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

Mercedes beats Tesla to autonomous driving in California

theregister.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 778 posts

Re: Mercedes beats Tesla to autonomous driving in California

#51

Post by stefan_ »

cj wrote: post #13
belter wrote: post #6

"Conditionally automated driving: Mercedes-Benz DRIVE PILOT further expands U.S. availability to the country’s" - https://media.mercedes-benz.com/article/81a29ac5-4d02-4b58-b... ”Mercedes-Benz DRIVE PILOT is the world's only SAE Level 3 system with internationally valid type approval. It builds on a very robust foundation, setting new industry standards. DRIVE PILOT uses a highly sophisticated vehicle architecture ba…

>"Mercedes-Benz S-Class DRIVE PILOT Sensors Details" - https://youtu.be/9m-VS55w9HA - LiDAR - Radar - Cameras - Ultrasonic sensor - Road moisture sensor Curious how this collection of sensor compares with Tesla and also with run of the mill cars with ACC / lane keeping.

It seems a bit suboptimal to place LiDAR in the front and low. More like a lane following kinda setup.

Re: Mercedes beats Tesla to autonomous driving in California

#52

Post by ChuckNorris89 »

pyinstallwoes wrote: post #39
cj wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm aware of Elon's opinion: "LiDAR is lame. LiDAR is lame. Lame. Losers use LiDAR. LiDAR is expensive." I can't stomach watching a video that starts out like that.

Do you use LiDAR when you drive?

No, but at the same time Boeings and Airbuses don't flap their wings and birds don't use jet engines to fly.

Just because nature and millions of years of evolution have solved a problem in a way that looks simple on the surface, doesn't mean the same thing can be copied with current tech to solve the same problem.

Elon's "but humans drive with only use two eyes therefore we can do it with cameras" is the most moronic argument ever and it saddens me when I hear others here parrot it.

Our two eyes may be enough to drive, but our eyes can move in their sockets, our heads can move around and parallax for depth perception, our retinas have miles better dynamic range than any commercial sensor that Tesla is using, but most importantly, our brains are orders of magnitude ore intelligent at reasoning with new or unknown situations than current self driving tech which is just basic pattern matching in comparison.

Re: Mercedes beats Tesla to autonomous driving in California

#53

Post by justapassenger »

elif wrote: post #25
justapassenger wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You really think there’s no engineering difference between system that’s designed to actively kill you, and others if you don’t pay attention vs system that’s designed not to do it, and company putting their money behind that statement?

You really think Mercedes legal filings guarantee a safer system? It is more important to focus on the technical capabilities of the systems than who can add more asterisks to their crash statistics. You are comparing a mature system with billions of miles of testing to a system which you will struggle to keep engaged for 2 mile intervals.

Ok, let’s focus on the technical aspects.

Tesla has no safety life cycle process and as a result FSD is inherently unsafe, from the engineering point of view.

You can try to hand wave over that, but if you are an engineer working on the safety critical systems (it’s an actual engineering field), that’s all you need to know about FSD.

Re: Mercedes beats Tesla to autonomous driving in California

#54

Post by pfannkuchen »

justapassenger wrote: post #34
lvl102 wrote: post #29

It doesn’t take a lot to retro-fit roads with autonomous guardrail markers when we repave. It’s going to take a federal-level effort to accomplish this (which should have been apart of pandemic infrastructure stimulus). I strongly believe this would improve safety for autonomous vehicles by 1000x.

Detecting lane is mostly solved problem. Detecting AND predicting what other things will do on the road (not only cars, but people, animals, trash, etc) is not.

> predicting what other things will do on the road… [like] trash

At least we do have a model for this one (physics). I wonder what additional signals the car would need to accurately simulate trash movement? Wind?

Re: Mercedes beats Tesla to autonomous driving in California

#55

Post by elif »

throwaway_ab wrote: post #31

Many people are saying Tesla FSD is far more advanced, and I've seen videos of A Tesla driving around LA for 2 hours completely autonomously so I agree Tesla FSD is the world leader by far and blows what Mercedes has built out of the water. However Mercedes are taking liability whilst their system is in use which implies Tesla takes no liability whilst their system is in use. I'm surprised Tesla is scared to take leg…

The responsibility already isn't on the car occupants, it is on the occupants' insurance carrier. The only way to meaningfully diminish responsibility on the car occupants is to lower insurance premiums.

