Live data from Hacker News

Self-driving cars turned out to be harder than expected

vox.com

271–280 of 287 posts

Re: Self-driving cars turned out to be harder than expected

#271
post #34

You have to wonder, when you see these stories, whether the engineers in charge of these programs spent much time driving around, trying to see the road like an AI might. In my experience, driving in the city, it's rare that I can go more than a few miles before some exception comes up that requires human judgment. Here's a few of the things I saw just last week: * Car double parked. Do I cross the center line to go…

And the amazing part is there are millions of drivers on the road right now that have absolutely no idea how to handle those cases, and do an exceedingly bad job of it. From the very new drivers, to people who simply don't drive often, to people who got their license in another country where the rules are entirely different (me!), to the very elderly who are losing their sight, reflexes and judgement and people playi…

Not long ago there was a company which failed to perform the relatively impossible themselves, and when they ceased operations their message was clearly _we could not automate that which we could not do that well manually_.

I think there's an abundance of drivers that are almost always unsuitable for the most challenging situations, or for whom the roadway or conditions encountered are completely unsuitable themselves.

Collisions are everywhere and are dwarfed by near-misses. Fatalities are statistically limited by hazard mitigation, safety measures, and a seemingly larger portion of miraculous good fortune.

Some drivers are completely out of control and some even like it that way. There is a much smaller amount of mechanical or health failures.

These all can be the riskiest due to unpredictability.

We will have to admit that each out-of-control driver can exhibit perhaps completely unexpected and unique behavior from each other, because that's what they've always done.

That's not a very high bar for different out-of-control AI events by comparison.

Tragedies occurring from individual human driving deficiencies have been largely attributed to social effects, because the underlying mechanical engineering performance has been so overwhelmingly predictable by comparison.

With AI different unforseen tragedies are to be expected, and it will not be due to any recognized or imagined individual human driver deficiency. Attribution will be squarely on the engineering team deficiencies when it comes to the programmable electronics that were overlaid onto the fundamentally predictable 20th-century-proven mechanical platform.

There could be deaths that can not be dealt with using natural human social constructs.

Being killed by an out-of-control robot is always going to be something that's supposed to be nearly impossible to occur, compared to being killed by an out-of-control human.

Anyway, with emerging programming technologies sometimes actually achieving highly suitable goals which were only reachable when combined with ideal support, and a sales/advertising mentality that can make up the difference when the incredible engineering effort has done all it can and the goal is not quite met nor suitable, everything's looking better than ever so what could go wrong?

Re: Self-driving cars turned out to be harder than expected

#272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you have to narrow the definition of driving so much then it’s not actually driving. I don't care what you call it. I just want to be able to ignore the road until the car beeps at me. (with at least 10 seconds of warning) > Many cars spend a lot of time idling But a car can't be idling while I use it. A computer can have idle power levels while I browse the web, and a phone that works in a certain range of hour…

Self driving systems today are the nurse but you're still the doctor. And you wouldn't call the nurse a doctor just because they can do the more simple or common tasks. > I just want to be able to ignore the road until the car beeps at me. (with at least 10 seconds of warning) You may want it but you are not getting that from any "self driving" system in use now. It's even illegal for you to do so. And that isn't sel…

First off: I don't think current cars are good enough, and I didn't say they were.

> If you're in traffic and the car isn't moving it's idling.

Let me rephrase. A car does not idle continuously while being useful, it only idles for a minute or two at a time. A computer running at "idle power levels" is more like a self-driving car that only goes up to 15mph. Which would actually be very useful if you're in stop-and-go traffic.

> If a system left to its own devices turns a degraded lane marker into a major life threatening challenge then it just makes my point that you're the driver and it can only assist.

Depends on what you mean by "left to its own devices".

If you mean that I'm zoned out watching a movie, and the car crashes all by itself, then that car doesn't meet the standard I laid out.

If the car beeps at me, and I have to intentionally choose to ignore it to get into a crash, that's acceptable. Because I won't ignore it, and won't crash, even though the car can take over for hour(s) at a time. Go ahead and call it "driver assist" if you want.

> Self driving cars today

Are level 2, and I want a level 3 or 4.

