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

Cruise is opening driverless cars to the public in San Francisco

getcruise.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 652 posts

Re: Cruise is opening driverless cars to the public in San Francisco

#231

Post by redler »

dont__panic wrote: post #201
kfarr wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can confirm from personal experience in crosswalks with self driving cars: cruise is the most timid (read safest!) of the self driving cars being tested in SF IMHO. Cruise will proactively alter trajectory (such as deceleration) for pedestrians and cyclists at a noticeably earlier threshold than Waymo. This is much more pleasant for everyone surrounding the vehicle as it clearly expresses that you have been recognize…

Urban bicyclist here. I don't life in SF, but I'm really curious how current autonomous vehicles behave around cars. If you're biking down a one-way street with little room, do most autonomous vehicles just wait behind you? Do they try to pass? What kind of follow distance would they give a bicyclist who "dominates" the lane because it's too narrow to let a car pass safely?

As a fellow cyclist who must be vigilant in defending against frequently bad behavioral answers to these questions from human drivers, I’d love to know how any self-driving system approaches them.

Re: Cruise is opening driverless cars to the public in San Francisco

#232

Post by kfarr »

rabuse wrote: post #217
kfarr wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can confirm from personal experience in crosswalks with self driving cars: cruise is the most timid (read safest!) of the self driving cars being tested in SF IMHO. Cruise will proactively alter trajectory (such as deceleration) for pedestrians and cyclists at a noticeably earlier threshold than Waymo. This is much more pleasant for everyone surrounding the vehicle as it clearly expresses that you have been recognize…

This sounds like a shill comment.

I’m a former taxi driver and safe streets advocate, so if anything my motivations are not sympathetic with their cause, just observing behavior of them.

Re: Cruise is opening driverless cars to the public in San Francisco

#233

Post by soaxre »

rootusrootus wrote: post #149
judge2020 wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does a human identify obstacles, VRUs [0], and other cars? 0: vulnerable road users, eg pedestrians and bicyclists

> How does a human identify With the most complex, context-aware, intuitive computer in existence. In addition to eyeballs that are dramatically more capable than any camera Tesla is using.

Have you ever used night mode on your phone? It looks nothing like what you are taking in terms of colours, but it shows a lot more detail than the human eye can pick up. Same thing with zoom cameras. Also there are more cameras than eyes, and in better spots.

Re: Cruise is opening driverless cars to the public in San Francisco

#234

Post by kvetching »

judge2020 wrote: post #125
more_corn wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reason camera only won’t happen is because it won’t work. Elon has been fighting reality for years.

How does a human identify obstacles, VRUs [0], and other cars? 0: vulnerable road users, eg pedestrians and bicyclists

Why would Elon want to model humans when humans are mostly responsible for the problems we want to replace humans for.

Re: Cruise is opening driverless cars to the public in San Francisco

#235

Post by ra7 »

soaxre wrote: post #220
kvogt wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cruise CEO here. Our strategy has been to solve the challenges needed to operate driverless robotaxis on a well-equipped vehicle, then aggressively drive the cost down. Many OEMs are doing this in reverse order. They're trying to squeeze orders of magnitude of performance gains out of really low-cost hardware. Today it's unclear what strategy will win. In a few years our next generation of low-cost compute and sensin…

No, the different strategies are that Tesla has a vehicle actually being used by hundreds of thousands of people and is slowly incrementally improving their self driving with massive amounts of feedback and data, while these demo companies are doing if statements around the block.

> while these demo companies are doing if statements around the block.

[citation needed]

I only ever see Tesla fanbase making outrageous claims like this without any supporting evidence.

Re: Cruise is opening driverless cars to the public in San Francisco

#236

Post by pvg »

desertraven wrote: post #219
xeromal wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No need for a conspiracy. This is hackernews. Not reddit. I doubt they are spending their marketing dollars here.

You're right. Perhaps they simply announced this post company-wide, so lots of happy employees are here.