To that end, Tesla is offering insurance directly to consumers now, offering lower premiums based upon driver safety system utilization. In my case it would cut my insurance rates in half.

Re: Mercedes beats Tesla to autonomous driving in California

#56

Post by dmbche »

simondotau wrote: post #48
dmbche wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I doubt so, I think in the guidelines Meta comments are not encouraged as they are not fruitful for conversation.

I appreciate your contribution but I disagree that it’s any more “meta” to respond to the community’s unwritten reactions (votes) than responding to its written reactions (normal replies).

Oh I was refering to your comment on the editorialisation of the title, since it's not a comment on the subject of the article but on the writing of it's title. Not a dig, just an observation.

Re: Mercedes beats Tesla to autonomous driving in California

#57

Post by ajross »

throwaway_ab wrote: post #31

Many people are saying Tesla FSD is far more advanced, and I've seen videos of A Tesla driving around LA for 2 hours completely autonomously so I agree Tesla FSD is the world leader by far and blows what Mercedes has built out of the water. However Mercedes are taking liability whilst their system is in use which implies Tesla takes no liability whilst their system is in use. I'm surprised Tesla is scared to take leg…

> However Mercedes are taking liability whilst their system is in use

Are they? This press release doesn't actually say so. There was an announcement a while back when they deployed this system in Germany, but that's obviously a different legal environment.

FWIW, this is mostly spin anyway. Liability isn't generally something that is granted, it's either there or not. If Tesla FSD causes an accident, they can absolutely be sued for that in the US. And they have been on a handful of occasions (Successfully even, I think? Pretty sure there were settlements in some of the early AP accidents?).

The reason that "Tesla is liable for accidents" doesn't make news is... that there are vanishingly few AP/FSD accidents. The system as deployed is safe, but that doesn't match people's priors so we end up in arguments like this about "accepting liability" instead of "it crashed".

Re: Mercedes beats Tesla to autonomous driving in California

#58

Post by zaroth »

throwaway_ab wrote: post #31

Many people are saying Tesla FSD is far more advanced, and I've seen videos of A Tesla driving around LA for 2 hours completely autonomously so I agree Tesla FSD is the world leader by far and blows what Mercedes has built out of the water. However Mercedes are taking liability whilst their system is in use which implies Tesla takes no liability whilst their system is in use. I'm surprised Tesla is scared to take leg…

Mercedes could also ship their own L2 AutoPilot without having to take legal responsibility. Their customers would love it as much as Tesla drivers love theirs.

The thing is, they just aren’t capable of it.

Re: Mercedes beats Tesla to autonomous driving in California

#59

Post by justapassenger »

pfannkuchen wrote: post #54
justapassenger wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Detecting lane is mostly solved problem. Detecting AND predicting what other things will do on the road (not only cars, but people, animals, trash, etc) is not.

> predicting what other things will do on the road… [like] trash At least we do have a model for this one (physics). I wonder what additional signals the car would need to accurately simulate trash movement? Wind?

Wind, yes. But even without it - thing get tricky, when you’re traveling at 80mph. You need to detect enough of movements to be able to predict future path. It not easy, even with very advanced sensors.

And you cannot “play it safe and assume it’ll collide with us”. You get phantom breaking, which is very dangerous.

Re: Mercedes beats Tesla to autonomous driving in California

#60

Post by justapassenger »

simondotau wrote: post #36
justapassenger wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mercedes shipped a system that’s legally self driving, under some set of conditions. Tesla sells system that’s not legally self driving under any set of conditions. You’re always driving, and Tesla will fight you in court if you want them to take liability for any action it took. There’s nothing misleading about this headline.

All of that is technically correct but isn’t the point the OP was making. These are products with wildly different aspirations and at different stages of achieving those aspirations.

Yes. One product works and other doesn’t.

And one that doesn’t work is better and for sure will improve and work in the future? And one that does work won’t improve?

Post reply on HN