Tesla's self driving algorithm's overlay [video] • Hacker News Board

Re: Tesla's self driving algorithm's overlay [video]

#291

Post by xkjkls » Mon, Feb 03, 2020, 11:19 PM UTC

axguscbklp wrote: post #200

kickopotomus wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think 50 years is being overly pessimistic. Self-driving in temperate climates is probably pretty close ( [1]: https://techcrunch.com/2019/09/16/waymos-robotaxi-pilot-surp... [2]: https://www.theverge.com/2019/10/10/20907901/waymo-driverles...

The thing is, I see no way to have full self driving without AGI. And I don't think humanity is anywhere close to developing AGI. Without AGI you can have level 4++ self driving, maybe, but not level 5.

How much difference does 4++ vs 5 make for the predicted consequences of self-driving cars though? That's the important thing.

Re: Tesla's self driving algorithm's overlay [video]

#292

Post by plexicle » Mon, Feb 03, 2020, 11:19 PM UTC

ChrisClark wrote: post #147

bepvte wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a problem even in production autopilot in Teslas. When stopped at a stop light, you can see cars "dancing" and rotating randomly in a jittery fashion. Today during an auto lane change, the system blinked a truck from two lanes across in and out of my target lane, causing the car to cancel going into an empty lane after quarter ways entering it, twice.

The dancing cars were fixed several months ago in an update. The computer used to just recognize cars, and then align them according to the lanes it sees. At a stoplight it when it had trouble seeing the lanes clearly the cars would rapidly change orientation. Since they updated the neural net to also recognize the vehicle orientations the dancing has stopped. I have seen a lane change cancel recently, a couple weeks…

"The dancing cars were fixed several months ago in an update."

On the latest software and with HW 2.5, this is not true. It's still very much there.

Re: Tesla's self driving algorithm's overlay [video]

#293

Post by blattimwind » Mon, Feb 03, 2020, 11:19 PM UTC

meerita wrote: post #271

gamblor956 wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't matter how many objects a system can process if it can't recognize what they are or which ones are actually important, like say, the truck crossing in front of you.

Humans can have "visions" or can mistake shapes and interpret as things, our brain is easily hacked.

Yet a human tends to notice that their perception is unreliable and can react accordingly.

Re: Tesla's self driving algorithm's overlay [video]

#294

Post by xkjkls » Mon, Feb 03, 2020, 11:20 PM UTC

bdamm wrote: post #280

karpodiem wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He said a million self driving vehicles would be on the streets a year from FSD day. To try to say the hardware for FSD is now present in 1M vehicles (which I doubt) is disingenuous to the insinuation Elon made that FSD is right around the corner. They're not meaningfully closer to FSD today than they were three years ago. Somewhat closer? Sure. A few feet on a journey that's a few miles though.

Looking at how much has happened over the last two months though it seems that they are on the verge of something big. I'm on pins just waiting for stop light and stop sign detection to be integrated into lane keeping. They're already seeing them, they just need to put that data into action. In terms of my personal driving that'll be pretty big, road trips get a lot shorter when my attention isn't forced. Turns throu…

Given that in many countries GPS barely works enough to order an Uber with a human driver, I'm highly skeptical of self-driving taxis.

Re: Tesla's self driving algorithm's overlay [video]

#295

Post by emilecantin » Mon, Feb 03, 2020, 11:21 PM UTC

shaftway wrote: post #41

emilecantin wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The algorithm I apply is actually pretty simple: First at the intersection goes first. So you, individually, should let everyone who was there when you arrived go before you, but you should go before everyone who arrived after you. It gets messy when people try to be polite or don't understand the rules correctly, but otherwise it's pretty easy. It might depend on your jurisdiction, though.

My algorithm is so much more complicated than yours. In my area you get rear-ended if you were going straight and you didn't go when someone coming from the opposite direction but also going straight went (your algorithm doesn't allow that). Assuming cars are already at the intersection, I wait until each of them goes and then take my turn, unless it's someone's turn who wouldn't cause a conflict with me and nobody e…

Yeah, I forgot about the going straight part, but I actually do pretty much the same thing as you.

I guess one additional trick I use is to intentionally avoid conflicts: if it looks like I'm going to arrive at the same time as another car, I slow down a bit before arriving at the stop, then clearly stop AFTER they did, so it's clear that it's their turn to go. It works pretty well.

