Driverless cars are stuck in a jam • Hacker News Board

Re: Driverless cars are stuck in a jam

#231

Post by bluGill » Tue, Oct 29, 2019, 1:51 PM UTC

jfk13 wrote: post #159

IMTDb wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even 5 minutes per year is totally acceptable. 5 minutes is 300,000 miliseconds. Split over the course of 365 days at 86400 seconds per day, we are looking at roughly 1 milisecond of erratic behaviour every 105 seconds. Not enough to crash a car

Perhaps that'd be OK, if the 5 minutes per year is evenly spread across the entire year (including time the vehicle isn't even being used?!) OTOH, if it means that the vehicle is liable to have a 25-second "blackout" in the middle of your morning commute roughly once a month, it seems very different.

25 second blackouts are too much. However a 1 second blackout every 5 minutes might not be a problem in most cases: you can keep going the direction you are going and other cars that are not blacked out will avoid yours while the computer recovers. Of course this depends on the blackout - if the car is still steering itself but not looking for problems (a much easier problem) it works, if the car isn't steering itself it could run into a wall.

Re: Driverless cars are stuck in a jam

#232

Post by Recurecur » Tue, Oct 29, 2019, 1:54 PM UTC

vasilipupkin wrote: post #181

ghaff wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Substances used to excess and technology like electricity used improperly are in a different category than consumer-facing products that can kill you randomly through no fault of your own.

Why?. Alcohol is a consumer product sold everywhere and is one of the main killers.

Tobacco is an even better example, in that even when used in the "recommended" way it's often fatal.

Re: Driverless cars are stuck in a jam

#233

Post by vonmoltke » Tue, Oct 29, 2019, 1:55 PM UTC

ArnoVW wrote: post #199

arethuza wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of those benefits can be had from taxis - and yet people still buy their own cars.

Taxis are expensive because they require a human to drive them. Hence the reason the SDC could change that dynamic. A shared car that does not require an expensive human to drive it. Another model are shared cars, like dockless scooters and bikes. They are reasonably popular in the Netherlands for example. But they still require quite a bit of planning to ensure the car is available, and they are not always "in front…

> Taxis are expensive because they require a human to drive them. Hence the reason the SDC could change that dynamic. A shared car that does not require an expensive human to drive it.

Human driver's only account for 50% - 55% of a cab's cost.

https://urbankchoze.blogspot.com/2014/08/what-taxis-can-tell...

https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-breakdown-of-where-taxi-fa...

Re: Driverless cars are stuck in a jam

#234

Post by imtringued » Tue, Oct 29, 2019, 1:57 PM UTC

ossworkerrights wrote: post #149

bogle wrote: post #133

If we expect driverless cars to be further delayed and we continue building our cities to encourage micromobility (bikes, electric scooters, segregated lanes, car free streets, etc.) then at which point does the value of the driverless car become moot because we no longer drive? Does this sound unlikely? Consider European cities like Copenhagen and Amsterdam which have encouraged cycling over the last two decades and…

But why do we even need to cluster in massive cities, when today’s technologies allow for remote work for pretty much any non physical type of work? Accountants, developers, designers, architects, customer support, and so on can all be done remotely. That would reduce both the need to drive and to cram people in overcrowded public transport options.

The big reason is money. We now have large multinational corporations that service the entire world but have headquarters in one or two cities. So all the high paying jobs end up in a handful of cities.

I live in an completely unremarkably small city except for the fact that there is one big employer with a lot of money. The rents and house prices are only going up.

Re: Driverless cars are stuck in a jam

#235

Post by Recurecur » Tue, Oct 29, 2019, 1:57 PM UTC

KaiserPro wrote: post #69

rmason wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with Musk and George Hotz that lidar is never going to get there. That's because in Michigan the terrain that lidar has mastered changes drastically every time it snows. For those of us in snowy climates limiting us to self-driving to seven months a year isn't going to cut it.

Lidar has no problem with snow, only when its _snowing_. However, if visibility is reduced, a pure visual approach is going to be even worse. Musk made a mistake, and he's spending billions to prove that he never made it. snow makes HD maps somewhat less useful, as the terrain changes shape. But then, you need a map that evolves. Sadly for musky, the only company that can do that using purely visual data is Scape Tec…

>Lidar has no problem with snow, only when its _snowing_. However, if visibility is reduced, a pure visual approach is going to be even worse.

Good thing Teslas have radar...which penetrates falling snow.

>Musk made a mistake, and he's spending billions to prove that he never made it.

