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

501–510 of 778 posts

Re: Mercedes beats Tesla to autonomous driving in California

#501

Post by atyppo »

Consultant32452 wrote: post #476
0xr0kk3r wrote: post #431

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What do we want from self driving cars? Nothing. Absolutely nothing. I want public transportation infrastructure and far, far, FAR fewer cars. I think the US should strive to reduce car ownership by 75% over the next 20 years, at least in cities over a certain population size. I don't want any more money invested in self-driving cars. But I'm also a grown-up of a certain age and realize the bright-eyed 20-something…

[flagged]

How could you possibly imagine the average city resident uses more energy when dwellings are smaller, newer on average (more energy efficient), and residents are less likely to own a car?

Re: Mercedes beats Tesla to autonomous driving in California

#502

Post by josephcsible »

adgjlsfhk1 wrote: post #500
DiggyJohnson wrote: post #492

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about inside those cities? Like from my apartment on this side of town to the other side.

subways, trams and buses. good systems can easily be faster than cars dinner thru don't have traffic and you don't need to find parking. for short distances, bikes are also great.

I know I'm just one data point, but for my commute to work, taking public transit is about 30 minutes slower than driving at rush hour.

Re: Mercedes beats Tesla to autonomous driving in California

#503

Post by worik »

xigency wrote: post #450
0xr0kk3r wrote: post #431

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What do we want from self driving cars? Nothing. Absolutely nothing. I want public transportation infrastructure and far, far, FAR fewer cars. I think the US should strive to reduce car ownership by 75% over the next 20 years, at least in cities over a certain population size. I don't want any more money invested in self-driving cars. But I'm also a grown-up of a certain age and realize the bright-eyed 20-something…

Yeah, self driving cars would be a step backward as currently imagined. We need high speed rail to connect our cities.

> We need high speed rail to connect our cities.

Perhaps we need to slow down a bit, in general?

Re: Mercedes beats Tesla to autonomous driving in California

#504

Post by elif »

belter wrote: post #259
elif wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why don't you find a video of FSD failing on a 40mph highway with no lane changes for an apples to apples comparison... Oh wait that is an unreasonably niche scenario to be worthy of consideration in the context of full autonomy.

Will almost accelerating straight into the guard rail at 30 mph do it? - https://youtu.be/sNBEHumIHJI?t=14 https://www.carscoops.com/2022/05/tesla-driver-claims-model-...

In that 3 year old build, you can see the driver disengage out of pure fear before the turn started. You can also see the route planner plotting the corner maneuver. You can then see the same software completing the corner twice when the driver does the exact same thing but merely refrains from overriding.

Re: Mercedes beats Tesla to autonomous driving in California

#505

Post by nradov »

rcxdude wrote: post #464
0xr0kk3r wrote: post #431

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What do we want from self driving cars? Nothing. Absolutely nothing. I want public transportation infrastructure and far, far, FAR fewer cars. I think the US should strive to reduce car ownership by 75% over the next 20 years, at least in cities over a certain population size. I don't want any more money invested in self-driving cars. But I'm also a grown-up of a certain age and realize the bright-eyed 20-something…

Self driving cars are much more likely to be public transport than individually owned. It's also extremely likely that it requires ride-sharing to be viable, which will substantially reduce traffic as well as car ownership (I suspect there may be enough cost pressure that most self-driving vehicles are more like minibuses than cars, which would also help a lot with pollution and congestion, but this may require regul…

Autonomous driving is just another safety and convenience feature, like cruise control or anti-lock brakes. It won't fundamentally change anything. I see no reason to give up owning my own cars even if they can drive themselves. The biggest reason is that I use my cars like a rolling storage locker or mobile base of operations when I'm out doing stuff. There's no way I'm going to deal with the hassle of shared vehicles.

Re: Mercedes beats Tesla to autonomous driving in California

#506

Post by Jap2-0 »

saalweachter wrote: post #474
dunham wrote: post #385

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You can't legally enter an intersection (advance past the stopping line if present) until you are clear to perform your transit of the intersection. Yeah, I've seen tickets written for this in Emeryville, CA for cars that entered on green and weren't going to clear the intersection in the next ten minutes. (I don't know if the intersection is still that bad.) Bicycle cop, because there was no way they'd get a car i…

> I recall that this was legal in Michigan, where I grew up, but it either had to be onto or off of a one way street. I could never remember which, so I didn't try it. I believe it requires two one-way streets.

