Despite High Hopes, Self-Driving Cars Are ‘Way in the Future’ • Hacker News Board

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

#421

Post by DataGata » Thu, Jul 18, 2019, 2:32 PM UTC

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #335

wbrinkley wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tesla frequently talks about platooning when touting their Semi. "Self-driving" by almost blindly following a human-driven lead vehicle doesn't seem that far off. But I'm not looking forward to the day when I see a "train" of semi trucks speeding down the interstate only a foot or two apart from each other!

That could work, for the platoon, while on the interstate. It might not work for other vehicles on the interstate, though. If there's not room to pull in between them, then you have to pass all of them at one time. If you're a semi that wants to drive 1 or 2 MPH faster than them, that's going to be a very long, slow, pass. It will be even worse if it's in hilly country, where the semi attempting to pass may have high…

We could ban semis passing at all, that'd be fine with me.

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

#422

Post by runarberg » Thu, Jul 18, 2019, 3:23 PM UTC

beat wrote: post #417

smileysteve wrote: post #339

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But this is where HN is blind; a non insignificant portion of America doesn't have access to a reliable automobile. So, there are already 10s of millions of Americans (and Europeans) that transport luggage and a baby just fine.

Actually, no. I know people who are too poor for a car. I've been people too poor for a car. Kiss an extra two hours of your day goodbye just to get to and from work (assuming you have a job). Going to the doctor is a nightmare (assuming you have medical insurance). It sucks a lot, unless you're living in a city so dense that cars are impractical.

From your situation it seems like the system in place that provide alternatives to driving could benefit from being expanded, increased, and optimized.

I hope your local politicians agree with me that expenditures going into making these alternatives are money better spent then waiting for the technology to dedicate highway lanes for autonomous vehicles.

That is I hope they agree that your situation of not being able to go to the doctor within a reasonable amount of time takes precedence over people wanting to sleep during their 8 hour highway trip but are unwilling to take the bus for some reason.

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

#423

Post by yazanobeidi » Thu, Jul 18, 2019, 3:43 PM UTC

mkl wrote: post #350

onemoresoop wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about automating traffic lights? This could ease traffic in urban areas and I don't hear anyone talking about it.

Traffic lights are automated. They detect how many cars are waiting to know when to change, they adjust their cycle length depending on time of day, etc., they synchronise along long roads so people generally get a string of green lights. What do you mean?

Only a small proportion of traffic light signals are adaptive and/or connected today. Most rely on manual signal timing studies to set a timing schedule. The up-front cost is typically prohibitive. Full disclosure I am founder of a startup changing the economics on this.

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

#424

Post by jakeogh » Thu, Jul 18, 2019, 3:57 PM UTC

pedrocr wrote: post #414

jakeogh wrote: post #396

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nope. As I just said, even going the police state route _wont work_. Your premise, that we can make the environment more predicable to make pre-programmed cars easier to program is wrong. That would be attacking the tiny minority of the real world problem. I'm entirely comfortable with that prediction. You disagree, that's fine. I suspect we will both be around to see. If you want to instead talk about making it safe…

It's not just making the programming easier, it's making the problem actually possible. We have a much higher tolerance for fatal accidents with human drivers than we ever will with automated ones. So if you have an environment where many thousands of people are killed today and then expect self-driving to work in the exact same context with airliner level reliability you've defined the problem as practically impossi…

There is no making the programming easier, or possible. It's not a problem you can solve with a program. I blame sci-fi for this disconnect.

Human sensory augmentation will save lives, but that has nothing to do with the marketing ploy that cars can have self.

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

#425

Post by YeGoblynQueenne » Thu, Jul 18, 2019, 3:59 PM UTC

bart_spoon wrote: post #398

YeGoblynQueenne wrote: post #361

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Uber did recognise Elaine Herzberg as a pedestrian in the last 2 seconds before hitting her, after failing to do so for the 4 previous seconds [1]. It could have activated its breaks and she may have had a chance to survive (though probably not unscathed). However, the car's auto-breaking decision had been disabled because it was considered too conservative. So the only agent who could have reacted in time was th…

> Much as I find the hype around self-driving cars brain-dead, in this case, the car's AI was not at fault. Even if it could have made the decision to stop in time, the agency to act upon this decision was removed from it. The agency to react was removed because its reactions are crap. If the AI is braking due to false positives all the time, and the the only way to fix it is to disable its ability to react, then I w…

Like I say, _in this case_ the car's AI was not at fault.

I don't know how good or bad is Uber's car AI. If by "crap" you mean that image recognition in general is brittle when exposed to real world conditions, as opposed to the controlled experimental conditions in published results, then I agree.

