Live data from Hacker News

Driverless cars are stuck in a jam

economist.com

301–310 of 556 posts

Re: Driverless cars are stuck in a jam

#301
post #259
post #248

I don't understand why there is so much focus on automobiles instead of just about everything else. In every other instance - airplanes, boats, long-haul trucking - the problem in significantly less complex to solve. The only tangible reason I see for such disproportionate focus is some sense of false futurism; aka, driver-less cars have become the 'flying cars' of our times.

Large aircraft are basically self-driving these days. Pilots can choose to do almost nothing at all from takoff to landing. However, the failure modes are all mostly catastrophic so pilots remain under the assumption that they can slightly increase the survivability rate when the automation fails. Modern drone systems are also have elements of this kind of automation and can fly complex flight paths and station keep…

> Large aircraft are basically self-driving these days. Pilots can choose to do almost nothing at all from takoff to landing.

Sort of. The plane will continue to fly the pre-programmed route without pilot involvement, so the actual manipulation of the control surfaces is no longer their primary task. But there are systems to monitor, controllers to talk to, weather systems to navigate around, climbs/descents to find more favourable winds, fuel imbalances to correct, etc. And of course, baseball scores to pick up from ADF.

I'd liken it to how (most) software engineers are not writing in Assembly. Instead they're using higher-level languages and libraries to solve problems. Similarly a pilot is not hands-on flying for 7 hours over the Atlantic, but they're still operating the aircraft.

Re: Driverless cars are stuck in a jam

#302
post #173
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…

If you don't need to drive why would you buy a driverless car? I don’t anticipate many people will ever buy a driverless car. The whole concept of buying a car is kind of ridiculous. You pay for it then you continue paying for registration, insurance, maintenance, park, etc all while it sits idle 90% of the time. Driverless cars allow you to be picked up at your front door and dropped off exactly at the spot wherever…

I buy cars so that I can leave my stuff in them instead of having to load and unload every day. That convenience is worth a lot. Whether the car drives itself or not is an entirely separate issue.

Re: Driverless cars are stuck in a jam

#303
post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

[deleted]

Re: Driverless cars are stuck in a jam

#304
post #248

I don't understand why there is so much focus on automobiles instead of just about everything else. In every other instance - airplanes, boats, long-haul trucking - the problem in significantly less complex to solve. The only tangible reason I see for such disproportionate focus is some sense of false futurism; aka, driver-less cars have become the 'flying cars' of our times.

Another drawback is that it's taking focus away from mass transit, at least in the US. Decent mass transit ameliorates such a wide range of issues in cities it's hard to understand why we don't put more effort into making it work.

Mass transit doesn't really work in US suburbs because everything is just too spread out; it's not economical, nor logistically effective, to build subways to subdivisions.

But even in built-up cities, Americans cling to their cars just like they cling to guns and religion. Look at all the uproar in Manhattan, NYC, where they're taking away street parking and putting in protected cycling lanes. People are upset at this "attack" on cars, and somehow think they deserve free places to put their personal vehicles. If you look at another highly built-up city for comparison, Tokyo, they don't have this problem. There is NO street parking; it's all paid lots that cost a fortune. In fact, you're not even allowed to buy a car there unless you can prove you have a place to park it! So most people get around with subways, trains, walking, cycling, and taxis.

The bottom line is that it's cultural: Americans just don't like public transit and don't want to fund it with their tax dollars, but they do want to subsidize car driving with their tax dollars.

Re: Driverless cars are stuck in a jam

#305

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What you're saying is taking into account only big cities and young population, but in small places and suburbs you depend on cars to do anything, get anywhere. Old people can't be expected to walk far or drive scooters and bikes everyday. And population is mostly getting older, plus with the rise of remote work I presume that more and more people will move outside the big urban centers looking for slower pace and ch…

Old people can't be expected to walk far or drive scooters and bikes everyday. You need to give some serious readjustment to your mental image of “old people”. Perhaps the word you’re looking for is “disabled” or “differently-abled”, depending upon your preference. Some of those people, maybe disproportionately so, also happen to be old. I’d type more, but this AARP member crashed his scooter on the way to work on Fr…

I myself am 40+ and seriously obese, so I'm definitely counting myself into that "too old for e-scooter" group, but I actually had in mind average around-70-and-plus people around me, like my parents and their friends, the "real old people". They can walk but can't walk across the city every day, they can go on a leisure bike ride, but not ride it uphill (and we don't all live in flatland like Dutch), and you definitely can't seriously expect them to move around that way every day all around the year. You can't expect me either, btw, really sorry if I don't match nowadays modern lifestyle standards. Which are btw ridiculous as combination of walking and eco-friendly public transportation are much more sustainable (and for many enjoyable) solution than everyone zipping around in their e-scooters and e-bikes and whatnot which are all being charged everyday from the grid.

Re: Driverless cars are stuck in a jam

#306

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand why so many otherwise smart people fell for FSD hype. I'm not talking about the many con artists - I'm talking about the tech-savvy people who genuinely bought into FSD hype. How is it not obvious that FSD most likely requires artificial general intelligence and is, thus, probably somewhere between "many decades away" and "humans will never achieve it"?

Doesn't seem obvious to me. FSD using affordable sensors seems like an unsolved problem, and I haven't heard a convincing proof that it is or isn't solvable. Did high accuracy OCR without AGI seem possible before it was developed?

Where is the high accuracy OCR? All the OCR software I've seen so far is less accurate than me, especially with handwriting, damaged material, odd viewing angles, etc.

Re: Driverless cars are stuck in a jam

#307
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…

The same can be said about airplanes, which have a way longer history of automation. Anything in an airplane is automated: takeoff, flying and landing. Pilots make mistakes all the time, but they still need to do things manually to keep their practice high. People just do not want to go in an airplane without any pilots. In metro's it's not that obvious if someone is driving it or not. But airplanes, 'we' want a huma…

"Feeling" has nothing to do with the issue. Current autopilots are generally unable to cope with equipment failures. The pilots are primarily there to deal with unexpected failure modes.

Re: Driverless cars are stuck in a jam

#308
post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you've got 4 kids all under 4yo, you're kind of screwed no matter what vehicle you drive. For biking, you'd probably be looking at a Bakfiets with electric assist plus a trailer. Presuming we've sufficiently eliminated car traffic and the roads are safe for kids, it's also likely that at least one of those kids can bike themselves to the store with you.

4 kids will fit easily in a minivan or large SUV. Lots of families manage that.

4 kids will fit after everyone has been dressed, got their shoes on, got their shoes on again, been lifted/chased into the car/bike. That's what I meant by "screwed". The choice of vehicle doesn't really matter.

Once they're older, kids can bike themselves or walk. Families also manage that.

Re: Driverless cars are stuck in a jam

#309
post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Problems like that have technical solutions. You phase in updates over time. A hundred vehicles a day for the first week after release, then a thousand a day, then ten thousand a day and so on. That way if there is a serious bug, you find it when it's running on hundreds of cars rather than hundreds of millions.

Just like 346 people flying Lion Air and Ethiopian Airlines became unwilling parts of a "technical solution". No thanks.

Unless you think we should stop having computers in planes, what are you proposing as a solution to that? More to the point, what does it have to do with systemic risk or reducing it by staggering updates?

Re: Driverless cars are stuck in a jam

#310
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 one system might work better in one situation and the other in a different situation and you are going to encounter both situations?

Just like in cooking you can use meat cleaver and a paring knife or in a network you use switches and routers.

Post reply on HN