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

Geofencing Will Enable L5

semiengineering.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 76 posts

Re: Geofencing Will Enable L5

#41

Post by space_fountain »

alex_young wrote: post #29

So, to limit our problem a bit, let's create a nice little geofence around our robot cars. We'll limit the physical environment changes in this area, build in some barriers, limit pedestrian traffic, protect wildlife crossings, maybe build in some weather protection systems so our robots don't have to drive on the snow. Why stop there? Let's build a special track for these robots since tires are pretty bad in terms o…

Trains are a great solution to move loads of people between population centers and they’re an ok solution to moving loads of people downtown. They do start to suffer when you want to move people between basically random points in a city. I am all on board for fully automated micro trains though

Re: Geofencing Will Enable L5

#42

Post by codesnik »

space_fountain wrote: post #41
alex_young wrote: post #29

So, to limit our problem a bit, let's create a nice little geofence around our robot cars. We'll limit the physical environment changes in this area, build in some barriers, limit pedestrian traffic, protect wildlife crossings, maybe build in some weather protection systems so our robots don't have to drive on the snow. Why stop there? Let's build a special track for these robots since tires are pretty bad in terms o…

Trains are a great solution to move loads of people between population centers and they’re an ok solution to moving loads of people downtown. They do start to suffer when you want to move people between basically random points in a city. I am all on board for fully automated micro trains though

so, trams?

Re: Geofencing Will Enable L5

#43

Post by pclmulqdq »

alex_young wrote: post #36
msla wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OK, you build trains from Sidney, Montana, to Lewistown. I'm not interested in self-driving cars, but thinking trains solve all problems is a very narrow, urban view.

There is existing rail connecting both of those towns according to https://www.openrailwaymap.org/ I'd also point out that these are 2 towns with less than 6000 population each, in one of the lowest population density parts of the country, with one of the worst climates for self driving cars. In many European countries there are vast networks of trains connecting small towns with larger cities. Is there a good reason…

In Europe, 100 miles is far, and in America, 100 years is a long time. The European towns you are referring to are usually a lot closer together than American towns.

Re: Geofencing Will Enable L5

#44

Post by KaiserPro »

I'm not sure what the article is supposed to be saying, but geofencing autonomous vehicles does not make them level 5, it makes them level 4 with planning tools.

Navigation is not the issue. Large scale mapping using visual only features is pretty much a solved problem. I worked at a company that did this, Apple, Facebook, google, Niantic and a bunch of others all have this ability.

The biggest issue here is not that knowing where you are, but what is in the way. Sensors to figure out what is in the way, and if thats a real obstacle or a shadow is the hard part. combine that with working out what other road users are doing ( essentially body language for cars) and thats the main impediment to level 4/5 autonomy.

Re: Geofencing Will Enable L5

#45

Post by space_fountain »

codesnik wrote: post #42
space_fountain wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trains are a great solution to move loads of people between population centers and they’re an ok solution to moving loads of people downtown. They do start to suffer when you want to move people between basically random points in a city. I am all on board for fully automated micro trains though

so, trams?

Well without schedules or defined routes

Re: Geofencing Will Enable L5

#46

Post by seagullrific »

xani_ wrote: post #31
seagullrific wrote: post #25

Battery-powered scooters are heavily geofenced in the cities I've used them in. Ride down one street perfectly fine. Cross into an adjacent park, the brakes go on, the motor is disabled or limited, and an alarm might sound. As a solution, it's maybe missing the resolution of 1m vs about 5m at the moment. This is exactly what's needed, but instead of limiting virtually harmless products like scooters, all cars should…

People don't crash because of speeding, people crash coz they drive like idiots

Ah yes, the "if only people behaved differently from how they've always behaved" school of limiting easily-preventable deaths.

