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

Mercedes-Benz says Level 3 self-driving option ready to roll

thedetroitbureau.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 410 posts

Re: Mercedes-Benz says Level 3 self-driving option ready to roll

#201

Post by zip1234 »

Closi wrote: post #56
bryanlarsen wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That threshold is generally considered to be 20mph. Below that speed pedestrian injuries are unlikely to be fatal. It's what urban speed limits are in Sweden, and they average about one pedestrian death a year in the entire country.

20mph is considered to be good for survivability, but is not really good from a speed/travel perspective. I believe OP meant maybe 40mph is a good balance between the two factors of speed (higher is better) and survivability (higher is better) from a corporate risk / insurance perspective. Raising one of these lowers the other - so the actual threshold depends on how you value speed / convenience vs accident survivab…

20mph is within populated areas and not on a main road. In the US, the norm is 25mph, which isn't that far off.

Re: Mercedes-Benz says Level 3 self-driving option ready to roll

#202

Post by themacguffinman »

simondotau wrote: post #192
themacguffinman wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see the misunderstanding. Most of what you quoted is irrelevant, he said two key sentences: "And so actually, when you think about it, in order to solve full self-driving, we have to solve neural nets and cameras to a degree of a capability that is on par with, and will really exceeds humans. And I think we will achieve that this year." The meaning seems pretty clear. He says they will achieve "that", "that"…

I disagree that most of it is irrelevant. I think they are critical to understanding his point. Why are you so desperate to cherry pick? This isn’t Twitter, there’s no 240 character limit on replies.

It's hard not to notice that you still haven't explained where the misunderstanding is or even what you think is his point. I'm still curious how you think it's a misunderstanding, I already know you disagree. I'd be more impressed with your Twitter comeback if your own reply wasn't a <240 character non-explanation.

Re: Mercedes-Benz says Level 3 self-driving option ready to roll

#203

Post by zaphirplane »

Traster wrote: post #60
lorenzfx wrote: post #20

While the specs sound very underwhelming at first (geo-fenced on some roads, very low speeds, no bad weather), they seem to be so confident in their system, that they will take responsibility for the car when in autopilot. AFAIK, no other manufacturer does this for their systems (which capabilities they often make rather wild claims about).

Just from a management perspective, even if you're super-confident in your engineers (which you shouldn't be), doing anything other than a very limited slow roll out would be negligent. This is a tectonic shift in liability. It's one thing if you sell 1,000,000 cars and 100,000 get in an accident. It's actually much worse to sell 10,000 cars and 1,000 of them get in an accident and the company is liable .

I looked up the number of cars sold. Mercedes sells about 1/2 relative to ford and 22% compared to Toyota

Obviously the statistics of a new car is unknown

Re: Mercedes-Benz says Level 3 self-driving option ready to roll

#204

Post by zip1234 »

verisimi wrote: post #42
verisimi wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, a huge leap. I can't possibly imagine that government would pass legislation that all the automakers would comply with. /s https://www.musclecarsandtrucks.com/biden-infrastructure-bil... "Deep within the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act that was signed into law by President Joe Biden is a passage that will require automakers to begin including what can be best summarized as a “vehicle kill switch” within t…

I'm being downvoted - but this is the reality of what will happen. Who wants that sort of monitoring when they are driving? Is this a consumer-driven feature? Or is this more government management - leveraging technology to micro-manage every detail of our lives - only allowing good citizens travel privileges etc? We are sleep walking into a dystopia, and I get downvoted for stating the obvious! Seriously - your gove…

The fact is that loads of people drive drunk, drive illegally, and drive dangerously--on public roads. Police enforcement clearly doesn't work. Automated enforcement would. Why should people get to endanger others? The leading cause of death for children and teens almost every year is 'motor vehicle crashes' and it wasn't the children and teens causing those.

Re: Mercedes-Benz says Level 3 self-driving option ready to roll

#205

Post by [deleted] »

deaddodo wrote: post #181
stavros wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh man, I didn't expect to read a comment saying "it's OK if 100 times more cars have accidents as long as a company isn't liable".

From a corporate perspective, of course it is. It's the Ford Pinto study all over again. This is why corporate influence on legislation is bad, as their "best interests" often come at odds with morality-based ones.

[deleted]

Re: Mercedes-Benz says Level 3 self-driving option ready to roll

#206

Post by zip1234 »

jeffbee wrote: post #195
blhack wrote: post #168

It needs to be going under 40mph and on a highway, which sounds like this only works in stop and got traffic on the freeway. Pretty cool.

I wonder why that speed limit would exist. Sensor range? Computational power? It seems like the difference between being able to self-drive at 40 and at 65 on the same road would not be all that significant.

Perhaps because 65 has exponentially more energy in collisions and more likely to cause death? If it is limited to 40, death is less likely and therefore chance of negative news. So I would venture just a risk calculation for initial release.

Re: Mercedes-Benz says Level 3 self-driving option ready to roll

#208

Post by MereInterest »

oconnor663 wrote: post #193
stavros wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh man, I didn't expect to read a comment saying "it's OK if 100 times more cars have accidents as long as a company isn't liable".

I feel like almost any summary of the form "so you're saying it's ok that..." is almost without exception not something the other person would agree with.

That's kind of the whole point. If a decision or policy has predictable consequences that aren't being addressed, either the decision-maker is unaware of those consequences or is accepting of those consequences. Asking the question removes ignorance as a possibility, and lets the conversation continue.

Sometimes the answer is "No, I was unaware, and I will adjust my decision." Sometimes the answer is "Yes, here are the consequences of the alternatives, and here's why I believe this set of consequences to be best." Sometimes the answer is "Yes, I don't care about those people." By asking the question, these three types of answers respectively give the other person an opportunity to improve themselves, give you an opportunity to learn from the other person, or give the audience an opportunity to learn not to trust the other person.

Re: Mercedes-Benz says Level 3 self-driving option ready to roll

#209

Post by zip1234 »

Hamuko wrote: post #122
robonerd wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That might be the way it works in Israel, but it's not a safe way to drive even if the law permits it. In Washington state, every intersection is a crosswalk whether or not it's marked, and you have to stop for any pedestrian crossing an intersection whether or not the light says the pedestrian can be there. I hope these car companies get local laws right. But it would be best if they did the safe thing even if local…

It's not a safe way to walk either, and I don't know where walking against a red light is legal.

In England it is legal as long as the walker determines it is safe to do so.

Re: Mercedes-Benz says Level 3 self-driving option ready to roll

#210

Post by stubish »

lorenzfx wrote: post #20

While the specs sound very underwhelming at first (geo-fenced on some roads, very low speeds, no bad weather), they seem to be so confident in their system, that they will take responsibility for the car when in autopilot. AFAIK, no other manufacturer does this for their systems (which capabilities they often make rather wild claims about).

I think other manufacturers will also be taking responsibility for liability when they come to market. It is just insurance. You can already pay an insurance company to accept liability. The difference with lv3 self drive and beyond is that insurance companies no longer have the data to correctly price their policies, because this is all new and they rely on historical data. The car manufacturers believe they have that data, and are now in a position to take that slice of the pie. I expect that once things settle down, the bulk of your insurance will be paid as a yearly fee to the manufacturer to cover self driving (and the manufacturer will likely offload much of the risk to Big Insurance).
Post reply on HN