Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Tesla Autopilot

tesla.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 347 posts

Re: Tesla Autopilot

#281

Post by intended »

Retric wrote: post #270
dsfyu404ed wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>simply stopping is a completely viable option 99% of the time. For a naive definition of "vaiable" that does not take into account other people that need to use the roadways. A car stopping or even slowing drastically in a lane will have the same negative affect on the transportation system as a minor accident.

These cars are unlikely to stay stopped for long as there are going to be passengers in them. Now, we could get into hypothetical situations, but the reality is minor accidents are already really common like with so many other things machines can be better than people without being perfect.

I really want to see how cars deal with the massive code explosion as they have to account for things like tak tak gangs.

I posit now: "as the problems with automated cars become evident, solutions provided will tend towards Skynet as t increases."

Re: Tesla Autopilot

#283

Post by daveguy »

riskneural wrote: post #173
the_rosentotter wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It terrifies me to think of relying on image recognition software to correctly determine an upcoming crossing road (with cars zipping across) so it can properly slow down, rather than get broadsided at full speed. Or a number of other life-and-death situations (which are common during driving). It just seems fragile (what if the 'vision' is somehow impaired, f.ex. blinded by sunlight, or the road markings are wrong o…

When did all algorithms become AI?

Whether an algorithm is AI essentially depends on whether the objective is 1) human level difficult and/or 2) heuristic.

It should probably be both to avoid moving goal posts. That would make even chess algorithms still AI.

Self driving cars and image recognition are both definitely still AI.

"AI" does not typically mean strong or general AI.

Re: Tesla Autopilot

#285

Post by rhino369 »

bjelkeman-again wrote: post #97
gwicks56 wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Teslas don't have ignitions. And what defines "turned on" for an electric vehicle?

A Tesla is OFF if it is in Park. Yes the computer is still running, but for driving purposes if it is in park, no driving can happen.

You can't drive a normal car in park either.

Re: Tesla Autopilot

#286

Post by [deleted] »

bjelkeman-again wrote: post #97
gwicks56 wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Teslas don't have ignitions. And what defines "turned on" for an electric vehicle?

A Tesla is OFF if it is in Park. Yes the computer is still running, but for driving purposes if it is in park, no driving can happen.

[deleted]

Re: Tesla Autopilot

#287

Post by tptacek »

beaconstudios wrote: post #196
tptacek wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Have the hardware needed". Note: not the capability ; just the hardware. It's an unnatural way to write promo copy for a feature, and is written that way for a reason.

I think that with tesla's wireless software updating capabilities they'll continue to improve the software over time after you buy the car.

So we're just waiting for Sufficiently Smart Car Software, is what you're saying?

That sounds speculative.

Re: Tesla Autopilot

#288

Post by Matthias247 »

eddyg wrote: post #222
willvarfar wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It terrifies me to think of relying on image recognition software to correctly determine (... snip) Do you not drive using only your eyes? If you are not terrified of the sensors, then software? Turing's central belief was that the human brain was 'just' a computer. Regards doing things like embedding reflectors in roads and other ways to simplify lane holding, completely agree. But we can't forego the cameras etc…

Is the "computer vision" on Tesla good enough to ignore this false "lane marker" and use the actual yellow lane marker, not the "fake" one caused by the sun/shadow/pavement interaction? http://i.imgur.com/fk3OvEW.jpg This situation generated constant lane departure warnings for the driver.

I can't speak for Tesla. But I have a newest generation VW with lane assist. And lots of road construction sites in my area, where the normal white lanes markers are "overridden" with some yellow lane markers, which are narrower and often also take different pathes. Once I'm inside a yellow lane and drive straight it halfway works and the lane assist keeps that lane. However on the first position where the lanes depart (e.g. normal white lane goes straight, but yellow lane turns left to change over to other side of the road) the car has not really an idea what to do and mostly follows the wrong lane --> Without manual intervention a crash in these conditions would be guaranteed.

Re: Tesla Autopilot

#289

Post by tmzt »

Reason077 wrote: post #215
the_rosentotter wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It terrifies me to think of relying on image recognition software to correctly determine an upcoming crossing road (with cars zipping across) so it can properly slow down, rather than get broadsided at full speed. Or a number of other life-and-death situations (which are common during driving). It just seems fragile (what if the 'vision' is somehow impaired, f.ex. blinded by sunlight, or the road markings are wrong o…

"I don't fully understand why more effort is not put into a hardware solution, where roads are simply marked up for self-driving vehicles, e.g. magnets lining the lanes or something like that." How would "magnets" be any improvement over visual markings? Is there some sensor that can track magnets at greater distance, or with greater reliability than visual markings? Besides, how many millions of miles of road would…

A simple RF transmitter in new versions of the existing reflector discs would do it.

It wouldn't need to do anything but "ping", the battery could last for years. You could even have a mechanism to disable it when the lines are repainted, though normally roads that use the existing version of these reflectors would have them removed when moving lines.

The transmitter would have to be powerful enough to go through a small amount of snow in some states.

The question is can we get the car companies to agree on a standard for this? Would it make sense to put it in the frequency range allocated for vehicle radar systems?

What we get instead is an attempt to define the whole system de jure, including full V2V protocols and specifications.

Re: Tesla Autopilot

#290

Post by greglindahl »

beaconstudios wrote: post #196
tptacek wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Have the hardware needed". Note: not the capability ; just the hardware. It's an unnatural way to write promo copy for a feature, and is written that way for a reason.

I think that with tesla's wireless software updating capabilities they'll continue to improve the software over time after you buy the car.

That is Tesla's existing track record, yes. How far they can improve on a given sensor platform is the unknown part.
Post reply on HN