Live data from Hacker News

Cruise's 3rd generation self-driving car

medium.com

11–20 of 236 posts

Re: Cruise's 3rd generation self-driving car

#11
>Electric self-driving cars will save millions of lives and significantly accelerate the world’s transition to sustainable energy, but only when they’re deployed in large numbers.

Just like cars that we drive, self driving cars enable sprawl. Sprawl will never be environmentally sustainable. We need cities that you move through by foot, bike, and public transit.

Re: Cruise's 3rd generation self-driving car

#12

tl;dr we have built a car that does not self-drive, but like, some day, it will, we're pretty sure Funniest thing is they still use wiring harnesses. If you're manufacturing the car from scratch just build a digital bus into the frame.

"For now, there will still be a human behind the wheel." Yup. Total click bait.

What is not clear is if this is due to the legal limitations or limitation of automation?

Re: Cruise's 3rd generation self-driving car

#14
post #7
post #3

There are a lot of big claims in this article. As someone who hasn't been paying much attention, is it credible that they have a near-ready-to-go self-driving car right now?

Yep, they're pretty close. Late this year or 2018 they'll have cars driving around empty. GM has consistently been underestimated by the public, but they've played their cards very well. It's in no small part due to the drive and leadership of Kyle Vogt, who is on his way to the big leagues to join the ranks of Musk, Bezos, and Jobs and those guys.

[deleted]

Re: Cruise's 3rd generation self-driving car

#15
post #4

I don't know what to believe. A few days ago I spent some time checking publicly available data and the result is that the current state of art is extremely far from an autonomous car that, could like used to drive a taxi in a busy city like Rome. Not far as "still some effort needed" but potentially "not clear when this could be available" far. Now there are those claims made by multiple companies... Go figure.

Based on my own observations, there's probably a big difference between operating as a taxi in Berlin and Rome, and another between operating in Rome and Mumbai. This only factors in other human drivers and infrastructure design/signage, not weather conditions (a different can of worms).

I suspect that we'll see a progression like:

1) Well-regulated urban and highway environments

2) Well-regulated rural environments

3) Moderately regulated urban and rural environments

4) Poorly regulated rural environments

5) Poorly regulated urban environments

And I think we'll probably be stuck on #1 for a while. I would also venture that most companies claiming to "be there" or "almost there" are referring to #1 as well.

I also think that it's possible that politicians may try to legislate a transition up that list as that first case starts taking off (greater traffic enforcement, better signage/infrastructure, more rigorous driver training, etc).

Re: Cruise's 3rd generation self-driving car

#16
Wow. FYI - This is how you mess up content marketing. If the author genuinely wanted me to read the article and get to know the brand, he shouldn't have used such a scummy title. Yes, the article is /technically/ true. But they are only talking about the hardware, and acknowledge in the second paragraph that they don't have the software. So while the title implies self-driving cars are a solved problem, they are really only making claims about hardware. Cool I guess? But tesla probably already beat you to it?

Titles like these are what happen when marketers optimize everything towards clicks, and don't care about actual impact on the brand itself.

Re: Cruise's 3rd generation self-driving car

#17
post #7
post #3

There are a lot of big claims in this article. As someone who hasn't been paying much attention, is it credible that they have a near-ready-to-go self-driving car right now?

Yep, they're pretty close. Late this year or 2018 they'll have cars driving around empty. GM has consistently been underestimated by the public, but they've played their cards very well. It's in no small part due to the drive and leadership of Kyle Vogt, who is on his way to the big leagues to join the ranks of Musk, Bezos, and Jobs and those guys.

Once they actually have cars driving empty we will actually learn how close or how far are they. I've seen a lot of PR muscle flexing from big companies before and no longer believe any such stuff. They do that to impress investors and the public, but this has nothing to do with reality.

Re: Cruise's 3rd generation self-driving car

#18
'self driving' really means the vehicle is being controlled by outside entities who have created technology that enables navigation.

This article is very opaque on how mature this is. The vehicles are the 'last mile' and from everything I've read we are a long way from Level 5 mass market maturity. everything else seems to require you to be able to reflexively grab the wheel and use the pedals at any moment if something goes wrong...

Useful article about Toyota's Gill Pratt on realities https://spectrum.ieee.org/cars-that-think/transportation/sel...

Re: Cruise's 3rd generation self-driving car

#19
post #16

Wow. FYI - This is how you mess up content marketing. If the author genuinely wanted me to read the article and get to know the brand, he shouldn't have used such a scummy title. Yes, the article is /technically/ true. But they are only talking about the hardware, and acknowledge in the second paragraph that they don't have the software. So while the title implies self-driving cars are a solved problem, they are real…

Saying that self driving car hardware problem is solved and all we need is software is like saying that one solved the problem of building interstellar space ship. All they need now is the warp drive. Otherwise it is all solved...

Re: Cruise's 3rd generation self-driving car

#20
post #16

Wow. FYI - This is how you mess up content marketing. If the author genuinely wanted me to read the article and get to know the brand, he shouldn't have used such a scummy title. Yes, the article is /technically/ true. But they are only talking about the hardware, and acknowledge in the second paragraph that they don't have the software. So while the title implies self-driving cars are a solved problem, they are real…

Waymo and Uber are more likely to have beat them to it (lidar) than Tesla, but point very much taken.
Post reply on HN