Re: Tesla's self driving algorithm's overlay [video]

#296

Post by blattimwind » Mon, Feb 03, 2020, 11:22 PM UTC

scarejunba wrote: post #238

heavyset_go wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's no evidence that computers are any better at driving than humans, and there is no evidence that this generation of machine learning will be able to tackle this problem sufficiently. All signs point to driving requiring an understanding of what's going on around you, which this generation of ML does not provide. On the other hand, there is a lot of hype and promises being made without the results to back them…

There is some evidence. For instance, Tesla drivers report the car stopping before they can perceive an accident about to take place. An example is the first ten seconds of this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=APnN2mClkmk These vehicles have a superior sensor system to us. Our processing is better but sometimes their superior sensors are better.

That's not particularly impressive. The system reacted pretty much the same way a human driver (watching the brake lights and general attitude of the cars ahead) would react in this cirumstance.

Re: Tesla's self driving algorithm's overlay [video]

#297

Post by xkjkls » Mon, Feb 03, 2020, 11:22 PM UTC

arexxbifs wrote: post #197

_ea1k wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've gotten the impression that the "firing people in weird and capricious ways" bit has been greatly exaggerated. I do think anyone taking this has to expect grueling and challenging work. The job description practically demands that.

I don't doubt for a second that people like Musk (and before him for example Steve Jobs and Jack Tramiel) can be very demanding and sometimes difficult to work for. I also don't doubt for a second that a lot of the stories told have a sour grapes quality to them: If you're good at the kind of job they're offering, you can easily find employment somewhere else and you're also probably smart enough to move on of your o…

> I worked for an erratic, sociopathic boss once. I quit after about six months. Unless you're a masochist or truly have no other options, you'll soon realize it's not worth whatever extra money or prestige the company name might possibly come with.

Many people move their families, buy houses, and make large commitments taking new jobs (plus are normally granted large stock vesting at a given schedule). There's a lot of reasons people might put up with abuse for awhile.

Re: Tesla's self driving algorithm's overlay [video]

#298

Post by cortesoft » Mon, Feb 03, 2020, 11:23 PM UTC

donkeyd wrote: post #231

the8472 wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There's no evidence that computers are any better at driving than humans That's a vacuous statement. Evidence would be a deployed self-driving fleet. At which point it would be mission accomplished and we wouldn't be discussing this. Now if you want theoretical considerations instead of evidence, then consider the lower reaction times of machines.

> then consider the lower reaction times of machines Meanwhile, Teslas run into the backs of car carriers because they only recognise the car it's carrying and not the truck bed extending behind it. It might react faster, but it needs to identify the danger first and up until now, it's much worse at that in many situations. Yes, you're right, once it's safer, it's safer. That makes your statements just as vacuous as…

> Meanwhile, Teslas run into the backs of car carriers because they only recognise the car it's carrying and not the truck bed extending behind it

And someone rear ended me the other day because they didn't notice cars were stopping. Yes, self-driving cars make mistakes, but humans make all sorts of mistakes, too.

The question is, do self driving cars have more accidents per mile (or more damage per mile/injuries per mile/ deaths per mile) than human driven cars?

Re: Tesla's self driving algorithm's overlay [video]

#299

Post by xkjkls » Mon, Feb 03, 2020, 11:23 PM UTC

nickik wrote: post #120

Traster wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Two issues, first: I thought fully autonomous driving was meant to be done by now? Second, don't Tesla & SpaceX have a reputation for being a terrible place to work, with Musk expecting everyone to be working as hard (or harder) than him, and firing people in weird and capricious ways.

Tesla and SpaceX, specially SpaceX has been rated very highly in some rating I have seen. But there is a reputation that it is a lot of work specially in crunch time.

https://www.glassdoor.com/Reviews/Tesla-Reviews-E43129.htm 3.3 is not a high review.

Re: Tesla's self driving algorithm's overlay [video]

#300

Post by kanox » Mon, Feb 03, 2020, 11:24 PM UTC

donkeyd wrote: post #231

the8472 wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There's no evidence that computers are any better at driving than humans That's a vacuous statement. Evidence would be a deployed self-driving fleet. At which point it would be mission accomplished and we wouldn't be discussing this. Now if you want theoretical considerations instead of evidence, then consider the lower reaction times of machines.

> then consider the lower reaction times of machines Meanwhile, Teslas run into the backs of car carriers because they only recognise the car it's carrying and not the truck bed extending behind it. It might react faster, but it needs to identify the danger first and up until now, it's much worse at that in many situations. Yes, you're right, once it's safer, it's safer. That makes your statements just as vacuous as…

> only recognise the car it's carrying and not the truck bed extending behind it

This is very much a solvable problem.