Live data from Hacker News

Despite High Hopes, Self-Driving Cars Are ‘Way in the Future’

nytimes.com

41–50 of 445 posts

Re: Despite High Hopes, Self-Driving Cars Are ‘Way in the Future’

#41
This has been obvious all along to anyone who has ever driven or used a computer before and thought about the reality for more than a couple of minutes. But the press and VCs bought into the hype from the likes of Uber who needed to keep generating huge new investment to stay afloat and Tesla which is run by a delusional snake oil salesman who had a single hit with the Model S.

The shocking examples of crazy unexpected behavior in the article like street sweepers that do exactly what they are supposed to be doing and cyclists who don’t follow traffic rules blow my mind. Next we’ll learn that some streets have poorly painted lines or that road construction exists or that most human drivers exceed posted speed limits or that there is weather other than sunny and clear.

Re: Despite High Hopes, Self-Driving Cars Are ‘Way in the Future’

#42
Id take this article with a large pinch of salt, considering their previous predictions about technology.

case in point below:

"Hence, if it requires, say, a thousand years to fit for easy flight a bird which started with rudimentary wings, or ten thousand for one which started with no wings at all and had to sprout them ab initio, it might be assumed that the flying machine which will really fly might be evolved by the combined and continuous efforts of mathematicians and mechanicians in from one million to ten million years--provided, of course, we can meanwhile eliminate such little drawbacks and embarrassments as the existing relation between weight and strength in inorganic materials. "[Emphasis added.] The New York Times, Oct 9, 1903, p. 6.

see -> https://11points.com/11-ridiculously-terrible-predictions-ma...

Re: Despite High Hopes, Self-Driving Cars Are ‘Way in the Future’

#43

Self-driving tech muggle here. Could someone explain to me why any average Joe with minimal intellect can drive a car using only a pair of eyes but it's difficult to build a fully self-driving car even with 8+ cameras, GPS, LIDAR and other sensors us humans don't have?

In a word, context.

Human brains are just context gathering pattern matching machines. We can't even count without all kinds of context being automatically bubbled up into our consciousness.

When we see other drivers, we can take all kinds of subtle hints about their behavior. We can easily tell if they have an unsecured load (not just if it's currently shaking). We can see the way someone is looking at the road to know if they are going to go, if they're hesitating, if they're high. We can know where the road is even though it's snowed out because of the approximate distance from the ditch you remember being 15 feet out alongside it.

There are zillions of cases like this in the long tail. Self driving cars leapt forward by being able to answer the vastly important contextual question of "what is this in my sensor?" -- but to do the rest, it's hard to overstate how much a computer would have to "be human". To be able to apply past experience, psychology and complicated inferences about "why is this in my sensor? what can I do about it?"

In the end, self driving cars will thrive, just in an environment that poses these kinds of questions as little as possible.

Or we'll actually get a breakthrough and be able to create NNs that allow machines to learn and apply a vast breadth of learned context to sensory input. Teach them vast amounts of unrelated things just as every human learns in the 16 years before they drive (and then some), and then effectively put extra-sensory humans on the road.

Re: Despite High Hopes, Self-Driving Cars Are ‘Way in the Future’

#44
post #26

Nothing makes a huge group of us cringe more, than people saying it's just around the corner. The worst part is it also comes from people who should know better. >Waymo’s CEO, John Krafcik, has admitted that a self-driving car that can drive in any condition, on any road, without ever needing a human to take control—usually called a “level five” autonomous vehicle—will basically never exist. At the Wall Street Journa…

If a human can do it, I see no reason why an autonomous system can't, eventually, do it. It might take a very long time, but "never" seems short-sighted.

Humans can't do it. When your stopping distance (including reaction time) exceeds your visibility there's no way to drive safely, but humans do it anyways.

Re: Despite High Hopes, Self-Driving Cars Are ‘Way in the Future’

#46
post #25

I think it would happen this way: firstly you would automate things that go on a track - like trains - which I think we already have. Then secondly you could have certain lanes or roads that are designed for specific self-driving vehicles. This could help buses and trucks (in certain areas) get around. Then you would keep adding more of those, until many roads have those and very few manual lanes. It wouldn't immedia…

This has been my line of thought as well, autonomous vehicle will slowly emerge over time. We are not waiting on 1 or 2 big tech breakthroughs alone, but also on a lot of infrastructure and regulatory changes, which take a lot of time to enact.

I would wager we are at least a decade away from self-driving cars being a common part of daily life, in the sense that the average driver would see them on the road somewhat regularly. And probably 2 decades away from self-driving cars being an "everymans" vehicle and/or delivering on the concept of not having to own a vehicle and instead summoning one when needed, or putting your autonomous vehicle to work for you while you are not using it.

Re: Despite High Hopes, Self-Driving Cars Are ‘Way in the Future’

#47
post #10

Self-driving tech muggle here. Could someone explain to me why any average Joe with minimal intellect can drive a car using only a pair of eyes but it's difficult to build a fully self-driving car even with 8+ cameras, GPS, LIDAR and other sensors us humans don't have?

We're using a lot of sensory data to compensate for the fact that the "AI" driving the car is really dumb. It lacks any meta-level understanding of the problem domain and is essentially a stimulus-response system similar to a very simple insect or even a single celled organism. We can drive a car with much more limited sensory input because we have a very high level cognitive model of what we are doing. Better model…

not quite true. when you show a kid something new you are literally exposing the kid to the thing thousands/millions of times. different angles, rotation, heck even if you’re just looking without touching from a fixed position your eyes will sample it a lot (saccades of your eye). you also connect/map the object to your prior knowledge. with an AI/ML model you’re starting from scratch. what makes learning “easy” for humans is the incremental nature of it + millions of years of evolution

also: humans can drive a car better than a machine because the roads are designed for humans and the other drivers are humans. the machines would destroy us at driving if the roads were optimized for machines.

Re: Despite High Hopes, Self-Driving Cars Are ‘Way in the Future’

#48

Id take this article with a large pinch of salt, considering their previous predictions about technology. case in point below: "Hence, if it requires, say, a thousand years to fit for easy flight a bird which started with rudimentary wings, or ten thousand for one which started with no wings at all and had to sprout them ab initio, it might be assumed that the flying machine which will really fly might be evolved by…

Your best case example is a statement made over a century ago?

Re: Despite High Hopes, Self-Driving Cars Are ‘Way in the Future’

#49
post #27

Even if it will be technically possible, and I'm pretty sure some day that will be solved. That's the easiest part. The biggest hurdle for self-driving cars will be ethics, such as 'the car brakes for a child suddenly crossing the street but then kills the old woman' or perhaps even make decisions based upon social status. Lots of options here. Those ethics have to be agreed upon, and they will likely differ per cult…

No, the Trolley Problem will not be the biggest (or even a significant) hurdle until AI is so good that it's a moot point anyway. Self driving cars will do what humans do - they'll brake as hard as possible while trying to steer away from anything they're going to hit. If we're lucky they may distinguish between moving and non-moving objects and prefer to hit the latter on the assumption that the former are more important.

    if (going_to_crash()) stop();

Re: Despite High Hopes, Self-Driving Cars Are ‘Way in the Future’

#50
post #8

We don't need self-driving cars that can go anywhere (ie. level 5) for them to be widely useful. A car that only worked in bright sunshine on a preprogrammed set of roads would be immediately useful to me.

Semi trucks, solely on well done roads (Interstates in the US) seem more likely to happen sooner. There's an obvious strategy for "ports", dealing with exceptions, etc.
Post reply on HN