverless Hype Collides with Merciless Reality
141–150 of 440 posts
Re: Driverless Hype Collides with Merciless Reality
#142Earlier quoted context omitted.
Have you ever heard about that thing called fog?
As an existence proof, people drive through fog every day. We prove that it's possible to take binocular visual data and convert that into a series of control signals that will propel a car through fog. Sure sometimes accidents happen, but every day thousands upon thousands of people safely navigate fog in e.g. San Francisco or London. I see no reason machines shouldn't be able to perform at least as well one day.
> I see no reason machines shouldn't be able to perform at least as well one day.
Assuming that day is infinitely far away, then you're right.
Re: Driverless Hype Collides with Merciless Reality
#143Driverless cars are coming along just fine. Waymo is making steady progress. The sensors are getting better. The problem comes from all those "fake it til you make it" startups, Uber and Tesla being the worst. Both have killed people. This is mostly about sensors and geometry. Machine learning has a role, but only in target identification. That's how Waymo does it. The fake it til you make it crowd had the fantasy th…
I'm sorry I can't back up my claims but you will be proved wrong with time. I would bet in less than 10 years you'll have camera only fully autonomous systems.
There is no upside to this approach. LIDAR is only getting cheaper, there is no reason not to use it.
Re: Driverless Hype Collides with Merciless Reality
#144Earlier quoted context omitted.
Have you ever heard about that thing called fog?
As an existence proof, people drive through fog every day. We prove that it's possible to take binocular visual data and convert that into a series of control signals that will propel a car through fog. Sure sometimes accidents happen, but every day thousands upon thousands of people safely navigate fog in e.g. San Francisco or London. I see no reason machines shouldn't be able to perform at least as well one day.
Machines will be (and already are) held to a much higher standard than human drivers— there are a lot of reasons for this, ranging from the emotional to the pragmatic.
Just because thousands of people roll the dice every day driving in unsafe conditions does not mean that we should tolerate machines doing so.
Re: Driverless Hype Collides with Merciless Reality
#145Driverless cars are coming along just fine. Waymo is making steady progress. The sensors are getting better. The problem comes from all those "fake it til you make it" startups, Uber and Tesla being the worst. Both have killed people. This is mostly about sensors and geometry. Machine learning has a role, but only in target identification. That's how Waymo does it. The fake it til you make it crowd had the fantasy th…
I'm sorry I can't back up my claims but you will be proved wrong with time. I would bet in less than 10 years you'll have camera only fully autonomous systems.
I’ll take the “over” on that bet any day of the week. It might not be 20 years, but it’ll be a friggin’ while.
There are scenarios it’s possible to encounter on the road that humans don’t even necessarily know how to handle immediately. In proper, brutal, real-world testing, one very quickly enters the realm of problems that you’d need full-fledged general AI to reason through.
Re: Driverless Hype Collides with Merciless Reality
#146Driverless cars are coming along just fine. Waymo is making steady progress. The sensors are getting better. The problem comes from all those "fake it til you make it" startups, Uber and Tesla being the worst. Both have killed people. This is mostly about sensors and geometry. Machine learning has a role, but only in target identification. That's how Waymo does it. The fake it til you make it crowd had the fantasy th…
Self-driving car: ZF Electric car: ZF TaaS: ZF Self-driving advertising services: ZF All will be available, all from the same company. EDIT: Waymo laughed at "route-based advertising" when I mentioned, but ZF supports this idea. Route-based advertising or route advertising is an advertising model where your vehicle diverts to make you see a particular place and/or get you to visit a particular shop. For example, it m…
Silly question, but what do you mean when you type "ZF"?
Re: Driverless Hype Collides with Merciless Reality
#147Driverless cars are coming along just fine. Waymo is making steady progress. The sensors are getting better. The problem comes from all those "fake it til you make it" startups, Uber and Tesla being the worst. Both have killed people. This is mostly about sensors and geometry. Machine learning has a role, but only in target identification. That's how Waymo does it. The fake it til you make it crowd had the fantasy th…
Human drivers kill people every day. Something like 90% of all auto accidents are due to human error, last I checked.
The stats are still on the side of automated drivers.
As urban population density increases, and people are closer to services, we'll need fewer vehicles on the road at any given time.
Uber CEO Dara Khosrowshahi said just last week that e-scooters and such will be more popular than car trips in the next few years.
The number of people holding a license has dropped off a cliff from a generation ago. The only age cohort in which licensing is up is 60-70ish year olds, and is down in 75+ aged folks and younger than 60s. Half the number of 16 year olds today hold a license relative to 1983 when we started tracking it reliably.
Common reasons cited: car ownership and maintenance is too expensive, urban dwellers have Uber, pub trans, or friends and family. Gas and insurance are too expensive.
We're not about to get away from needing traditional automobiles entirely; too much utilitarian value. The frequency of use, and likely private ownership, is going to drop off a cliff in the next generation.
Re: Driverless Hype Collides with Merciless Reality
#148Driverless cars are coming along just fine. Waymo is making steady progress. The sensors are getting better. The problem comes from all those "fake it til you make it" startups, Uber and Tesla being the worst. Both have killed people. This is mostly about sensors and geometry. Machine learning has a role, but only in target identification. That's how Waymo does it. The fake it til you make it crowd had the fantasy th…
Hasn’t Tesla autopilot saved more lives than it took? So it’s more net beneficial (so far) than cautious Waymo?
How could it do that? The safety statistics quoted by Tesla is "fatalities per mile of Autopilot-enabled vehicle", compared to "fatalities per mile for the average car on the road". It's by no means an accurate comparison, in fact they're inflating their relative safety versus other cars by more than an order of magnitude.
Re: Driverless Hype Collides with Merciless Reality
#149Earlier quoted context omitted.
From Sterling Anderson, former director of Autopilot who oversaw the implementation of HW2: >Perception is a game of statistics.Crudely speaking, if we have three independent modalities with epsilon miss-detection-rates and we combine them we can achieve an epsilon³ rate in perception. In practice, relatively orthogonal failure modes won’t achieve that level of benefit, however, an error every million miles can get b…
First, thanks for sharing this! Second - based on the language used I can’t tell if he is saying Tesla’s camera and Radar approach will work, or that it won’t. The only thing that I pulled out was that if we increase the types of sensors we get better results because they have different strengths and weakenesses.
Sterling does believe cameras may someday be good enough, but I'm personally of the belief that Lidar will get cheap before vision gets good, and as such there's no good reason to not have the extra redundancy.
Re: Driverless Hype Collides with Merciless Reality
#150Driverless cars are coming along just fine. Waymo is making steady progress. The sensors are getting better. The problem comes from all those "fake it til you make it" startups, Uber and Tesla being the worst. Both have killed people. This is mostly about sensors and geometry. Machine learning has a role, but only in target identification. That's how Waymo does it. The fake it til you make it crowd had the fantasy th…
> You can maybe identify "traffic light", "car", "pedestrian", and "deer" with machine learning.
What you wrote makes a lot of sense to me. However, I would also hope that in a matured self-driving environment, traffic lights would be mapped ahead of time. It's always possible that a traffic light shows up in an unexpected place, but in my mental image of the future, this raises a flag for system management to modify the map of permanent objects.
There is a chance that a powered non-permanent traffic light is found somewhere, a dude walking along the side of the street with a stoplight on his back, and connected batteries. In that case, the police need calling. In machine learning, there are just so many corner cases where best to not try to fully interpret, just call out "dude, look at this thing!"