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

California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 1001 posts

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#341

Post by natch »

iamtheworstdev wrote: post #25
keneda7 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have not seen any easy way to get a tesla to drive without anyone in it. Any chance you could provide a link showing this?

not sure if you're trolling or not but last i heard people simply strapping an exercise/weighted wrist band to the steering wheel which simulated torque being applied to the steering wheel which leads a Tesla to believe someone is paying attention. A quick search on Youtube reveals more than a few videos confirming this.

That is outdated information.

It may have been true at the time, but now Tesla uses the interior camera to make sure you are paying attention to the road.

If you don’t want to use the FSD beta, you don’t have to activate the camera, or you can put tape over it. With either of these actions the user can opt out but will not have the ability to use the beta.

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#342

Post by topherPedersen »

I had a Cruise driverless car here in Austin, TX blow through a cross walk and get really close to me. I had a broken leg at the time and was using a walker. I almost hit the cruise car with my walker.

Before this, I was really impressed by Cruise and actually bought shares in General Motors because I was so blown away. But yeah those cars aren't perfect. However, maybe a human was controlling the car when it blew threw that cross walk? I would not be surprised if a person were to do something like that because people drive horrible all the time, but I would expect better from a computer.

Maybe that's part of the problem? We have bad drivers who are ultimately writing the software that controls the cars.

Anyway, those are my thoughts. If someone from Cruise happens to read this, try and add some code to prevent these cars from blowing through cross walks with people in them. (I'm not sure what the law says about this, but my interpretation is that if the cross walk sign is lit up, and there's a pedestrian in the cross walk, you should stop. Maybe it's okay to go if they haven't made it to your side of the street yet, but you should never get so close to a pedestrian that they can strike the vehicle out of anger with an object.)

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#343

Post by wskinner »

cp9 wrote: post #122

if people weren't VC brained they would realize that the way to prevent traffic deaths isn't to build fancy self driving cars, it's to invest in safer, more pedestrian friendly infrastructure and use the boring technology that already exists to get people where they want to go. the future is on buses and trains and bikes and pedestrian friendly 15 minute communities

In a city like San Francisco, building self-driving cars is easier than building "safer, more pedestrian friendly infrastructure". Those changes would take decades and cost tens of billions of dollars, and will not address the fundamental social problem: people prefer to travel in a clean, quiet car by themselves. San Francisco does not have the political will to make its public transit effective, let alone clean, quiet, and safe.

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#344

Post by _2d30 »

dopamean wrote: post #305
_2d30 wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My day-to-day experience with Cruises on the road is much better, mile for mile, than with human drivers. Cruise's failures, in my view, have come broadly at the long tail where their cars stall out entirely in the road due and it cascades to other Cruises.

There's literally no way you know this for a fact.

There's literally no way in which I expressed it as being known as a fact by me.

Did you make sure to reply like this to poster I replied to as well?

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#345

Post by natch »

keneda7 wrote: post #59
iamtheworstdev wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

not sure if you're trolling or not but last i heard people simply strapping an exercise/weighted wrist band to the steering wheel which simulated torque being applied to the steering wheel which leads a Tesla to believe someone is paying attention. A quick search on Youtube reveals more than a few videos confirming this.

No I was being serious. Searching turns up defeating the system with someone in the seat but not without. The other commenter provided a video showing it is possible from two month ago.

That’s autopilot, an entirely different thing from FSD beta.

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#346

Post by mint2 »

bdamm wrote: post #169
tempsy wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"A dark colored Nissan Sentra was stopped in the adjacent lane to the left of the AV. When the light turned green, the Nissan Sentra and the AV entered the intersection. Against a red light, a pedestrian entered the crosswalk on the opposite side of Market Street across from the vehicles, passed completely through the AV’s lane of travel, then stopped mid-crosswalk in front of the Nissan Sentra. The Nissan Sentra the…

Have you driven in San Francisco or basically any large US city? If cars had to stop like that to give extra space for a jaywalker that had exited the path of travel, someone would rear end the AV, or at the very least the driving experience would be very jarring. If we wanted to legitimize this case then probably large areas of downtown in cities should be redefined to be free-for-all traffic with low speed limits.

Normal drivers stop or proceed slowly through intersections when pedestrians are in the road regardless of whether the person is supposed to be there. With great power comes great responsibility.

Anyone who doesn’t slow down in situations like that is a waiting to be like the Nissan driver: a person a-okay with committing manslaughter.

And two wrongs don’t make a right. Just because some human drivers are negligent and horrible doesn’t mean we have to accept robots varieties that are also bad.

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#347

Post by occz »

sergiotapia wrote: post #115
reset2023 wrote: post #69

[flagged]

- No more traffic - No more car insurance - Cheap transportation to work/school - Less deaths on the road There is plenty to gain from having true driverless vehicles accessible to the public.

I highly doubt driverless cars will have an actually positive impact with regards to reducing traffic, nor that they can go uninsured, nor that they will be a cheap option for commuting.

They might be safer than human drivers, but there are already superior solutions to that in the form of transportation systems that are not overly focused on cars.

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#348

Post by fiddlerwoaroof »

gcampos wrote: post #320
fhub wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From my perspective, as a relatively early adopter of Waymo (60+ rides). I have zero gripes with the driving itself. In fact I've seen Waymos do things that no human would be able to do*. Drop-offs and pickups I'd like to see improvements made like getting a bit closer to the curb. Occasionally the route selections make no sense at all. * Waymo made a right turn up a steep hill. Two lanes each way. It then pulled a b…

That is actually an interesting question. We track how many accidents the automated cars cause, but I'm not sure how many accidents they prevent are tracked.

I’ve had several low-light situations where my Tesla identified a pedestrian and applied the brakes before I did (typically dark clothing on a dark street).

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#349

Post by oceanofsolaris »

paxys wrote: post #310

I had an epiphany about self driving recently late at night on the streets of San Francisco. It was a somewhat deserted part of town, and the roads were empty. There was a lone Cruise car chugging along and constantly stopping at red lights. The signals were so badly optimized that the car would be the only one waiting at a completely empty intersection for minutes at a time, only to be stopped again at the next one,…

But SF is a damn rich city (due to all the tech companies and their employees). Why didn’t they solve or at least tackle these problems?

It’s not like Cruise / Waymo could change city planning against the cities will, even if they wanted.

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#350

Post by alooPotato »

hiidrew wrote: post #318
fragmede wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is limited to San Francisco, rather than the whole of California, but they do just drive around the city, especially after 9pm. As a rider, the future is here. Instead of just checking Uber and Lyft for prices to get somewhere, now I check the Cruise and Waymo app for prices too. (Well, not Cruise anymore.) But yes, it's a thing . I call a car, sometimes it doesn't have a driver, and it takes me to where I need to…

How does the price of these compare to Uber/Lyft?

better driving imo
Post reply on HN