Waymo to customers: “Completely driverless Waymo cars are on the way” • Hacker News Board

Re: Waymo to customers: “Completely driverless Waymo cars are on the way”

#141

Post by esoterica » Thu, Oct 10, 2019, 3:37 AM UTC

Causality1 wrote: post #112

esoterica wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would companies not sell autonomous cars if customers exist who are willing to pay a reasonable margin over manufacturing costs? The fact that autonomous taxis are viable doesn’t preclude personal car ownership.

Because they would make far more money adding the car to their own fleet. Why sell a car for $40,000 when it could generate $300,000 in revenue over a decade? Tesla has already said they'll stop selling to the public after they have autonomous driving completely safe and working.

Because more than 1 company exists on the planet. If you won’t sell a car for $40,000 because you’re afraid of cannibalizing your taxi business then someone else will.

Re: Waymo to customers: “Completely driverless Waymo cars are on the way”

#142

Post by beerandt » Thu, Oct 10, 2019, 3:38 AM UTC

rayiner wrote: post #118

jonplackett wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or it might go the other way and driverless cars will be push-overs on the road and brake for everyone all the time. There’s a lot of decisions to be made about how they should react to that kind of stuff. Tesla’s last automation talk was interesting about that - they’re basically training the cars to act like a human driver would, looking for tiny signals that might warn of unexpected behaviour.

Tesla still reliably runs into stationary objects and fails to brake for (dummy) children, so take all that with a grain of salt.

Really? Stationary objects? I don't have a lot of faith in Tesla, but that's surprising.

Re: Waymo to customers: “Completely driverless Waymo cars are on the way”

#143

Post by jonplackett » Thu, Oct 10, 2019, 3:50 AM UTC

beerandt wrote: post #107

jonplackett wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that sums it up really well. In those kind of edge cases like the basket ball, if an AI driver didn’t slow down and then killed a kid, we’d all be up in arms about It saying how obvious it was that a kid would run out, and we’d have stopped, and we’d be right. But at the same time that AI driver will have stopped in time when 10 other kids jumped out without any warning because it has much, much better reflex…

Yes, except this presumes that AI would recognize the kid at the same time as a human driver. Or at least soon enough such that AI's quicker reflexes can compensate for any delay. If AI can't recognize some obstacles at all, then I think it's safe to assume there may be some delay in obstacle recognition compared to humans.

You’re probably right. The point I’m making though is there’s going to be some things AI is better at and some things humans are better at and it’s going to be much harder to accept dead people between those points.

Re: Waymo to customers: “Completely driverless Waymo cars are on the way”

#144

Post by seanmcdirmid » Thu, Oct 10, 2019, 3:55 AM UTC

rayiner wrote: post #134

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How many parks in the USA have speed zones around them that aren’t restricted to 15-25mph? It is stupid easy to slow down for a kid chase ball scenario when you are already going slow anyways, the only reason it is such a problem at all is because human drivers prefer speeding so much.

Tons of them? I don't think any of the parks around here in exurban maryland have any sort of special speed zone. My 100+ year old neighborhood doesn't even have its layout mapped correctly in Google Maps. (The road names in the app don't match the street signs and the wayfinding doesn't realize that the road in front of my house is segmented with barriers so you can't drive all the way down it.)

Even in that case, the city default speed limit (when not posted) is usually something low like 25 (Seattle is 20!). Yes, many human drivers ignore that, but self driving cars don’t have that luxury.

We really should do this like the Dutch: when something problematic is encountered, engineer and regulate the hell out of it. Not just for self driving cars, but it works for humans to some extent that the laws are actually enforced.

Re: Waymo to customers: “Completely driverless Waymo cars are on the way”

#145

Post by c0nducktr » Thu, Oct 10, 2019, 4:05 AM UTC

p1necone wrote: post #60

harry8 wrote: post #36

How to predict: 1) Say what but don't say when. 2) Say when but don't say what. Never, ever, ever bet tempted to say something specific will happen in a bounded time range. Flying cars are on the way! That disease you hate, a cure is coming! Next year will be a big year for other breakthroughs not mentioned here.

This is the golden rule of software dev too - promise features or promise a release date, but never both.

