371–380 of 514 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> incidents like these are only a minor, harmless inconvenience. Until there is a emergency vehicle thats unable to get through.
Humans aren't any better at letting energency vehicles pass...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The system as a whole used C, C++, Python, and some Java/JS-family stuff in the infrastructure backends. You can find a long tail of other languages scattered throughout the organization, like Go, Rust, Lisps, and Swift, etc. I wrote a fare-cost-calculator in Mathematica awhile ago, as an example. As for storage systems, no idea. The stuff I know was all custom, but I was deep in the stack most of the time and don't…
>The system as a whole used C, C++ It all makes sense now. Astounding its legal to use C/++ in a safety critical situation.
Airplane systems, telecom equipment, medical equipment, satellite and space launch equipment, railway systems, etc., etc.
There's other languages used as well obviously, and even just assembly in some parts of some systems, but in terms of the majority it's C and/or C++.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Rails are too restrictive for real life? I'm not sure what you are trying to say here... Rails are widely used for real life around the globe. In many, many places rails significantly out perform cars to the point that people choose not to own cars.
Yes point A to B on extremely selective routes or if you only want to go to/between towns/cities your whole life.
Yes they don’t go everywhere, but in the UK we aren’t very spread out in our cities, towns and even suburbs, so it’s reasonable to expect quite a large number of people to be within walking or cycling distance of a tram stop.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Disagree. It’s easy to see how far FSD has progressed, there’s lots of videos to document how far it’s gone from then and today. Yeah, but videos aren't objective metrics. For me, an objective metric is "went $FOO miles in $BAR conditions without needing any intervention". What would you consider an objective metric?
> "went $FOO miles in $BAR conditions without needing any intervention" But who decides whether intervention was necessary? This is still too vague.
Irrelevant - until the car has actually gone without an intervention for whatever the median is for human drivers[1], we can't very well claim that it is safe for use.
[1] The average human driver goes hundreds of thousands of kilometers without crashing.
The promises of self driving cars have always seemed weird to me. Sure, I would love to have a world where all cars are self driving. The security benefits seem large. But decreasing congestion? We already know how to do that, and in many ways it seems like a safer bet than some kind of technogy with large problems and even larger unknowns; public transport. Cheap, well developed, reliable public transport will beat…
> well developed
> reliable
Speaking as a guy in Europe where we generally have "good" public transport, I think you can only ever have ONE of those at the same time, with some exceptions.
Cheap fares? You get decrepit busses from the 80s and the timetable's just a suggestion (what my city used to have)
Well developed? Development isn't cheap so fares get expensive, busses are Mercs that run on CNG and the timetable's still just a suggestion - but you get live boards showing arrival times at least (what my city has today)
Reliable? You'll have to go to Switzerland or Japan to experience that, no other place truly has it. And those places aren't cheap... but they would count as having well developed route networks, so 2/3 for them I suppose.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What does lidar have to do with connection to the network? If anything, once GPS goes down, more sensing modalities can only be helpful.
Car should be able to drive without Lidar and connection to the network. There is currently only a single car company that accomplished that.
The promises of self driving cars have always seemed weird to me. Sure, I would love to have a world where all cars are self driving. The security benefits seem large. But decreasing congestion? We already know how to do that, and in many ways it seems like a safer bet than some kind of technogy with large problems and even larger unknowns; public transport. Cheap, well developed, reliable public transport will beat…
Cheap, reliable, dense public transit with diverse "last mile" options is clearly a much better choice from the congestion, efficiency cost point of views.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wow. I had no idea that these things had such fundamental limitations. I'd feel a lot less safer using one now, to be honest. If you had to estimate, how long would it be before AVs would be able to do all their calculations locally? Is that something that's even under consideration at the time?
It's a well-known thing in AV circles that some companies were actually faking their route by hardcoding them for demos etc. Also one shortcut is to use HD map data, and relying on 100k+ LIDAR sensor data that will never will be cost-effective. I know of only a handful of companies that rely on 'cheap' sensor data (cameras/radar) and use real-time calculations.
Eh, the $100k prices are mostly for high-end, low-production-volume research LIDARs.
There are LIDAR manufacturers claiming they can achieve prices of $500 [1] or even $200 [2] if they were fitted to every car made.
[1] https://guidehouseinsights.com/news-and-views/lower-cost-lid... [2] https://www.opsys-tech.com/post/are-we-nearing-a-shakeout-in...
The promises of self driving cars have always seemed weird to me. Sure, I would love to have a world where all cars are self driving. The security benefits seem large. But decreasing congestion? We already know how to do that, and in many ways it seems like a safer bet than some kind of technogy with large problems and even larger unknowns; public transport. Cheap, well developed, reliable public transport will beat…
In almost all the above places, there have been frequent instances where I’ve had to use taxis and/or rent a car. And that was while living/staying in the core of these cities.
99.99% of places on earth aren’t nearly as densely populated as the ones above, so increase the need for cars proportionally if you ever want to go elsewhere.
We need both good public transport and autonomous vehicles. It’s not one or the other.
Whenever I see people citing public transport as a panacea for all problems, it’s typically a wealthy, single, childless, digital minimalist 20-something who lives in the core of the aforementioned cities, and never does much outside of it.
You ever wonder where the food you eat gets grown and how it gets delivered to that fast casual restaurant you love down the street? It’s not public transport.
The promises of self driving cars have always seemed weird to me. Sure, I would love to have a world where all cars are self driving. The security benefits seem large. But decreasing congestion? We already know how to do that, and in many ways it seems like a safer bet than some kind of technogy with large problems and even larger unknowns; public transport. Cheap, well developed, reliable public transport will beat…
Of course driverless taxis will not help much with congestion. That will require different solutions.