Yeah, this covers the case when turning left doesn't cross any oncoming lanes of traffic - so it's basically the same as turning right on red at a normal light.

Although searching for this now, it does appear to also be allowed from a two-way,[0] which sounds vaguely familiar but isn't really the same as turning right on red.

[0] https://www.michigan.gov/msp/services/traffic-safety/traffic...

Re: Mercedes beats Tesla to autonomous driving in California

#507

Post by fasthands9 »

rcxdude wrote: post #464
0xr0kk3r wrote: post #431

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What do we want from self driving cars? Nothing. Absolutely nothing. I want public transportation infrastructure and far, far, FAR fewer cars. I think the US should strive to reduce car ownership by 75% over the next 20 years, at least in cities over a certain population size. I don't want any more money invested in self-driving cars. But I'm also a grown-up of a certain age and realize the bright-eyed 20-something…

Self driving cars are much more likely to be public transport than individually owned. It's also extremely likely that it requires ride-sharing to be viable, which will substantially reduce traffic as well as car ownership (I suspect there may be enough cost pressure that most self-driving vehicles are more like minibuses than cars, which would also help a lot with pollution and congestion, but this may require regul…

Autonomous driving would reduce car ownership but it almost would certainly make traffic worse. The cost to get driven around or have things delivered would be less while demand would stay the same.

Re: Mercedes beats Tesla to autonomous driving in California

#508

Post by l33t233372 »

natch wrote: post #485
l33t233372 wrote: post #392

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FUD is an interesting term. Why do you use it here? Are you implying GP’s message is part of a broader campaign?

Not op but there are several groups that are independent but essentially aligned on anti-Tesla motivation that have reasons to support campaigns against Tesla: TSLAQ, union supporters, oil producers, legacy auto, to name just a few. There are more. And FUD is well known and easy enough that even individuals can practice it, so I wouldn’t read too much into that.

I’m not convinced FUD is a real thing.

Re: Mercedes beats Tesla to autonomous driving in California

#509

Post by dendriti »

ETH_start wrote: post #487
CharlieDigital wrote: post #481

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So there is never any economic need to transfer the cost of using the transportation network from those using it, to taxpayers at large. Like most things in a thriving, functioning society, socializing the costs is what makes it work. Let me reframe your statement: > So there is never any economic need to transfer the cost of using the education system from those using it, to taxpayers at large. In fact, socializin…

> Like most things in a thriving, functioning society, socializing the costs is what makes it work. What is it about transportation wherein socializing the costs of using it would make it work? Toll roads work all around the world, and better than the routes where the costs are socialized. > Yet this same education system is what has produced a society capable of enormous economic output over the relatively short his…

Libertarianism has been exposed as bullshit over and over again. To dismiss these well-documented concerns as "ideological defense mechanisms" is just sad.

FWIW homeopaths and chiropractors use the same sad defense.

Re: Mercedes beats Tesla to autonomous driving in California

#510

Post by afavour »

nradov wrote: post #505
rcxdude wrote: post #464

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Self driving cars are much more likely to be public transport than individually owned. It's also extremely likely that it requires ride-sharing to be viable, which will substantially reduce traffic as well as car ownership (I suspect there may be enough cost pressure that most self-driving vehicles are more like minibuses than cars, which would also help a lot with pollution and congestion, but this may require regul…

Autonomous driving is just another safety and convenience feature, like cruise control or anti-lock brakes. It won't fundamentally change anything. I see no reason to give up owning my own cars even if they can drive themselves. The biggest reason is that I use my cars like a rolling storage locker or mobile base of operations when I'm out doing stuff. There's no way I'm going to deal with the hassle of shared vehicl…

You may not want to deal with the hassle but I wouldn’t assume that applies to everyone.

A fully autonomous car (however unrealistic it may be) would be a game changer simply for the economics alone. Not paying full tax, insurance etc for a vehicle while retaining all of the transport possibility would be incredibly tempting to anyone on a budget. Not having to build housing with parking included could do great things for housing availability.

I’m not saying any of this will happen but fully autonomous cars definitely would open the door to a lot of opportunities.

Post reply on HN