Be a bullshit artist?

Re: Waymo to customers: “Completely driverless Waymo cars are on the way”

#146

Post by beerandt » Thu, Oct 10, 2019, 4:06 AM UTC

jonplackett wrote: post #143

beerandt wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, except this presumes that AI would recognize the kid at the same time as a human driver. Or at least soon enough such that AI's quicker reflexes can compensate for any delay. If AI can't recognize some obstacles at all, then I think it's safe to assume there may be some delay in obstacle recognition compared to humans.

You’re probably right. The point I’m making though is there’s going to be some things AI is better at and some things humans are better at and it’s going to be much harder to accept dead people between those points.

I agree. I just don't get why:

1) Everyone assumes the good will outweigh the bad. (And why proof of humans doing one task better than AI is somehow also taken as self-evident proof that the AI will be better at everything else.)

2) No one assumes that we, as humans, will ever be able to improve our driving skills in way that can keep up with AI advances. Someone could invent a magic driving pill. Which is crazy. I just don't assume that it's any crazier than a near-perfect driving AI.

Re: Waymo to customers: “Completely driverless Waymo cars are on the way”

#147

Post by beerandt » Thu, Oct 10, 2019, 4:26 AM UTC

Dylan16807 wrote: post #111

2bitencryption wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

every now and then I do something while driving that, IMO, requires "human cognition". Not just image recognition, obstacle avoidance, rule following, etc. Like, I'm cruising along at 45mph and a plastic bag is blown in front of my car. Yes, I see an obstacle and need to make a decision about what to do - but I do this as a human who knows what a plastic bag is, and how it is far safer to drive right over it than sla…

Even if the car occasionally stops for plastic bags, the self-driving is still a massive improvement in the experience I have. For children you might preemptively slow down, but a properly designed system can brake a whole lot faster. Should be fine.

These are both faulty assumptions.

1) If I'm considering whether to brake for a plastic bag, I'm also going to check for anyone tailgating me, and take that into consideration. Including whether said tailgater is a geo prism or a Freightliner attached to a tanker of gasoline.

Slamming on the brakes for a plastic bag is not the universal safer choice.

2) Already mentioned this, but reaction/breaking time is meaningless without timely recognition.

Re: Waymo to customers: “Completely driverless Waymo cars are on the way”

#148

Post by fwip » Thu, Oct 10, 2019, 4:33 AM UTC

jonplackett wrote: post #79

fwip wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The driverless cars out there can't even stop for children that are clearly visible. https://www.zdnet.com/google-amp/article/does-your-car-have-... > Using a child-sized dummy, vehicles only avoid running over the child 11% of the time They're not safe.

This is just for automated braking, not autonomous cars. Not the same thing at all.

The state of the art systems designed only to brake before hitting obstacles can't even do that. It's a pretty simple problem, as far as self-driving tasks go.

I don't think that bodes well at all for full autonomy - especially since at least one of those vendors (Tesla) is promising self-driving sooner than later.

Re: Waymo to customers: “Completely driverless Waymo cars are on the way”

#149

Post by beerandt » Thu, Oct 10, 2019, 4:34 AM UTC

jonplackett wrote: post #79

fwip wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The driverless cars out there can't even stop for children that are clearly visible. https://www.zdnet.com/google-amp/article/does-your-car-have-... > Using a child-sized dummy, vehicles only avoid running over the child 11% of the time They're not safe.

This is just for automated braking, not autonomous cars. Not the same thing at all.

Honest question. Are they fundamentally different, design wise? Or is it merely a measure of confidence & reliability?

Re: Waymo to customers: “Completely driverless Waymo cars are on the way”

#150

Post by paulcole » Thu, Oct 10, 2019, 4:34 AM UTC

jonplackett wrote: post #42

I have very mixed feelings about autonomous cars. One side of me is so excited about the prospect and finds it all amazing and futuristic. I love reading about how Tesla and Waymo approach it differently. The other side of me is absolutely not ready to trust my life to a machine - even though I know I do that all the time in other ways in modern life. I think it will be people's emotional evaluation that will matter…

When true autonomous cars are truly ready, you’re not going to have a choice. It’s going to quickly become prohibitively expensive to insure a human driver.