381–390 of 394 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
These are not my definitions, they are the SAE's definitions. As anyone can verify themselves by visiting SAE.org
Even with SAE's definition, Waymo seems to be at L4: https://www.sae.org/blog/sae-j3016-update
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think another post alluded to this but if Tesla gets in trouble the cars will likely be bricked right? If the viability of the company relies on the hype machine then it’s pretty relevant what kj d of person is “renting” me the car
> I think another post alluded to this but if Tesla gets in trouble the cars will likely be bricked right? I strongly doubt millions of cars will be left bricked to be towed to the junkyard.
That eSilverado tho
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is not room to argue. Unless we call it “Full self-driving*”. Full describes the set of use cases the car can drive in. All of them, not some with conditions and exceptions.
Not many people can fully drive a car then. Which makes sense. I think excluding off road / hazardous mountain roads etc. might be OK for the definition. And still cover many 9s of actual trips. Driving into a parked ambulance is definitely a no no though.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Dismissing "snow" as something that happens only in "the frozen tundra" is fairly provincial. You'd be surprised by how much of the USA (and other industrialized countries) have roads and road edges mostly obscured by snow for weeks at a time multiple times throughout winter. There's a reason almost all autonomous driving tests are done in places like Arizona. And the ones done in winter settings tend to be absolute…
> Dismissing "snow" as something that happens only in "the frozen tundra" is fairly provincial. Who did that? My comment certainly didn't by any reading of it. > You'd be surprised by how much of the USA (and other industrialized countries) have roads and road edges mostly obscured by snow for weeks at a time multiple times throughout winter Again, maybe you would, but I'm not. > There's a reason almost all autonomou…
Unless the machines fail the same way human drivers do and go off the absolute positioning based lanes to follow the emergent human based ones they'll cause crashes. Sometimes doing the right thing is the wrong thing because everyone is doing the wrong thing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Dismissing "snow" as something that happens only in "the frozen tundra" is fairly provincial. Who did that? My comment certainly didn't by any reading of it. > You'd be surprised by how much of the USA (and other industrialized countries) have roads and road edges mostly obscured by snow for weeks at a time multiple times throughout winter Again, maybe you would, but I'm not. > There's a reason almost all autonomou…
>Is this supposed to be a gotcha or did you not realize AV companies are not about blindly to replicate human vision in the AV field? Unless the machines fail the same way human drivers do and go off the absolute positioning based lanes to follow the emergent human based ones they'll cause crashes. Sometimes doing the right thing is the wrong thing because everyone is doing the wrong thing.
Being able to follow vehicles in front of you outside of lines is below table stakes in this field, you wouldn't even get into the casino. Mobileye was doing that 11 years ago with nothing more than a OTS radar and a single BW camera.
I mean, again, do you really think saying "humans don't perfectly follow the rules of the road" could possibly be a novel concept to anyone in the field of AVs?
There's nothing like being in a field to realize how far HN hubris actually goes. Someone reading your first comment would think you're a thought leader with how flippantly you write off an entire industry, yet here you are 2 comments in and slowly re-discovering the ground truths that the industry is already built on.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Is this supposed to be a gotcha or did you not realize AV companies are not about blindly to replicate human vision in the AV field? Unless the machines fail the same way human drivers do and go off the absolute positioning based lanes to follow the emergent human based ones they'll cause crashes. Sometimes doing the right thing is the wrong thing because everyone is doing the wrong thing.
Again you're showing that you're not familiar with the field you're talking about. Being able to follow vehicles in front of you outside of lines is below table stakes in this field, you wouldn't even get into the casino. Mobileye was doing that 11 years ago with nothing more than a OTS radar and a single BW camera. I mean, again, do you really think saying "humans don't perfectly follow the rules of the road" could…
>do you really think saying "humans don't perfectly follow the rules of the road" could possibly be a novel concept to anyone in the field of AVs?
I do think that driving in cold regions seems to be a novel concept because every time I talk to someone in the know like yourself they latch on to the wrong side of the idea immediately.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've wondered the same thing about FSD in Canada. Often we Canadians drive on roads where we cant see the lines due to snow/ice. We sort of form our own "lanes" based on where we think the lines SHOULD be. How would a FSD Tesla handle a situation where everything is white? Even Humans who are use to these conditions still fail: https://ottawa.ctvnews.ca/opp-responds-to-numerous-crashes-o...
> We sort of form our own "lanes" based on where we think the lines SHOULD be. And that is exactly what FSD does. You can search YouTube, there's plenty of examples if you want to see how it performs in different weather conditions. Snow is challenging but not impossible.
FSD can’t adequately handle rain, let alone snow where the road lines are not visible.
I welcome the public's acknowledgement that self-driving vehicles are completely infeasible for even the medium term future. It's just unfortunate that the trigger for this change seems not to be anything about snow, or the inability to replicate human flocking on buried/unmarked roads during winter, etc, but instead more about the current political fallout from Musk's take-over of Twitter.
Musk's Twitter takeover is just an added layer of bullshit on top of the FSD lies. People have paid thousands of dollars for a "feature" that will run them into center dividers, trains, and children but disengage a fraction of a second before impact so it can't be blamed. Tesla also requires NDAs be signed to uphold service agreements and fights tooth and nail to keep FSD's failures out of the news. Meanwhile Musk is…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Again you're showing that you're not familiar with the field you're talking about. Being able to follow vehicles in front of you outside of lines is below table stakes in this field, you wouldn't even get into the casino. Mobileye was doing that 11 years ago with nothing more than a OTS radar and a single BW camera. I mean, again, do you really think saying "humans don't perfectly follow the rules of the road" could…
I'm not talking about following other vehicles in front of you. I'm talking about follow the paths the other vehicles, now long gone, have left in the snow/ice/mush. >do you really think saying "humans don't perfectly follow the rules of the road" could possibly be a novel concept to anyone in the field of AVs? I do think that driving in cold regions seems to be a novel concept because every time I talk to someone in…
Not realizing that we can follow other cars is somewhat understandable. Bringing up following tire tracks in the snow at this stage is so utterly nonsensical, it simply doesn't pass muster when considering the ways to parse the statement.
Millions upon millions of people who can be served without having to checks notes solve following tire tracks on the ground... but that's your current bastion for why self-driving is "completely infeasible"
No good deed goes unpunished apparently, because here you are now wearing the misguided nature of our charitable interpretations as a badge of honor.