Driverless cars are stuck in a jam • Hacker News Board

Re: Driverless cars are stuck in a jam

#361

Post by rootusrootus » Tue, Oct 29, 2019, 5:06 PM UTC

GhostVII wrote: post #35

xbmcuser wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree that ditching Lidar by Musk is the wrong move. From what I have read most if not all the self driving accidents that Tesla have been involved in could have been avoided if a Lidar type sensor was involoved. With tech available trying to use the same limits as human vision is stupid.

I think Musk has no choice but to ditch Lidar. He has promised to provide full self driving on cars already on the road, and retrofitting all of those cars with Lidar is incredibly expensive.

> He has promised to provide full self driving on cars

I continue to be surprised he hasn't been taken to court yet for selling a $6K package that isn't anything but an empty promise.

Re: Driverless cars are stuck in a jam

#362

Post by greiskul » Tue, Oct 29, 2019, 5:06 PM UTC

evo_9 wrote: 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.

Whats the percentage of the cost of the driver for airplanes, boats and long-haul trucking, compared to the cost of each trip? Maybe for the trucking it is significant, but I'm not sure airplane ticket prices would go down significantly if we automated them.

But with cars, the price of the driver is actually pretty big, at least 50% of the cost of each ride, when taking a cab or Uber. So that can be a lot of money people are saving.

Plus the whole part where we might get rid of parking spaces in urban centers. This might actually change the way we build cities in the future.

Re: Driverless cars are stuck in a jam

#363

Post by Sargos » Tue, Oct 29, 2019, 5:07 PM UTC

zapita wrote: post #354

lkbm wrote: post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Also, why would I prefer a driverless taxi if an electric car with a human driver costs no more? I believe the number one cause of death for Americans under the age of 30 is traffic accidents.[0] It's around 40,000 deaths per year (in the US alone). Cars are getting safer, but humans aren't getting better drivers. Individuals humans will get better with experience, but experienced drivers cycle out and new drivers…

Wouldn't the safety of self-driving cars relative to human drivers also become moot if cars were no longer needed?

We are a LOT further away from cars no longer being needed than we are full self-driving cars.

Re: Driverless cars are stuck in a jam

#364

Post by mitfahrener » Tue, Oct 29, 2019, 5:10 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…

Let me guess. Single male, able body, no kids. When you have kids, you'd appreciate having a car/rent a car/uber when grocery shopping for example. And the city is full of people with kids. We are not the minority here. Not everyone is interested in a scooter that is inherently unsafe at moderate speeds.

Re: Driverless cars are stuck in a jam

#365

Post by pacala » Tue, Oct 29, 2019, 5:10 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…

We'd be better off building our cities to encourage mass transit. Micromobility follows as a bonus.

Re: Driverless cars are stuck in a jam

#366

Post by zjaffee » Tue, Oct 29, 2019, 5:11 PM UTC

todd8 wrote: post #346

stkdump wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There are places where it's cold, where it rains and snows. Like Amsterdam and Copenhagen? > The good thing about the driverless cars is that they solve the parking problems in the cities. They solve the search for parking by humans. But if you want to get the cars out of the city while they aren't used, you practically double the traffic and emissions.

No, not like Amsterdam. I love Amsterdam, but I'm so tired of it being used as an example of how we should all be on bikes. It has a very temperate climate. The weather in most of the US isn't as mild and cool as Amsterdam. There are cites in the US with great weather, for example San Diego, Santa Barbara, all of Marine and Sonoma Counties in CA have great weather (sadly it is having wild fire problems right now). I…

Minneapolis has some of the highest percentage of Bike Commuters in the US at around 3.5% only falling after Portland at ~6% and San Francisco which is a nudge closer to 4%.

The entire west coast has weather at least as favorable to bike commuting as Amsterdam, yet the percentages of people commuting that way are still far lower than Amsterdam simply because the infrastructure isn't there.

Re: Driverless cars are stuck in a jam

#367

Post by gkfasdfasdf » Tue, Oct 29, 2019, 5:12 PM UTC

_ea1k wrote: post #318

rhino369 wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the fundamental issue Musk has is that his cars can’t drive safer than even a below average driver. Oh wow, it can stay in a lane and match speed! So can every car manufacturer. They’ve got a level 2+ system and cars won’t be safer until level 4.

> I think the fundamental issue Musk has is that his cars can’t drive safer than even a below average driver. Agreed. > Oh wow, it can stay in a lane and match speed! So can every car manufacturer. They’ve got a level 2+ system and cars won’t be safer until level 4. I don't find this to be true at all. ProPilot is terrible compared to AutoPilot and many of the other manufacturers have the same limitations (or worse).

> ProPilot is terrible compared to AutoPilot

I second this - recently rented a fully-loaded Nissan Rouge and drove for around 700 highway miles - the lane centering feature was just awful compared to my Model 3's. It would often times give up on even slight curves, or fight me when I would try to regain control after it misjudged a curve. After a while I gave up on it and just used the automatic cruise control, which worked fairly well.

Re: Driverless cars are stuck in a jam

#368

Post by Steltek » Tue, Oct 29, 2019, 5:13 PM UTC

rootusrootus wrote: post #358

Steltek wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Large metro areas effectively subsidize the rural areas. Those millions of people have enjoyed amazingly subsidized civil engineering to have that car commute. If those commutes built-in the correct costs in land usage, gov budget impact, and environmental impact, those commutes would be untenable.

Large metro areas also include an incredibly large proportion of suburban homes where people absolutely continue to rely on cars.

A suburban area that likely expanded because of 1950's highways that bored through the downtowns of cities, displacing thousands. Streetcar Suburbs, predating car oriented development, are way more walkable and not car dependent.

Re: Driverless cars are stuck in a jam

#369

Post by tempsy » Tue, Oct 29, 2019, 5:13 PM UTC

I'm a little confused by the delivery only cars like Nuro. Logistically how would the package be delivered once it arrives at my apartment...? Would I have to be home and physically grab my package from the vehicle? If there's a human assistant who needs to drop off my package to my doorstep then is there really any cost savings over a regular driver?

Re: Driverless cars are stuck in a jam

#370

Post by MuffinFlavored » Tue, Oct 29, 2019, 5:13 PM UTC

lkbm wrote: post #347

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…

> Also, why would I prefer a driverless taxi if an electric car with a human driver costs no more? I believe the number one cause of death for Americans under the age of 30 is traffic accidents.[0] It's around 40,000 deaths per year (in the US alone). Cars are getting safer, but humans aren't getting better drivers. Individuals humans will get better with experience, but experienced drivers cycle out and new drivers…

> get to inherit the experience of the 70-year-old they're replacing

A lot of 70 year olds should not be driving.