It is so important to do the whole trip because switching costs for the driver from "totally inattentive" to "grasping the wheel and driving" are measured in seconds. Anything less than 4 is asking for trouble.
Do you assume that the car, after recognizing that human intervention is required, continues to move forward into the path of danger while it waits for the human to take over?
I assume that there are a huge number of situations where "quietly pull over and let the human drive" is impossible.
I'm not talking about "oh hey, here's a situation I can't handle" and more "take over now".
I think it's going to take some societal change, but we will have to. Computers are just an extension of ourselves. The people making these systems will make mistakes, these systems will kill people (and arguably already have), but hopefully they will kill less than we currently do by not having them. There's this stigma around "computers" where people treat them differently than everything else. Yes, you're getting…
The big difference is, if I make a mistake and hurt myself, my family, or others, I have myself to blame. If my car makes a mistake though, I have someone else to blame. Even though the statistics may point to self-driving cars being safer in the aggregate, would an individual be willing to give up control to software which might make a mistake and kill them? Even if, statistically, they might be safer? Will people m…
just film and show a complete flight from an airliner from the cockpit. flights are fully autonomous except take off and landing, which still are computer assisted.
all crashes occur when the pilot overrides the flight system or the runway has no support for computer aided landing (ils).
thats the only reason flying is statistically safer than driving.
A real convincing promo video would be in stormy weather with angry, unpredictable drivers and random jaywalking kids.
Agreed. Throw in some fog, high-speed stop-and-go interstate fun, and moving from the interstate into a crowded city full of people jaywalking and running stoplights trying to get to where they're going.
yes. If Tesla really wants a good test, try autopilot in Morocco!
all at once: moped taking over from the right, in a round about, truck entering the roundabout without slowing down. donkey & cart on the side. woo hoo!
I've wondered about this. Totally defensive driving would reduce a car to 5mph - somebody might jump out from behind every blind corner or mailbox. Truth is, we all drive fairly irresponsibly, trusting in the rules of the road and human self-preservation to keep most stuff out of our way. And if we do hit somebody who dashes out on the freeway, well that's an accident or 'their fault' or 'nobody's fault' so no foul.…
The issue is really about capitalism. A video where a car manages to stop because a drunk falls into your lane will make the stock soar. A video where a car hits an old lady who jumps in front of your car will make the stock crash. There are people on either side who want this technology to succeed or fail (not self-driving, i mean electric cars)
seems like a dumb statement. why in hell would you think its ok to hit the lady when the car can avoid it?
getting there 30s later on average is worth killing grandmas? with automated cars you dont even have to pay attention or care. get in get out.
I notice at 0:24 in the short version (0:41 in longer version [0]) it seems to stop early for a stop sign and then resumes driving to the stop sign. It looks like the vehicle in the oncoming lane may have caused the stop. I only noticed because in the longer version the person in the driver's seat lifts his hands when the stop occurs (not as noticeable in the short version).
Forget parking, the cars would be driving, ferrying people and goods around, as much as possible when not charging. No need to own one, just hail one when you need a ride.
That's practical, and for people like you and me who aren't bothered by the idea of not owning our own vehicle, but it's very culturally desirable in the US to own a personal vehicle. Not an unsolvable problem, but it will definitely be a bump in the road.
i don't think its an issue. live in the city? dont own a car. just like today. uber is way cheaper than owing a car.
live in the gonnies? own a car. hailing one would take forever. having cars near you in the gonnies,that you dont own wouldn't be economical.
basically, there would be less vehicule owners but not that many less.
...so...going on basic understanding of IP rights management... If I was an investor I'd be super fucking pissed off Tesla is squandering capital on NOT CHEAP sync rights for Rolling Stones songs to be used in their PR materials. If I was an investor I'd be super fucking pissed off Tesla is ignorant enough about Intellectual Property that they'd use a Rolling Stones song in their PR materials without paying the NOT C…
I tweeted the Vimeo link to the Rolling Stones so hopefully we'll get to the bottom of whether Tesla paid or not. Why is this of any importance? Because if it was my song they were using I'd pursue the $250,000 per infringement max penalty for being a billion dollar company and shamelessly ripping off an artist. Just because it's the Rolling Stones, who I wish would retire, doesn't change the rules on the books, as m…
The $250k penalty doesn't apply, because sound recordings made prior to 1972 (like Paint It Black) aren't subject federal copyright law, but to earlier state copyright laws. In this case, that's supposedly California Civil Code, specifically articles §980 and subsequent. At least that's what it seems to me - IANAL.
This is pretty impressive. Still, at 00:54, getting a closer look at the female runners? Someone following could have gotten caught out if driving too close / playing Pokemon. A human driver (well, at least myself) would simply have lifted the foot off the accelerator somewhat and drifted closer to the centre line when passing - seeing as there was no oncoming traffic.
Perhaps the car knows it's own capabilities better than we humans do. Maybe it knows that if the joggers were to suddenly jump out, doing what you or I would do isn't enough, so it slowed down to a near stop just in case. Also, it's a bit of a "blind corner", so drifting out toward the middle of the lane might not be the best idea (again, even though it's probably something I as a person in that scenario would have d…
There seem to be some issues. E.g. it recognizes the joggers (0:55) as obstacles even though they're obviously (to a human) on the sidewalk. And when taking a right turn (1:01) it mistakes a hydrant and a parked car in a parking bay on the other side for an obstacle and stops for a moment before noticing that they're not actually in its lane. I think a polite driver may have slowed down gradually to not startle the j…
I would guess that the car couldn't predict the direction the joggers were moving in. They could be jogging towards the road. We as humans would know that they were running along the road because we see their backs but not necessarily from extrapolating their movement