Live data from Hacker News

Toyota Research Institute head says full autonomous driving is “not even close”

techcrunch.com

201–210 of 443 posts

Re: Toyota Research Institute head says full autonomous driving is “not even close”

#201

Completely agree with this. It will be ridiculously difficult to get to Level 5 automation in cars. It's decades away, not years. Ironically though, part of the reason it's so difficult is that during the transition the roads will still be populated with human-driven cars. If we passed laws to the effect that "as of date X, no human-driven vehicles or pedestrians will be allowed on roads in the set {Y}", we could get…

> It will be ridiculously difficult to get to Level 5 automation in cars. It's decades away, not years.

One could make the convincing argument that Waymo's vehicles are already at Level 5; where they probably struggle (I have no examples or data on this) is probably in inclement conditions (rain, snow, fog, etc). That said, even in such conditions, they probably perform much better than a human driver.

For instance, most human drivers in such conditions - even when they struggle to see the road clearly - continue to drive anyhow, mostly blind, instead of doing the right thing and pulling off to the side of the road and waiting, which I bet is a behavior that Waymo's vehicle performs when it struggles beyond a certain level.

In other words, Waymo's vehicle is likely better at determining when NOT to drive, and acting on that determination, instead of being stubborn and irrational in the face of evidence to the contrary.

Re: Toyota Research Institute head says full autonomous driving is “not even close”

#202

Toyota got into autonomous driving late. Then they hired Gil Pratt from MIT. Pratt used to run the MIT Leg Lab, which Raibert ran before Boston Dynamics, but Pratt didn't do much there. It's clear that autonomous driving can be made to work, because Google/Waymo is doing it. It's hard and expensive and it takes a lot of sensors. It also takes extensive testing. Waymo drives 25,000 autonomous miles a week. Volvo has l…

What do you think of Austin Russell's Luminar?

https://www.luminartech.com/

Re: Toyota Research Institute head says full autonomous driving is “not even close”

#203

Toyota got into autonomous driving late. Then they hired Gil Pratt from MIT. Pratt used to run the MIT Leg Lab, which Raibert ran before Boston Dynamics, but Pratt didn't do much there. It's clear that autonomous driving can be made to work, because Google/Waymo is doing it. It's hard and expensive and it takes a lot of sensors. It also takes extensive testing. Waymo drives 25,000 autonomous miles a week. Volvo has l…

Of all the companies you mentioned, only Toyota is a top ten automaker, and is indeed number one by many measures. I guess you think experience and a track record of phenomenal success is a disadvantage. I could agree with you in some contexts, but not this one. The autonomous car hype is the emperor’s new clothes, and Toyota is not your average industrial behemoth. Those guys literally wrote the playbook on nimble m…

Toyota and other car companies are fantastic at building cars, yes. But autonomous driving is at its core a challenging software problem. No major car manufacturer outside of perhaps Tesla has a track record of shipping software at scale. They're hardware companies.

Your sentiment here is like saying Samsung is great at making phones so they must be great at Mobile OS's. They're fundamentally separate things, and we frequently see that proficiency in one area doesn't necessarily translate to proficiency in another.

Re: Toyota Research Institute head says full autonomous driving is “not even close”

#204

I've been saying this for a while. The problem is that people are mostly familiar with the rate of overcoming traditional technical challenges (e.g., making your current computer/phone more compact, improving graphics quality, making cameras and screens with more pixels, etc.). What people don't realize is that full autonomous driving will require more than just faster/smaller/cheaper technical innovation - it will r…

Intercontinental planes are mostly autonomous. Trains are autonomous. Massive mine dump trucks are fully autonomous. These things are in use today and has been for almost a decade. They need not be perfect to be useful, they only need to be better than the average human driver. Toyota is way behind in the game. What do you expect them to say about the competition?

Not all trains are autonomous, and they have been known to crash due to operator error.

Re: Toyota Research Institute head says full autonomous driving is “not even close”

#205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It already happened before Uber, except now the app is in the hands of the person being exploited, not the managers creating optimized schedules that make it near impossible for individuals to hold enough jobs to pay the bills.

That's nice PR to assuage the guilt of people building this kind of tech, but it's really not working out that way: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jun/17/uber-drivers...

You must have replied to the wrong post. This agrees with my point that this kind of tech is abusive, but doesn't address my point that it's a long-standing problem older than Uber. Managers in retail and food service have used scheduling software to screw workers over for years. Uber just shifts the technology into the hands of people it exploits (smartphone app instead of scheduling software in the manager's office + calling in to get hours/find out you aren't getting any).

You seemed to imply that this is a new phenomenon that isn't yet legitimized. It's been around for a long time. It was and continues to be a problem, but Uber is just a microcosm of it.

