531–540 of 919 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
it's becoming more and more clear. self driving technology will only put more 2000 lb machines on highways clogging up space. USA NEEDS TRAINS!
Not necessarily: a self driving car takes you to a self driving coach for the long distance, then back to sdc for the last miles. All electric. Very efficient.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think self driving cars are a ridiculous solution to a problem we created and doesn't need to exist. The US building out the country for cars wasn't a good way to do transportation. If we just had trains going from city to city and subways in the cities, we wouldn't even need self driving cars.
I never owned a car, but going anywhere, anytime, at will is a very real thing and cars are the obvious solution. Humans are terrible at safe driving and self driving will eventually solve this. I don't see how this is not the future of transportation.
All that money and energy could have gone somewhere else.
Tesla says autopilot works but that driver should be ready to intervene. This is terrifying - like having a kid riding shotgun that might just reach out and turn the wheel while you are on the highway. Anyone who has driven with autopilot, how quickly might it react to a perceived obstacle? Would it take a hard turn into a median faster than a person could reasonably react if it thought there was something in the roa…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have autoplilot on the VAST majority of the time. It does not make any sudden movements. If anything, it brakes a little heavier than I would prefer at times, but there are rarely any steering problems. It has improved a lot in the 9 months I have had it.
>It has improved a lot in the 9 months I have had it. A system like this should not have noticable changes in behavior over such a short period of time. In other words, I don't think they should launch it (let alone call it "autopilot") until it's done and stable.
Under autopilot, there are times when the "do I need to make an adjustment" instinct kicks in and you decide that you don't, but it was borderline. Things like being centered in the lane while passing a semi.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I also own a Subaru. The assistance is very unwelcome for the crash detection at times. Living in Minnesota the exhaust from a car in front of you can set it off. This can happen on start off of a green light and can completely decelerate the Subaru. The eyesight detects the exhaust as obstacle the car behind you is now at a loss why you are now immediately breaking off the green light. I’m not a fan at all and eye s…
The Subaru doesn’t have a forward radar does it? I heard it uses two optical camera instead. I bet smoke/water vapor can trip that up... Our Mazda gets tripped up when adaptive cruise is engaged and someone pulls into the turn lane to make a left. It also can sometimes get “spooked” on the interstate when going on turns and trucks are in adjacent lanes. Hasn’t freaked out with collision warnings though. Every time it…
The warning lights and alarm went off and then the car slammed on the brakes. Thankfully no one was behind me.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think self driving cars are a ridiculous solution to a problem we created and doesn't need to exist. The US building out the country for cars wasn't a good way to do transportation. If we just had trains going from city to city and subways in the cities, we wouldn't even need self driving cars.
it's becoming more and more clear. self driving technology will only put more 2000 lb machines on highways clogging up space. USA NEEDS TRAINS!
- people are spread out because they've owned cars, so the distance doesn't bother them
- If you take their cars away, they're too spread out to support themselves, because of how the towns were built.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> There is no real self-driving on the road Emphasis on real . There is definitely something that most people would refer to as "self driving" in cars on the road. I'm not saying what is there is specifically good at what it does - I'm saying someone put it into use regardless of how fit for purpose it is. > but this future is probably not as close as Tesla PR makes us think Unless you're suggesting the PR team decid…
> Emphasis on real. There is definitely something that most people would refer to as "self-driving" in cars on the road. Then you'd have to define what a self-driving car actually means. At least for me, self-driving means level 4 upwards. Everything below I'd consider assisted driving. > Unless you're suggesting the PR team decided to make shit like "Summon" available to the public, then it's not just "PR spin". As…
I said "for most people". For most people I know, a car that will change lanes, navigate freeways and even exit freeways is "self driving". It may be completely unreliable but even a toaster that always burns the bread is called a toaster: no one says "you need to define what a toaster means to you".
> At least for me, self-driving means level 4 upwards.
I have literally zero clue what the first three "levels" are or what "level 4" means, and I'd wager 99% of people who buy cars wouldn't either.
> that doesn't mean that at the end of the year it'll be able to drive the car with 150 km/h on the Autobahn.
30 seconds found me a video on youtube of some British guy using autopilot at 150kph on a German autobahn last June.
Again: I'm not suggesting that it is a reliable "self driving car". I'm suggesting that it is sold and perceived as a car that can drive itself, in spite of a laundry list of caveats and restrictions.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This whole self driving, fully autonomous thing has become some sort of strange faux-religion. It's followers see no other possible solution as acceptable. Instead of putting our heads together to make really good driver assistance technologies and being satisfied, the darn thing needs to also drive itself everywhere otherwise we're leaving something on the table! Untill we have zero deaths, we cannot stop demanding…
Actually one of the biggest obstacles to Level 5 is expectation of Zero Deaths for Level 5 autonomous operations. The standard should be fewer deaths than human-operated (or even auto assisted ) cars. When you have thousands of machines traveling in close proximity at speeds exceeding 50mph there will be deaths, this is unavoidable. We need to reduce those as much as possible but to demand ZERO before the technology…
How do we go about testing this? By tallying up autonomous deaths until there are fewer per year than human drivers?
>We need to reduce those as much as possible but to demand ZERO before the technology can be used is just unrealistic
Human driver skill varies immensely by person. The idea that anyone who is (or even considers themselves to be) a "good" driver will never accept "average death rates" as a risk when getting in an autonomous car. I know I wouldn't.
The goal has to be zero or it will never be accepted by the public.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I also own a Subaru. The assistance is very unwelcome for the crash detection at times. Living in Minnesota the exhaust from a car in front of you can set it off. This can happen on start off of a green light and can completely decelerate the Subaru. The eyesight detects the exhaust as obstacle the car behind you is now at a loss why you are now immediately breaking off the green light. I’m not a fan at all and eye s…
What year is your Subaru? My understanding was that early versions of the eyesight system were pretty bad, but they fixed a lot of the kinks in recent versions. It would be disappointing to learn that wasn’t the case...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Emphasis on real. There is definitely something that most people would refer to as "self-driving" in cars on the road. Then you'd have to define what a self-driving car actually means. At least for me, self-driving means level 4 upwards. Everything below I'd consider assisted driving. > Unless you're suggesting the PR team decided to make shit like "Summon" available to the public, then it's not just "PR spin". As…
> Then you'd have to define what a self-driving car actually means. I said "for most people". For most people I know, a car that will change lanes, navigate freeways and even exit freeways is "self driving". It may be completely unreliable but even a toaster that always burns the bread is called a toaster: no one says "you need to define what a toaster means to you". > At least for me, self-driving means level 4 upwa…
This argument is leaning toward the ridiculous.
I think only you and Elon Musk consider a "greater than zero chance of making it to your destination without intervention" to be self-driving.