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

#426

Post by mikestew » Thu, Jul 18, 2019, 4:11 PM UTC

rayiner wrote: post #405

mikestew wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think your prediction will turn out to be as closer or closer than any other. Certainly more on the money than the breathless “won’t be a problem in a few years when self-driving...” But as I read your probably-on-the-money prediction, I was thinking “here we go again, dumping money for the two-ton wheelchairs while alternative transportation goes begging again.” Where’s my fucking barrier-protected bike lane? Or a…

> Frankly, if that’s how it goes, I wonder if it happens at all. “Separate lanes for wealthy tech workers” is how that’s going to go. You know why we can’t even get bike lanes? Because people bitch and moan because they don’t personally use it. Expand that to an empty lane of moving traffic while the plebs sit in traffic. It’s bad policy to spend scarce resources (in this case road space) on something few people use.…

It’s bad policy to spend scarce resources (in this case road space) on something few people use.

You mean like self-driving cars? How about we spend "scarce resources" on things people actually do use right now, like bicycles, scooters, electric skateboards, whatever.

You're also arguing, "let's not spend anything on infrastructure for $ACTIVITY, then when no one does $ACTIVITY, we can say, 'yeah, but nobody does that'."

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

#427

Post by jmpman » Thu, Jul 18, 2019, 4:31 PM UTC

hi5eyes wrote: post #419

jmpman wrote: post #407

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Drove my Model 3 on autopilot today. Entered a roadway that had recently been repaved, and lacking lane markers. The Model 3 couldn’t handle it and wouldn’t let me engage autopilot. There aren’t robotaxis until that trivial problem is solved.

by autopilot you mean teslas dangerous rebrand of lane assist? yeah stupid

It’s surprisingly good at 99.9% of scenarios. Unfortunately I encounter one of those 0.1% events each day, and they’re always different. For example, yesterday there was a tractor driving down the road in the lane next to me. It had axles which stuck out almost two feet from the wheel. Suspect that scenario isn’t going to be handled properly as the appropriate bounding box is non-standard.

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

#428

Post by tptacek » Thu, Jul 18, 2019, 4:45 PM UTC

mikestew wrote: post #426

rayiner wrote: post #405

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Frankly, if that’s how it goes, I wonder if it happens at all. “Separate lanes for wealthy tech workers” is how that’s going to go. You know why we can’t even get bike lanes? Because people bitch and moan because they don’t personally use it. Expand that to an empty lane of moving traffic while the plebs sit in traffic. It’s bad policy to spend scarce resources (in this case road space) on something few people use.…

It’s bad policy to spend scarce resources (in this case road space) on something few people use. You mean like self-driving cars? How about we spend "scarce resources" on things people actually do use right now, like bicycles, scooters, electric skateboards, whatever. You're also arguing, "let's not spend anything on infrastructure for $ACTIVITY, then when no one does $ACTIVITY, we can say, 'yeah, but nobody does tha…

Like he said, because less than 1% of American commuters bike, and the average commute is over 16 miles.

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

#429

Post by ghostbrainalpha » Thu, Jul 18, 2019, 4:56 PM UTC

runarberg wrote: post #270

AtlasBarfed wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seriously, please automate highway driving first. You get all the benefits for shipping and efficiency and logistics, so the money is there. The problem is so much more simple, and there can be convergent infrastructure (embedded sensors, mesh network updates, higher standards of road quality). On long trips on highways it just kills me that I have to stare at the same image for hours basically, and that a program co…

It seems there is a solution for your problem already: Busses. Although not strictly automated, they are externalized. That is you are not the one doing the driving, and therefor you are free to sleep, read, work, etc, while you wait to get to your destination. The beauty about busses is that they exists. There is no unsolved technology problems with busses. And they can be (and most likely already are) implemented w…

Your comment is how things "should work", but really not how they do. At least in the U.S.

The drive from Las Vegas to Los Angeles is about 3.5 hours. It's a 90 minute flight.

If you try to do it by Bus it takes 12 (often for about 1/2 the price of the plane ticket), and for some reason a train with NO STOPS took 16 hours. Which was discontinued just a couple years ago, because no one was using it.

Maybe someday we will get a high speed Mag Lev train for this commute, because mass transit has completely failed this commute.

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

#430

Post by milesokeefe » Thu, Jul 18, 2019, 5:07 PM UTC

sam_goody wrote: post #160

It is phenomenally simpler to have autonomous driving in an area where the only things on the road are autonomous and there is a standard for interacting cross manufacturer. Many new cars, and in some countries all new cars (by law), have enough sensors to be made self driving. Standards are already being worked on. A basic level of autonomy - good enough for an area without human drivers - is being worked on by ever…

>Many new cars, and in some countries all new cars (by law), have enough sensors to be made self driving.

Does that include LIDAR? You can't make a safe self driving car without LIDAR.