By this point you're just repeatedly making insinuations about shillage and astroturfing which is in the guidelines as a thing to not do.

Re: Cruise is opening driverless cars to the public in San Francisco

#237

Post by JaimeThompson »

femto wrote: post #210
kvogt wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cruise CEO here. Our strategy has been to solve the challenges needed to operate driverless robotaxis on a well-equipped vehicle, then aggressively drive the cost down. Many OEMs are doing this in reverse order. They're trying to squeeze orders of magnitude of performance gains out of really low-cost hardware. Today it's unclear what strategy will win. In a few years our next generation of low-cost compute and sensin…

What’s your view on whether self-driving cars should automatically be 100% liable for any accidents? I ask this in the context of machines being governed by classical deterministic physics, so there is an argument that there is no such thing as an accident involving a self-driving car: only a design flaw. This is a genuine question, as I can see that companies with self-driving systems that work, and who do serious f…

How does one take into account lack of maintenance by the end user in a strict 100% liability situation?

Re: Cruise is opening driverless cars to the public in San Francisco

#238

Post by bduerst »

snotrockets wrote: post #224
mlindner wrote: post #163

I'm not interested in cars I can't own. This idea that we'll turn cars into some kind of service and convert roads into places filled with company-owned vehicles is completely foreign. At that point it'd be cheaper to have self-driving buses and subways. I can only think this viewpoint comes from people who have only ever lived in cities where car ownership is inconvenient given the lack of personal garages. At the m…

Even cheaper: don't have computer driven transit, but human driven transit. The current money sunk on the automated driving tech startups could pay drivers for years to come. What I would like to see is companies and people working towrds eliminating as many vehciles from the road. It is untainable, if we want an habitable planet, to have have a dependency on cars. This means we have to move back to a denser environm…

On any given timeline, dedicated human drivers will always have larger variable costs and waste than dedicated computational drivers, on top of being cost-prohibitive to people who can't afford to pay for human driven rides.

You could make the same argument for ditching email and calendar technology in favor of everyone having human secretaries typing inter-office memos. It's absurd now, yeah, but that's because we live with the benefits.

Re: Cruise is opening driverless cars to the public in San Francisco

#239

Post by vidarh »

snotrockets wrote: post #209
ghaff wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do expect at least some companies will hit L4 within the decade(?) but it's going to be under limited conditions that won't include urban driving. Which could actually be a very useful capability but isn't the "don't own a car" future that some really are focused on. ------ Level 4 _ High Automation System capability: The car can operate without human input or oversight but only under select conditions defined by f…

Achieving the “don't own a car” future doesn't require automation, as much as urbanization. No car technology would help reduce the climate crisis we're facing, unless that technology eliminates private transit (as in rides not shared by multiple people, not as in private ownership of said transit)

As someone without a drivers license or a car, automation would still be wildly useful in driving down the cost of occasional journeys to locations inconvenient to serve with public transport to a point where it makes living without a car an option for more people.

You're right, though, that the challenge is that it also makes it easier for everyone to opt for cars over mass transit.

Re: Cruise is opening driverless cars to the public in San Francisco

#240

Post by ummonk »

B1FF_PSUVM wrote: post #173
judge2020 wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does a human identify obstacles, VRUs [0], and other cars? 0: vulnerable road users, eg pedestrians and bicyclists

How does a bird fly? For human flight, we borrowed the wings, but made them fixed and added propellers, to cheat the mechanical incompetence. I wouldn't be shocked that radar/lidar/sonar/whatever sensors are what it takes to cover the incompetence in matching human brain+vision. Heck, use multiple "brains" and give each veto power on moving the vehicle. Supposing that stopping doesn't kill you, that would at most fre…

Well also the largest animal to ever fly only weighed a few hundred lbs so we’re also just limited by the kind of flight we’re trying to do.

At least today we probably could build a craft that flies by flapping its wings but what would be the point?

Post reply on HN