People drive fairly well with only visual sensors (eyes). That is proof of concept. Lidar seems like overkill.

Re: Driverless cars are stuck in a jam

#236

Post by bluGill » Tue, Oct 29, 2019, 1:59 PM UTC

addictedcs wrote: post #134

mr__y wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just because lidar is not working in certain places and certain conditions does not mean that it's always useless. It just means that an AV cannot rely [only ]on lidar. Lidar could be used as a suplementary sensor - that is providing additional sensory data when appropriate and switching to non-lidar mode when conditions require. This is one of the things where AV can have a clear advantage over [even above ]average…

If you switch to non-lidar mode for unfavorable condition, why don't just use the non-lidar for all conditions. A system that is safe for unfavorable conditions is likely to be the system that is safe for all conditions.

Because lidar allows faster travel in the modes where it works. When there is heavy rain/snow the only safe speed is very slow anyway. When roads are clear and dry I really want my car to go faster than the elderly walk (I walk faster than that normally), and lidar may be required for that mode.

Re: Driverless cars are stuck in a jam

#237

Post by WhompingWindows » Tue, Oct 29, 2019, 1:59 PM UTC

bogle wrote: post #133

If we expect driverless cars to be further delayed and we continue building our cities to encourage micromobility (bikes, electric scooters, segregated lanes, car free streets, etc.) then at which point does the value of the driverless car become moot because we no longer drive? Does this sound unlikely? Consider European cities like Copenhagen and Amsterdam which have encouraged cycling over the last two decades and…

This ignores the massive value SDC's can provide to the blind, disabled, elderly, and children, all of whom may not be able to hop on a bike or scooter.

Re: Driverless cars are stuck in a jam

#238

Post by bogle » Tue, Oct 29, 2019, 2:02 PM UTC

WhompingWindows wrote: post #237

bogle wrote: post #133

If we expect driverless cars to be further delayed and we continue building our cities to encourage micromobility (bikes, electric scooters, segregated lanes, car free streets, etc.) then at which point does the value of the driverless car become moot because we no longer drive? Does this sound unlikely? Consider European cities like Copenhagen and Amsterdam which have encouraged cycling over the last two decades and…

This ignores the massive value SDC's can provide to the blind, disabled, elderly, and children, all of whom may not be able to hop on a bike or scooter.

I did mention taxis. The question would then be, why an SDC as opposed to a taxi? In the example you give a driver would be of more use.

Re: Driverless cars are stuck in a jam

#239

Post by kiba » Tue, Oct 29, 2019, 2:02 PM UTC

DickingAround wrote: post #216

bogle wrote: post #133

If we expect driverless cars to be further delayed and we continue building our cities to encourage micromobility (bikes, electric scooters, segregated lanes, car free streets, etc.) then at which point does the value of the driverless car become moot because we no longer drive? Does this sound unlikely? Consider European cities like Copenhagen and Amsterdam which have encouraged cycling over the last two decades and…

This is kind of silly. It's nice to imagine a world where people don't need cars. But most/all european cities, many of which we laid out before cars, still have cars. We all have cars because cars are incredibly useful; Got 4 young kids and you need to get groceries for the week? You're not going to bicycle them to the store and all that food home again in the mountains. Live in the city and want to go hiking 20 mil…

We all have cars because cars are incredibly useful; Got 4 young kids and you need to get groceries for the week?

This only work that way because that's how your life is structured, not that it is a law of nature.

If you live near a grocery store, you wouldn't have to buy enough grocery to last you a week. You can just buy what you need.

Re: Driverless cars are stuck in a jam

#240

Post by WhompingWindows » Tue, Oct 29, 2019, 2:03 PM UTC

crocal wrote: post #8

The article misses an important point. It’s not only a problem of technology, it’s also a problem of risk acceptance. While we accept to be killed by our own mistakes at the wheel, society (we) will not accept that a machine makes the same, even if the failure rate is on average /better/. This is the fundamental issue Elon Musk has. The driverless bar for safety is way higher than very clever driver assistance or eve…

Everyone said the first death via SDC would be a massive setback. After the Uber death in Arizona, have we seen that massive setback? I'd argue not, I think you are vastly over-estimating the risk aversion of the American public, which has allowed opioid epidemics, numerous pointless/corrupt foreign incursions, and allows the caging of children. Can we factually say we're a nation that highly values safety and human life?

The delay is mostly due to a lack of suitable EV's and suitable tech. If big business was ready, big business would ram this through as soon as it could generate a good profit or good PR.