Earlier quoted context omitted.
I dunno, being able to easily get places (to visit or work or have fun) is pretty important. Time is finite and valuable, so things that less us spend time in more satisfying ways are valuable.
Denser cities and electric bikes would go a long way. But somehow in the US people only want to go places in a deadly metal box, even to fetch bread.
Even after $100B, self-driving cars are going nowhere
361–370 of 501 posts
Re: Even after $100B, self-driving cars are going nowhere
#362Re: Even after $100B, self-driving cars are going nowhere
#363Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm genuinely curious why you think Tesla is ahead compared to Waymo and Cruise. Autopilot struggles in my car on some fairly boring roads, while Waymo and Cruise are both operating real taxi services in vehicles without drivers. I can understand the argument that Tesla has lots of data from real world driving. But Google also has fleets of cars mapping out every road in the world.
Compared to general self-driving, it's relatively simple to make self-driving taxis work in just a couple of cities (preferably ones with minimum adversarial weather, too) - you just test the code against that particular dataset until it performes reasonably well, manually fixing the edge cases along the way if need be. It's still a monumental, multi-billion dollar project, but I would be surprised if it wasn't achie…
Re: Even after $100B, self-driving cars are going nowhere
#364Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'll be blunt about this. Most of this research is funded in the US and the hyper individualistic Americans as a group don't believe in public transport.
Yes, as a hyper individualistic American fuck public transport. I don’t want to travel with other people, I don’t want to live in dense cities and I don’t want to go to like the 10 places with public transport. I love national parks, camping, hiking, road-tripping etc.
Re: Even after $100B, self-driving cars are going nowhere
#365WHY is a fully autonomous vehicle even interesting to pursue, given that wheeled vehicles and their infrastructural requirements are such a large expense and social and environmental problem relative to the benefits provided? I mean, out of all the moonshots, why die on this particular hill? I consider an actual hyperloop to be a much more compelling vision for the future: those pneumatic tubes the banks use in subur…
Re: Even after $100B, self-driving cars are going nowhere
#366In the short run, technological progress is much slower than anyone hopes, but in the long run it is much faster than anyone expects. My favorite example is that in 1987, the scientific consensus was that it would take "at least 100 years" and likely much longer to sequence the entire human gnome.[a] But the vast majority of it was sequenced by 2000, only 13 years later. Moreover, just two decades later, anyone could…
AGI is a generalization and super set of self driving cars and has a far wider impact and set of people researching it.
The two problems seem equivalently hard in that fully autonomous vehicles must be five nines (?) reliably safe. That's a ridiculously hard problem.
Re: Even after $100B, self-driving cars are going nowhere
#367Right now cars are trying to drive like a human. Based on the same cues and road markings, signs etc.
What if we started embedding road signs with radio beacons. Cars with transponders like aircraft have. Road markings in a digital way that's easier to follow for a machine.
We could start with some lanes dedicated to automated traffic. If the goal is that humans will no longer drive themselves, why should the road design still be prioritized for humans?
Re: Even after $100B, self-driving cars are going nowhere
#368They should have hired game developers, they have a headstart
Re: Even after $100B, self-driving cars are going nowhere
#369I think it would go significantly better if we make roads for self-driving cars. Right now cars are trying to drive like a human. Based on the same cues and road markings, signs etc. What if we started embedding road signs with radio beacons. Cars with transponders like aircraft have. Road markings in a digital way that's easier to follow for a machine. We could start with some lanes dedicated to automated traffic. I…
Re: Even after $100B, self-driving cars are going nowhere
#370Earlier quoted context omitted.
As someone who also likes to watch Chuck Cook, I don't think Tesla is close to waymo. Tesla fsd in its current state will either crash or do some serious fuck up if you let it unattended for a few hours or maybe less (based on the disengagements in those videos). Forget about driverless Tesla with the current fsd. Waymo has been operating driverless since 2019. I do agree that it is progressing very nicely. Imo tesla…
I totally agree with you that Tesla FSD seems more likely yo have a serious crash, but if actual fully autonomous cars are the end goal, then the behavior of learning/beta models doesn't really matter except to the extent that it let's them get to the end goal (for the sake of this argument). All fully autonomous cars are in a different legal situation then Tesla. Tesla sells Joe Shmoe a car and then tells him he can…
i didn't sign up to be killed by some idiot tech bro testing a class project where they plumbed alexnet into the steering wheel of a 2000kg vehicle and took a couple of steps downhill
the streets are already dangerous enough for pedestrians