Re: Toyota Research Institute head says full autonomous driving is “not even close”

#206

I'm sure he's right, but then why is everyone joining the race now? Wouldn't it be way less expensive to wait until at least some of the problems are solved? Also, it sure seems like level 5 autonomous driving is just a few steps short of general AI, which is still lightyears away.

People are jumping in because they get attention and money for doing so (and because lots of non-experts who tend to be the money-distributors believe the hype) including government grants. The real threat is not that the hype will waste private investors' money (although it is) but that it will draw government funds away from transit projects that would be a far better investment.

> but that it will draw government funds away from transit projects that would be a far better investment.

Here in the United States, such funds are meager and almost non-existent. That is not likely to ever change anytime soon.

Even in the areas where such funds are allocated, most people do not want to take public transit, for a variety of different reasons. If you have the ability to own a car, using it for transportation and other tasks tends to be preferable than other means. You have more flexibility in where you go, when you go, and how fast you'll get there. You are dependent on a system outside of your control, or other people to transport you.

Re: Toyota Research Institute head says full autonomous driving is “not even close”

#207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. I park in a very small space in a busy city. While backing out I must monitor the street, pedestrians, and the cars parked to the front, back, and side of me. Just this week, I missed one of those variables and cost myself $500 in damage. This is something a backup camera and automated system can and already does easily help with, and is a major efficacy leap. Small steps like this can really add up. What I…

> What I would like to see next is a system that alerts the driver when the light in front of them turns green. I feel like I lose 5-10 minutes a week sitting behind people who are checking their phones unaware the light has changed. I wish I could upvote this idea straight into the car manufacturers inboxes. Nothing more frustrating than having to sit through multiple light cycles cause the dipshit in front of you i…

Use that horn ;)

Re: Toyota Research Institute head says full autonomous driving is “not even close”

#208
post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree with the analogy to speech recognition. What makes speech recognition difficult is that it's highly dependent on context (sounds the same, but means something different depending on surrounding words, what the conversation is about, or even who you're speaking with). With driving, you should be able to make a good decision with just the instantaneous state, given enough information about that state (object…

Im skeptical you can do real autonomous driving without context. In DC, we have roads that flow one direction part of the day and another direction the other part. We've got roads that will be shut down unpredictably when there is a diplomatic event. We've got constant construction, where a two lane road might be reduced to one lane with a human holding a sign or using hand signals to usher cars through on their turn…

Remote driving assistance by a retired Uber driver on basic income is a possible low-tech solution.

Re: Toyota Research Institute head says full autonomous driving is “not even close”

#209

I've been saying this for a while. The problem is that people are mostly familiar with the rate of overcoming traditional technical challenges (e.g., making your current computer/phone more compact, improving graphics quality, making cameras and screens with more pixels, etc.). What people don't realize is that full autonomous driving will require more than just faster/smaller/cheaper technical innovation - it will r…

You've hit the nail on the head - audio recognition is quite poor after (a lot of) concerted effort over decades. Driving a car safely is significantly more difficult (and dangerous). That being said, Toyota's (and Subaru's) approach is the smart way forward - add sensors and capabilities that augment the human, but leave the human always responsible and in control. In order for a crash to happen, the human AND the m…

I don't know by what metrics you're making these comparisons. Audio recognition and self-driving vehicles are apples and oranges.

Autonomous driving is difficult primarily because of a changing world and low tolerance for mistakes. The state space of situations you're trying to map is just large. It will take time. But it's not even close to impossible.

Audio recognition is difficult for a different reason: language is difficult to disambiguate without context. So today the limits of our audio recognition bump up against knowing the context of words you're saying. It used to be the case that audio recognition had fundamental difficulties e.g at word boundaries but those challenges are mostly solved. Some of these challenges might not be solved without improvements in areas outside of the raw listening part of ASR.

> That being said, Toyota's (and Subaru's) approach is the smart way forward - add sensors and capabilities that augment the human, but leave the human always responsible and in control. In order for a crash to happen, the human AND the machine BOTH have to miss it.

This is your opinion. Folks at some other companies (e.g waymo) don't think this makes you safer. Human attention might not work the way you think it does.

Re: Toyota Research Institute head says full autonomous driving is “not even close”

#210

Toyota got into autonomous driving late. Then they hired Gil Pratt from MIT. Pratt used to run the MIT Leg Lab, which Raibert ran before Boston Dynamics, but Pratt didn't do much there. It's clear that autonomous driving can be made to work, because Google/Waymo is doing it. It's hard and expensive and it takes a lot of sensors. It also takes extensive testing. Waymo drives 25,000 autonomous miles a week. Volvo has l…

Of all the companies you mentioned, only Toyota is a top ten automaker, and is indeed number one by many measures. I guess you think experience and a track record of phenomenal success is a disadvantage. I could agree with you in some contexts, but not this one. The autonomous car hype is the emperor’s new clothes, and Toyota is not your average industrial behemoth. Those guys literally wrote the playbook on nimble m…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN