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

671–680 of 778 posts

Re: Mercedes beats Tesla to autonomous driving in California

#671

Post by Thorrez »

KaiserPro wrote: post #598
Thorrez wrote: post #532

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even in Italy? Just now I went to Avis.com , set pick up in Rome tomorrow, drop off in Rome the day after, and it said there are 6 types of cars available, and 5 of those types have manual transmissions.

I was really shocked in italy by the standard of driving. I was fully expecting full on car honking road rage in cities and uber fast driving on the motorways/highways. Florence was incredibly calm, respectful and considerate driving. The Motorways everyone was doing just under the speed limit. My italian friends said that its not the case in the north.

Apparently in Italy the speed limit is strictly enforced by automated cameras. If you go more than 5% over, you'll get a fine.

Re: Mercedes beats Tesla to autonomous driving in California

#672

Post by ETH_start »

RandomLensman wrote: post #630
ETH_start wrote: post #625

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course. I was pushing back against the claim in the original post, which argued for socializing transportation costs on economic grounds: > Transportation is a service that's critical to economic function. Transportation is not amongst the subset of goods/services where having individual market actors pay for its production leads to economically sub-optimal under-production. Whether transportation should be subsid…

I am a bit less convinced about the "optimalities" in practice, because differences in funding costs, risk preferences etc. can lead to inefficiencies in the real world that a state actor could bridge.

>>because differences in funding costs, risk preferences etc. can lead to inefficiencies in the real world that a state actor could bridge.

I don't understand, could you elaborate?

Re: Mercedes beats Tesla to autonomous driving in California

#673

Post by concordDance »

jbverschoor wrote: post #638
concordDance wrote: post #619

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those are crashes WITH, not crashes BECAUSE. Without knowing the usual amount of no fault crashes given the number of driving miles the number is meaningless

$TSLA speaking?

I have no financial involvement in Tesla, owning neither shares nor shorts.

And even if I did, my motivation for speaking up does not affect the fact that a crash happening does not mean autopilot was at fault.

Re: Mercedes beats Tesla to autonomous driving in California

#674

Post by okdood64 »

gzer0 wrote: post #43

Friendly reminder that this system is HEAVILY limited, with the following restrictions: - Must be under 40 mph - Only during the daylight and only on certain highways - CANNOT be operated on city/country streets - CANNOT be operated in construction zones - CANNOT be during heavy rain or fog or flood roads And for comparison: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DjZSZTKYEU4 Tesla FSD navigating the complex city streets of…

> Only during the daylight

This makes no sense to me based on the technology used. Cruise actually previously had a permit to ONLY operate at night.

Re: Mercedes beats Tesla to autonomous driving in California

#675

Post by thebradbain »

jacquesm wrote: post #617
PeterStuer wrote: post #607

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Self driving cars are much more likely to be public transport than individually owened" I've only seen this as a 'just so' greenwash pr story from the automotive industry to offset the projected 300% increase in total road miles driven anually. Please explain why peole would be compelled to ditch their multidude of private cars just because they now come with a 24/7 free driver included?

Indeed, that's the elephant in the room. Self driving cars by virtue of being self driving can be sent on trips by themselves without requiring the driver to be present. The presence of a driver is a limiting factor, once that one drops away there will be many more trips. Suddenly kids can use the car and all kinds of pick up and delivery jobs become cost effective in a way that they are not today.

Ah yes! Would love to know how the crowd that protests better public transit, pedestrian paths and bike lanes as “taking away space from cars” will respond to roads being further clogged with… empty cars?

We’re really going to spend billions and billions on further car infrastructure, more reduction in space-constrained cities towards pedestrian and bike infrastructure, and even the displacement of existing homes and communities for… empty cars?! If it weren’t so depressing, it’s a perfect indictment of the US’s car culture taken full circle.

Re: Mercedes beats Tesla to autonomous driving in California

#676

Post by nathanasmith »

akmarinov wrote: post #67
gzer0 wrote: post #43

Friendly reminder that this system is HEAVILY limited, with the following restrictions: - Must be under 40 mph - Only during the daylight and only on certain highways - CANNOT be operated on city/country streets - CANNOT be operated in construction zones - CANNOT be during heavy rain or fog or flood roads And for comparison: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DjZSZTKYEU4 Tesla FSD navigating the complex city streets of…

In the end, Mercedes assumes liability for its system, where Tesla doesn’t. Tells you all you need to know.

>Tells you all you need to know.

Thanks for the subtle reminder that your statement is most definitely not "all I need to know."

Re: Mercedes beats Tesla to autonomous driving in California

#677

Post by RandomLensman »

ETH_start wrote: post #672
RandomLensman wrote: post #630

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am a bit less convinced about the "optimalities" in practice, because differences in funding costs, risk preferences etc. can lead to inefficiencies in the real world that a state actor could bridge.

>> because differences in funding costs, risk preferences etc. can lead to inefficiencies in the real world that a state actor could bridge. I don't understand, could you elaborate?

For example: corporations have a lot of secondary objectives beyond profit such as limited volatility of profits that can suppress beneficial activities. State actors can take different risks and absorb such volatility by funding activities and then recovering via taxes (simplistically). In the financial markets this gets often arbitraged away, but in slow and high cost markets, those arbitrageurs aren't necessarily forming.

Similarly, time preferences can stop long-term beneficial activities by corporate actors.

In the end, it is about bridging different preferences. There are also issues of resource pooling and coordination, but those are easier to overcome.

Re: Mercedes beats Tesla to autonomous driving in California

#678

Post by [deleted] »

worik wrote: post #354
jchoca wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You say that, but it’s how most companies operate unfortunately.

> You say that, but it’s how most companies operate unfortunately. Thank goodness you are incorrect. Most people in business, like most people generally, are ethical human beings. Good to deal with, trust worthy and reliable. That is my experience. The sharks that rise to the top of billion dollar companies I only see in the news. My impression is that they are generally mentally disturbed (Elon Musk's "jokes" on Twi…

[deleted]

Re: Mercedes beats Tesla to autonomous driving in California

#679

Post by KETpXDDzR »

One good use-case this is traffic jams. Bosch developed the "traffic-jam pilot" a few years ago with help of DARPA grand challenge participants.

I'm not sure which system Mercedes is using here. Could also be NVIDIA hard- & software (Mercedes and NVIDIA teamed up).

Re: Mercedes beats Tesla to autonomous driving in California

#680

Post by jchoca »

worik wrote: post #354
jchoca wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You say that, but it’s how most companies operate unfortunately.

> You say that, but it’s how most companies operate unfortunately. Thank goodness you are incorrect. Most people in business, like most people generally, are ethical human beings. Good to deal with, trust worthy and reliable. That is my experience. The sharks that rise to the top of billion dollar companies I only see in the news. My impression is that they are generally mentally disturbed (Elon Musk's "jokes" on Twi…

Maybe "most companies" was the wrong choice of wording. How about "most large companies that actually influence the world?"

>Most people in business, like most people generally, are ethical human beings. Good to deal with, trust worthy and reliable.

It doesn't matter if the people you've anecdotally dealt with are ethical. It doesn't even matter if most of the people "in business" are ethical. The incentive structure to make the right choice for large public companies, or even venture-backed private ones just isn't there.

I wish I was incorrect, but I'm not. If I was, we wouldn't still have companies producing fossil fuels, animal agriculture, or surveillance capitalism.

Post reply on HN