341–350 of 652 posts
I notice that they are refereed to as "driverless" rather than "self-driving". Are these actually self-driving or are they remote controlled by a person?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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.
Well, you are ignoring the point. The whole differentiating strategy between Tesla and everyone else is the incrementally improvement of large amounts of vehicles versus the magic “hey, we came out of nowhere and now just drive ourselves”. This has been repeated though out tech history and the incrementally improving real life one always wins.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I expect the media led zeitgeist to slime you on a few fronts: 1. AI/automation/tech bros undercutting the working class. 2. The mortal danger of self driving cars to pedestrians and the public- perhaps with an AI bias/racism zest. 3. The price, location-availability, or otherwise explicit exclusion of people that damage the cars or are otherwise unprofitable being harmful. 4. The proliferation of self driving cars r…
All-electric fleets of safe, non-honking AVs that are fine with whatever routes are required of them and go to designated areas to park and charge are going to make our downtown areas so much better.
Full size EVs are still bad for air quality too because of tire dust.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Game theory and personality dynamics strategy applies to C-levels too! For some industries, companies, etc you want to be a Holmes type of total confidence. It depends who your market is, and by that I mean the VC's you want to attract. If they go for the "arrogant boy/girl genius" schtick then that's what you do. If they want a humble intellectual, then that's what you do instead. Conversely, you may alternate betwe…
Theranos didn't use the normal set of VCs because they all thought it was a scam; they raised from some random rich people who weren't professional tech VCs instead. It's unfortunate the only thing she was convicted for was defrauding them, since being accredited investors they should be able to live with that. As for Elon, he's currently doing a bad boy anti-government bit in an attempt to make Tesla "electric cars…
NO.
Investors are supposed to be able to live with all the usual risks of technology, execution, marketplace dynamics, etc.
They are NOT supposed to be OK with deliberate fraud.
If you invest at Early_Round when the tech looks promising, but then it fails to develop, CEO truthfully tells everyone what failed, the plan to overcome the failures, and you invest in Later_Round, or don't, and it ultimately fails and you lose your investment, fine.
BUT, if you invested in Early_Round and then the tech fails to develop, but the CEO straight-up lies to you and says they are "light years ahead of everyone else", shows phony endorsements from major industry players, and more so that you invest again in Later_Round, and then lose your shirt - that's fraud, and all involved in the fraud should be prosecuted, convicted, and jailed.
Anything less will create an environment where blatant lying for 100s-of-$millions is okay, and that is doomed to systemically fail.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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?
are there narrow streets in america?
What is the benefit of a taxi being driverless, for the passenger? Is it cheaper?
Likely be able to get a taxi anywhere. No discrimination. No 20/25/30% tip suggested. No taking advantage of passengers, no weird routes to tack on extra fees.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What makes you say Tesla is imitating humans? Their motion planning is all traditional robotics logic, not anything learned.
Vision-based driving. Humans don't have lidar sensors.
Did you know we can see light polarization?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, they’re not trying to solve the same thing? I think Tesla is right that to solve it for real you need to solve the general case which can’t rely on high resolution maps. The city cab case is smaller and can, so the cruise approach makes sense for that use case. It’s just narrower.
The truth of it is that it’s just not possible (with currently existing technology/ML architectures) to create a truly autonomous taxi without HD maps. Everyone in the robotaxi industry knows this - even Tesla builds HD maps, they just don’t call them that.
I found his and Tesla's arguments convincing for the general case. That doesn't mean that the narrow cases aren't super cool or valuable (I signed up for this Cruise thing in SF).
I just think that if the software is unable to make decisions based on visual data alone without up to date high resolution maps it'll never achieve true FSD in the general case (not geo locked). You'll end up trapped in a local max otherwise because there are just too many conditions in the real world that vary (and the world is too large to economically map fast enough for that approach). You have to solve the vision problem.
I don't know enough to comment on the approach differences beyond that, but my understanding was that Tesla did not rely on the same stuff that Waymo and Cruise require (largely Lidar and these high resolution maps).
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…
Not quite this, but you get the idea:
https://nypost.com/2021/05/20/motorcyclist-rider-survive-hor...
I couldn't find the clip of a motorcyclist patiently stopped at an intersection get taken out by an out of control left turner. Lots of fully legally stopped vehicles get hit.