Level 3 is the minimum I described, and I don't care if we call it "self driving" or "driver assist", it's useful.

Level 4 is just level 3 plus the ability to pull over when confused, but I would say it's unambiguously "self-driving" at that point.

Re: Self-driving cars turned out to be harder than expected

#273
post #269
post #33

Alternate headline: Some people overstated how simple this problem was because they didn't know what they were talking about, could promote themselves as experts, could get funding for a self-driving startup or some combination of the above. I guess that isn't as pithy but it's closer to the truth. When it became clear that Uber's strategy (under Kalanick anyway) was premised on replacing drivers with AIs before the…

> couldn't see general self-driving vehicles coming within 20 years. I still say that's true. 20 years is a long time, arguably you're already wrong because self-driving vehicles already exist. But Self-driving with the ability to replace Uber drivers will be here by 2030 at the latest.

If you’re talking about level 5 then I disagree with this. None of the technologies I see in use today can work in the same weather conditions that humans currently drive in. Things like snow, fog, and even heavy rain.

If you’re talking anything below level 5 then all we will be doing is making current human drivers worse. Some of the deaths so far have been people who knew the limitations of the technology and still got complacent. If it requires you to have constant supervision then people simply won’t do that and will die.

Re: Self-driving cars turned out to be harder than expected

#274
post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> couldn't see general self-driving vehicles coming within 20 years. I still say that's true. 20 years is a long time, arguably you're already wrong because self-driving vehicles already exist. But Self-driving with the ability to replace Uber drivers will be here by 2030 at the latest.

If you’re talking about level 5 then I disagree with this. None of the technologies I see in use today can work in the same weather conditions that humans currently drive in. Things like snow, fog, and even heavy rain. If you’re talking anything below level 5 then all we will be doing is making current human drivers worse. Some of the deaths so far have been people who knew the limitations of the technology and still…

People obsess about weather conditions as a limiting factor for level 5 and it's bizarre. Bad weather conditions will favour robots over humans because the robot drivers have sensors that can penetrate fog and rain whereas humans have to rely on mk1 eyeballs that can't.

The real limiting factors for level 5 are less legible to humans. We understand the physical world via years of experience and good priors. Teslas crash straight into concrete lane separators and Ubers hit pedestrians that they know are there. In the latter case the actual reasons for the collision would strike a human as absolutely nuts - things like the algorithm not having a proper sense of object persistence or being terrible at commonsense reasoning. Yes, the Uber system was quite primitive, but the way that it broke gives us some insight into how AI drivers face a totally different set of challenges than what we would think of as "difficult conditions".

See: https://www.jefftk.com/p/uber-self-driving-crash

Re: Self-driving cars turned out to be harder than expected

#275
post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you’re talking about level 5 then I disagree with this. None of the technologies I see in use today can work in the same weather conditions that humans currently drive in. Things like snow, fog, and even heavy rain. If you’re talking anything below level 5 then all we will be doing is making current human drivers worse. Some of the deaths so far have been people who knew the limitations of the technology and still…

People obsess about weather conditions as a limiting factor for level 5 and it's bizarre. Bad weather conditions will favour robots over humans because the robot drivers have sensors that can penetrate fog and rain whereas humans have to rely on mk1 eyeballs that can't. The real limiting factors for level 5 are less legible to humans. We understand the physical world via years of experience and good priors. Teslas cr…

Can you link to some of these sensors? As far as I know, anyone who knows what they’re doing is using Lidar at the moment which has significant difficulties with weather.

Re: Self-driving cars turned out to be harder than expected

#276
post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you’re talking about level 5 then I disagree with this. None of the technologies I see in use today can work in the same weather conditions that humans currently drive in. Things like snow, fog, and even heavy rain. If you’re talking anything below level 5 then all we will be doing is making current human drivers worse. Some of the deaths so far have been people who knew the limitations of the technology and still…

People obsess about weather conditions as a limiting factor for level 5 and it's bizarre. Bad weather conditions will favour robots over humans because the robot drivers have sensors that can penetrate fog and rain whereas humans have to rely on mk1 eyeballs that can't. The real limiting factors for level 5 are less legible to humans. We understand the physical world via years of experience and good priors. Teslas cr…

My interpretation of the Uber situation is that they were rushing in an incredibly reckless way. I think the Uber system described in the NTSB report is probably far worse than what Uber's more conservative competitors (Waymo, GM Cruise, etc) had at the time.

