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

Welcoming our first riders in San Francisco

blog.waymo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 691 posts

Re: Welcoming our first riders in San Francisco

#41

Post by beaconstudios »

gfodor wrote: post #27

Kind of interesting to consider how this adjusts priors on these outcomes: - Self driving is not possible - Self driving is not possible anytime soon - Self driving is possible, but requires LIDAR - Self driving is possible, and can be done with normal cameras I've engaged with a lot of people who presume self-driving reduces onto AGI, therefore it will not be achieved anytime soon if ever. I wonder which of their as…

The big concern is that driving as a human skill is reactive and adaptive, whereas ML (and software in general) models are pre-baked. If something happens outside the car's model, it will react unpredictably, and strange circumstances can arise while driving. AGI, as based on human cognition, would have the capability to adapt to as-yet-unseen circumstances.

Re: Welcoming our first riders in San Francisco

#42

Post by akiselev »

gfodor wrote: post #27

Kind of interesting to consider how this adjusts priors on these outcomes: - Self driving is not possible - Self driving is not possible anytime soon - Self driving is possible, but requires LIDAR - Self driving is possible, and can be done with normal cameras I've engaged with a lot of people who presume self-driving reduces onto AGI, therefore it will not be achieved anytime soon if ever. I wonder which of their as…

You forgot a fifth one: Self driving is possible but follows the 80/20 rule that states that the last 20% of work requires 80% of the effort. We probably haven't even started on that 20%

Re: Welcoming our first riders in San Francisco

#44

Post by bluGill »

tofuahdude wrote: post #2

This is both incredibly exciting and a little terrifying. As a pedestrian, I'm still a little weary around these cars.

The bar to being better than human drivers is not that high. It is a hard problem, but there is plenty of room to be better than humans while still being dangerous to pedestrians.

Re: Welcoming our first riders in San Francisco

#46

Post by reaperducer »

ra7 wrote: post #19

It's fantastic to see Waymo's progress. SF is a real nightmare to drive. If they can nail it there, that's 2/2 for busy, urban street driving (SF) and "boring" suburban driving (Chandler, AZ). They've been quietly very confident of their tech, but this is a real test. Tangentially, I've also noticed that Waymo has picked up pace ever since the recent leadership changes. They are publishing more blog posts, offering m…

SF is a real nightmare to drive. If they can nail it there, that's 2/2 for busy, urban street driving (SF) and "boring" suburban driving (Chandler, AZ)

Both are low-hanging fruit. When it can navigate a snow-covered road at night while it's still snowing, get back to me.

Re: Welcoming our first riders in San Francisco

#47

Post by espadrine »

Waymo is currently the only SAE Level 4[0] self-driving car in use, right? The wheel must not be used. Even though it is limited to two cities.

Their technology seems an order of magnitude above the rest, although factoring in its cost could make it look worse. (Can it turn a profit, when including the development costs?)

Tesla FSD is at best SAE level 3 (can need human fallback), and at worst level 2 (needs constant human monitoring).

[0]: https://blog.waymo.com/2020/10/revealing-our-approach-to-saf...

Re: Welcoming our first riders in San Francisco

#48

Post by judge2020 »

gfodor wrote: post #27

Kind of interesting to consider how this adjusts priors on these outcomes: - Self driving is not possible - Self driving is not possible anytime soon - Self driving is possible, but requires LIDAR - Self driving is possible, and can be done with normal cameras I've engaged with a lot of people who presume self-driving reduces onto AGI, therefore it will not be achieved anytime soon if ever. I wonder which of their as…

Self driving was never impossible, just infeasible with tech at the time. Surely it'll be standard in a few decades, despite that being quite far into the future.

Re: Welcoming our first riders in San Francisco

#49

Post by MattGaiser »

gfodor wrote: post #27

Kind of interesting to consider how this adjusts priors on these outcomes: - Self driving is not possible - Self driving is not possible anytime soon - Self driving is possible, but requires LIDAR - Self driving is possible, and can be done with normal cameras I've engaged with a lot of people who presume self-driving reduces onto AGI, therefore it will not be achieved anytime soon if ever. I wonder which of their as…

I assume that they just don't solve the really wacky edge cases which might require AGI.

Many people assume that a self driving car must be 100% successful. To me it is sufficient to beat the top 20%/bottom 80% of drivers.

So the car will crash if a seagull flies in front of the camera and there is a deer just beyond it. The human would probably crash too.

Post reply on HN