Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Redefining what a map can be with new information and AI

blog.google

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 293 posts

Re: Redefining what a map can be with new information and AI

#261

Post by benhurmarcel »

karussell wrote: post #245

Driving with low carbon emission can only mean driving with a speed that is (much) smaller then the allowed maximum speed outside of cities. E.g. 80km/h (or even 70) instead of the allowed 100km/h in Germany. This way I can reduce my fuel consumption by at least 30%. With Google Maps driving and reaching the ETA is very stressful (and burns a lot of gas) as you often have to "max out" the speed limits. I guess the AI…

This is a good point, and navigation apps like Google Maps could perfectly tell you something like "On this section driving at x km/h would save y€ of gas for only z minutes added".

Re: Redefining what a map can be with new information and AI

#262

Post by baryphonic »

eru wrote: post #177
baryphonic wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I say to hell with the CO2 emissions and pick the fastest route always, will YouTube and Search direct me toward more climate change-oriented content? :-D

Keep in mind that your car emits CO2 mainly from burning fuel. Even if you don't care about CO2, you might want to care about burning less fuel. That stuff ain't free. (And the beauty of CO2 taxes would be that they make worrying about fuel costs equivalent (or equivalent enough) to worrying about emissions.)

I intended my post mainly tongue-in-cheek (hence the emoticon). I'll probably stick with the defaults unless it really takes me out of my way or does something like avoid freeways.

The beauty of CO2 taxes is that I pay more at the pump (at least till I can afford a Tesla) and the state gets an incentive to grift off of climate change.

Re: Redefining what a map can be with new information and AI

#263

Post by matesz »

Does Google use Filament [1] for this AR stuff or do they have something completely different? I mean using something else would be a huge waste from my little point of view ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[1] Filament is a real-time physically based rendering engine for Android, iOS, Windows, Linux, macOS, and WebGL2 - https://github.com/google/filament

Re: Redefining what a map can be with new information and AI

#264

Post by ghaff »

oceliker wrote: post #46
murphyslab wrote: post #30

It's also the cheapest route to drive, as it's optimizing for lower fuel consumption: With insights from the U.S. Department of Energy’s National Renewable Energy Lab, we’re building a new routing model that optimizes for lower fuel consumption based on factors like road incline and traffic congestion. Provided that the few extra minutes aren't critical to one's wallet, it's a cost savings. For me those extra minutes…

> If I could, I'd usually choose the lowest stress route! Apple Maps sometimes features alternate routes that are "simpler" or with "fewer turns", which I think is a very nice feature. I'd rather not cut through small side streets just to save 1-2 minutes.

Google Maps sometimes seems as if it goes into an "I feel like a country drive" mode. Particularly in the winter when there may be blowing snow and icy patches on narrow roads this is particularly sub-optimal. And even in summer, given enough turns, I usually end up messing something up so I lose whatever 1 minute I was going to save.

Re: Redefining what a map can be with new information and AI

#265

Post by ghaff »

Agentlien wrote: post #241
atty wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I almost always take the simpler route, especially in areas I’m not familiar with. It’s a very nice quality of life feature that doesn’t get mentioned much.

I haven't heard it mentioned often as a nice feature. However, it used to be a regular complaint from people I know that GPS would send you on awkward routes through tiny streets with many turns. That's something I haven't heard in a while.

Google definitely sometimes still does it. Which as I said elsewhere, is particularly annoying when there's snow and ice in the winter.

Re: Redefining what a map can be with new information and AI

#266

Post by falcor84 »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #249
sanxiyn wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are right, but most people want navigational aid, not map. Maps were popular because they were good navigational aid, not because they help building mental model. If better navigational aid becomes available, most people will gladly abandon map's mental model building feature.

Disagree. A navigational aid such as Google Maps is only good as long as you know your exact destination in advance. If for some reason you can't, or you need to orient yourself in an area, or even understand the route you're on, or - God forbid - plan a trip involving multiple destinations - Google Maps is incredibly hard to use.

I'm not quite sure what you mean; I've been quite happy with Google Maps's support for multiple stops. And as for the other thing: "If you don't know where you are going, any road will get you there".

Re: Redefining what a map can be with new information and AI

#267

Post by datavirtue »

NathanielK wrote: post #111
vmladenov wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Efficiency drops sharply at high speed.

For long distance driving speed is key. Highways can be faster even when they are indirect. This is what the OSMAnd "Fuel Efficient Way" routing is based on. It biases towards the shortest routes that may have lower speed limits. This is nice for road trips and bicycling, but can be quirky with city driving.

OK...so google just fixed maps then. I don't know anyone who wants to get on the highway if they don't have to.

Re: Redefining what a map can be with new information and AI

#268

Post by datavirtue »

saalweachter wrote: post #202
eru wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Going up and down mountains should be mostly a wash, apart from these small losses. What's really eating into your battery in a way you can't recover with regenerative breaking ever is wind resistance. Routes that make you drive faster for longer cost more energy. (And given the way wind resistance works, for the same average speed, a variable speed is more expensive than a constant one.)

Optimal regenerative braking recovers like 2/3 of the energy lost, and suboptimal braking -- for instance, if you need to decelerate more rapidly because of a bend in the road -- is worse. Every 100 feet of elevation change amounts to ~1% of the battery capacity of a Chevy Volt; a couple of small mountains, with lots of ups and downs, and it's easy to lose 5-10% of your range versus taking a more level route, 5% if y…

Downshifting is the devil.

Re: Redefining what a map can be with new information and AI

#269

Post by lastofthemojito »

bayindirh wrote: post #230
jozvolskyef wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't turn it off in the EU. The configuration is reset as soon as you power off the car. Considering this, assuming your claim is true, there should be vast amounts of damage to vehicles in the EU, which there isn't. In other words, the stop-start system causing significant damage is just one of the many myths popular among motorists.

I've heard only two things about start/stop systems: 1. I don't like it (Folks didn't have a clear answer. Maybe ego?). 2. Batteries are too expensive (Which I think is acceptable for such tech).

My cars are too old to have the start/stop system but I've experienced it in rental cars and my immediate reaction is that I don't like it - especially the lag between when you move your foot from the brake pedal to when the engine actually starts running.

It wasn't so bad with a manual transmission (~2016 Mini Cooper) as I often start to ease off of the brake pedal as I start to depress the clutch, so once it's time to give it some gas, the engine is probably running.

That lag felt extremely annoying and potentially dangerous in an automatic ~2018 Volvo S90 though. Maybe I move my feet faster than the average person, but if I quickly moved my foot from the brake to the gas, the car would just sit there for a split second ... wait for the engine to start ... and then start moving. I know it's a low probability, but I definitely felt as though that car would give me a lesser chance of a making a successful evasive maneuver if, say, I noticed an out-of-control vehicle hurtling towards me.

Re: Redefining what a map can be with new information and AI

#270

Post by WaitWaitWha »

5cents wrote: post #93
Alex3917 wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have no issue with this. The bigger issue I have with Google Maps is that it makes zero effort to avoid dangerous routes. If two routes for a ~45 min drive are within 30 seconds of another, why would I want to risk death by taking the one with an extremely dangerous left turn through oncoming traffic? It makes zero sense.

This looks like a governmental issue in my eyes: it's the government's responsibility to ensure that the roads are reasonable safe and the traffic reasonable regulated, not Google's. If a route is dangerous, something should be done with the route itself (not the suggestion). But if Maps' suggestions breaks regulations and propose an illegal route, I agree!

Where and when does the driver's responsibility come into play? Do we not have a social contract of following rules we already agreed on, or set by the Gov? What else did you want Gov to do?
Post reply on HN