(Disclosure: I work for Google which is a sibling of Waymo)

Re: Self-driving cars turned out to be harder than expected

#277
post #134
post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah this is interesting. My Tesla M3 does similar behavior, and so I often am ready to punch the accelerator. In the Tesla, this is how you solve that problem. The driver's push on the accelerator contraindicates the AI's decision to slow down, and so the car follows the driver's direction. Where it gets dicey is the scenario where the "imminent collision" (hazards on, seatbelts tightened) detection is triggered, an…

I'm amazed by people like you. You're a programmer, you know how your code looks like. Worse still, you have seen other people's code, how they fail to account for corner cases, you've seen so many articles on HN's front page about security bugs found by fuzzing. Yet, you trust your LIFE to "heuristics"? Do you really trust that when the proverbial black swan flies in front of your car the software won't swerve you i…

Especially in a second world country like the US where semis dont have skirts and you do have crossroads without lights on highways

https://arstechnica.com/cars/2020/02/i-was-just-shaking-new-...

Re: Self-driving cars turned out to be harder than expected

#278
post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> couldn't see general self-driving vehicles coming within 20 years. I still say that's true. 20 years is a long time, arguably you're already wrong because self-driving vehicles already exist. But Self-driving with the ability to replace Uber drivers will be here by 2030 at the latest.

If you’re talking about level 5 then I disagree with this. None of the technologies I see in use today can work in the same weather conditions that humans currently drive in. Things like snow, fog, and even heavy rain. If you’re talking anything below level 5 then all we will be doing is making current human drivers worse. Some of the deaths so far have been people who knew the limitations of the technology and still…

Obviously you don't have to operate the self driving vehicles in all conditions in a ride sharing service, because you have the option of operating human driving vehicles in the worst conditions. [I also expect you would use human driving vehicles to help out in peak demand periods--you don't want to spend big money on a self-driving car unless it is going to be heavily used.]

Re: Self-driving cars turned out to be harder than expected

#279
post #33

Alternate headline: Some people overstated how simple this problem was because they didn't know what they were talking about, could promote themselves as experts, could get funding for a self-driving startup or some combination of the above. I guess that isn't as pithy but it's closer to the truth. When it became clear that Uber's strategy (under Kalanick anyway) was premised on replacing drivers with AIs before the…

As usual the article conflates the (very difficult problem) of self-driving everywhere with various other sub-problems. The self-driving problem on highways is much more solvable, and can further be improved by convergent infrastructure evolution (forewarning of traffic jams from central control, embedded rfid to aid pathfinding in bad weather, weather reports, wildlife nets/barriers, highly standardized signage, int…

Basically the vast majority of people take very few 400-800 mile interstate trips so that doesn't matter [conversely the trucking industry does so long distance trucking would be a strong market]

As you said the Taco Bell trip doesn't matter.

The one area where it does matter is for the longer distance commuter--the unpleasant experience of spending an hour every morning and every night in stop and go traffic.

Re: Self-driving cars turned out to be harder than expected

#280

You have to wonder, when you see these stories, whether the engineers in charge of these programs spent much time driving around, trying to see the road like an AI might. In my experience, driving in the city, it's rare that I can go more than a few miles before some exception comes up that requires human judgment. Here's a few of the things I saw just last week: * Car double parked. Do I cross the center line to go…

For a mundane situation that's surprisingly difficult: toll booths. The highway goes from N lanes to N 5 (or more!) lanes and then back into N lanes, usually with the lane markings being completely absent in the process. You have to pick a lane to get into, with your choice being potentially impacted by such things as "are you a truck?", "exact change only", or "I have an EZ-Pass", not to mention the potential for so…

Self driving cars already use a map of the roads in the country--all you do is include the toll booths in the map.

They could also include a transmitter to vehicles.

Post reply on HN