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

CEO of Waymo John Krafcik is leaving

blog.waymo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 248 posts

Re: CEO of Waymo John Krafcik is leaving

#61

Post by endisneigh »

craftinator wrote: post #53
endisneigh wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think this is just the usual goal post moving, if a machine does it then we decide it wasn't really dangerous for a machine to do it. I strongly disagree. Most machines are not capable of killing you because it makes a mistake. Do you have an example of something humans did that could kill them that was automated completely that still can kill them, but generally does not anymore? An elevator is one example, but…

You mean, like the entire rest of his comment? Garmin Autoland...

The Garmin Autoland is not equivalent to full self driving? That's like self parking which has existed for a while now. In any case planes are inherently orders of magnitude safer than cars to begin with due to the lack of obstacles/chaos.

Re: CEO of Waymo John Krafcik is leaving

#62

Post by lrem »

specialp wrote: post #22

"To start, I’m looking forward to a refresh period, reconnecting with old friends and family, and discovering new parts of the world." I suppose that is a nice way of saying wait out my non-compete....

Even without a non-compete, taking a couple months off between jobs is nice. But yeah, at that level I imagine non-competes reach to the full legal extent and then some ;)

Re: CEO of Waymo John Krafcik is leaving

#63

Post by craftinator »

billfruit wrote: post #25
endisneigh wrote: post #6

That's sad. I must be the only one who thinks full self driving will not happen before year 2100. Is there an example of anything that's completely automated that's dangerous? I cannot think of a single thing. At best things are partially automated and need humans still. The thing is, if you have "partial" self driving, you might as well just drive yourself IMHO. The consequence of being wrong with a car is literally…

Does anyone else think that may be full autonomous flying of aircraft will be easier to make practical than driving of automobiles?

I thought this was obvious. The complexity that cars deal with during travel is many orders of magnitude higher than the complexity aircraft deal with, and cars actually have an effect on the complexity of the environment they travel in, unlike aircraft. For the most part, aircraft one have ONE object that they have to avoid hitting, and it's the size of a planet, and engages in zero direction changes. Aircraft are simple.

Re: CEO of Waymo John Krafcik is leaving

#64

Post by endisneigh »

minhazm wrote: post #31
meteor333 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even for airplanes and trains, we still have pilots and humans behind the controller with 100% attention.

We don't have fully automated planes because they're already safe enough and the economics aren't there. The probability of crashing with a plane is extremely low, even factoring in the higher risk of takeoffs and landings. The entire process is coordinated with Air Traffic Control. Since planes are so safe already and pilots are relatively inexpensive, there's no strong financial incentive to fully automate planes.

Planes are also substantially regulated. I mean if there was a Vehicular Traffic Control on every intersection the same way there's Air Traffic Control we probably wouldn't have any accidents now, negating the main purported benefit of self driving to begin with.

Re: CEO of Waymo John Krafcik is leaving

#65

Post by modeless »

Sherl wrote: post #26

For fully autonomous driving need to happen, all cars must exchange data with each other how robots do in a factory floor. Image and depth perception can solve some problems but a crash or a vehicle can maneuver in any direction. If two self driving cars need to take a decision at a intersection, how are they gonna do it?

Do factory floor robots communicate with each other in any meaningful way? I'm under the impression that they mostly just follow pre-programmed paths and all you need for that is clock synchronization.

Re: CEO of Waymo John Krafcik is leaving

#66

Post by lrem »

layoutIfNeeded wrote: post #32
tdhz77 wrote: post #21

Self driving is not possible without changes to infrastructure. We know this because NHS tried in 1960’s and was able to succeed with this approach. Government will have to solve problem first. How? Installing sensors on our highways that cars can use. Anything this big in scale can’t be solved by the private sector alone, you also need better infrastructure.

>Self driving is not possible without changes to infrastructure Humans seem to be perfectly capable of doing it though.

Humans come with their own liability :(

Re: CEO of Waymo John Krafcik is leaving

#67

Post by jdavis703 »

whimsicalism wrote: post #40
Sherl wrote: post #26

For fully autonomous driving need to happen, all cars must exchange data with each other how robots do in a factory floor. Image and depth perception can solve some problems but a crash or a vehicle can maneuver in any direction. If two self driving cars need to take a decision at a intersection, how are they gonna do it?

Do you need to exchange data with every other driver when you're on the road?

Isn’t this what turn signals, horns and brake lights are for? Not to mention making eye contact with pedestrians at crossings.

Re: CEO of Waymo John Krafcik is leaving

#68

Post by bumby »

billfruit wrote: post #25
endisneigh wrote: post #6

That's sad. I must be the only one who thinks full self driving will not happen before year 2100. Is there an example of anything that's completely automated that's dangerous? I cannot think of a single thing. At best things are partially automated and need humans still. The thing is, if you have "partial" self driving, you might as well just drive yourself IMHO. The consequence of being wrong with a car is literally…

Does anyone else think that may be full autonomous flying of aircraft will be easier to make practical than driving of automobiles?

Yes. It’s a much more regulated industry that already has mandatory equipment that helps solve the problem (e.g., transponders), there’s often more time to perceive and mitigate a risk (outside of takeoff and landing), less variable environments etc

Re: CEO of Waymo John Krafcik is leaving

#69

Post by giobox »

meteor333 wrote: post #11
endisneigh wrote: post #6

That's sad. I must be the only one who thinks full self driving will not happen before year 2100. Is there an example of anything that's completely automated that's dangerous? I cannot think of a single thing. At best things are partially automated and need humans still. The thing is, if you have "partial" self driving, you might as well just drive yourself IMHO. The consequence of being wrong with a car is literally…

Even for airplanes and trains, we still have pilots and humans behind the controller with 100% attention.

There's plenty of examples of driverless trains throughout the world.

> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_automated_train_system...

Re: CEO of Waymo John Krafcik is leaving

#70

Post by kungito »

roughly wrote: post #48
tialaramex wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Is there an example of anything that's completely automated that's dangerous? I think this is just the usual goal post moving, if a machine does it then we decide it wasn't really dangerous for a machine to do it. Garmin Autoland will take a plane which is otherwise working and is in the sky and put it back on the ground because the pilot has a problem (e.g. your plane nut husband finally has another stroke† while…

> I think this is just the usual goal post moving, if a machine does it then we decide it wasn't really dangerous for a machine to do it. I've seen a lot of goalpost moving in the other direction on this one, to be honest - Self Driving Cars started as "never have an accident again!" and have slowly migrated to "look, you suck at driving, the robot sucks less, so stop bitching when the robot runs over grandma"

*runs over grandma who us trying to ilegally and suddenly cross the street right in front of the car
Post reply on HN