Re: Geofencing Will Enable L5

#47

Post by 10u152 »

NegativeLatency wrote: post #38
alex_young wrote: post #29

So, to limit our problem a bit, let's create a nice little geofence around our robot cars. We'll limit the physical environment changes in this area, build in some barriers, limit pedestrian traffic, protect wildlife crossings, maybe build in some weather protection systems so our robots don't have to drive on the snow. Why stop there? Let's build a special track for these robots since tires are pretty bad in terms o…

Pretty clear at this point that self driving and electric are here to save the car/road building industry not society. Makes me so frustrated that I have to drive/own a car to be a "full" citizen in the US, I really hope other options start to become more viable/mainstream in my lifetime. (As I'm sure someone will love to point out, yes there are things that cars are good at, rural areas etc, but there are lots of wa…

Wouldn’t you say that electric cars are here to stay because they fit into the existing lifestyle/infrastructure?

The road building industry point is mostly moot as most large civil construction companies generally also do rail projects and could pivot into the expansion of rail systems.

Re: Geofencing Will Enable L5

#48

Post by JohnFen »

TurningCanadian wrote: post #34
JohnFen wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You saying you want to take the wheel every now and then is like saying sometimes you want to ride your horse on the 8 lane highway. Or maybe it's like saying you want to ride your horse on a country road every so often.

To complete the analogy, you'd have to want to ride your horse on a country road every so often in a way that breaks the law (original comment wanted to break the speed limit). Maybe you want to ride on private roads or something like that.

No, I'm not talking about wanting to break the law. I'm talking about wanting to drive.

Re: Geofencing Will Enable L5

#49

Post by dendrite9 »

msla wrote: post #30
alex_young wrote: post #29

So, to limit our problem a bit, let's create a nice little geofence around our robot cars. We'll limit the physical environment changes in this area, build in some barriers, limit pedestrian traffic, protect wildlife crossings, maybe build in some weather protection systems so our robots don't have to drive on the snow. Why stop there? Let's build a special track for these robots since tires are pretty bad in terms o…

OK, you build trains from Sidney, Montana, to Lewistown. I'm not interested in self-driving cars, but thinking trains solve all problems is a very narrow, urban view.

I don't think trains have to just be an urban thing. Maybe you wont get a train stop in McDermitt, NV or Loa, UT or Mackay, ID but there are plenty of places with higher density than that. It took me a long time to realize the history of the various interurban trails I've seen. This tweet I saw recently has some interesting maps of the networks of people focused rail to even small towns near Boston. https://twitter.com/FischermanDan/status/1571919260661809152

It's a response to this: https://nitter.net/grescoe/status/1571863398366973960#m

"By 1920, the network of interurbans in the US was so dense that a determined commuter could hop interlinked streetcars from Waterville, Maine, to Sheboygan, Wisconsin—a journey of 1,000 miles—exclusively by electric trolley. The tracks, and often the wires, extended deep into forest and farmland, making the railroads de facto intercity highways; after nightfall in the countryside, farmers would signal drivers to stop by burning a rag next to the track. Streetcars and interurbans became the dominant mode of urban transportation in North America, carrying 11 billion passengers a year by the end of the First World War."

Re: Geofencing Will Enable L5

#50

Post by theamk »

alex_young wrote: post #29

So, to limit our problem a bit, let's create a nice little geofence around our robot cars. We'll limit the physical environment changes in this area, build in some barriers, limit pedestrian traffic, protect wildlife crossings, maybe build in some weather protection systems so our robots don't have to drive on the snow. Why stop there? Let's build a special track for these robots since tires are pretty bad in terms o…

The key difference between trains and L5 vehicles is that once you leave geofenced area, your transport becomes a regular car than can immediately drive anywhere. This saves you a ton of time compared to train travel, especially on a shorter trips.

The closest thing in the train world would be car-carrying trains... and apparently Amtrak does have "auto train" for a pretty reasonable price ($180 for 18 hour trip): https://www.amtrak.com/routes/auto-train.html

Too bad they only have one auto-train line in the US, that would be an interesting way to travel.

Post reply on HN