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

Mercedes beats Tesla to autonomous driving in California

theregister.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 778 posts

Re: Mercedes beats Tesla to autonomous driving in California

#351

Post by jgalt212 »

BoorishBears wrote: post #304
oxfordmale wrote: post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mercedes accepts legal liability for collisions if the system is used under these stringent conditions. Tesla doesn't do this. It also doesn't mean it doesn't have the technical capability to drive through the streets of LA for 60 minutes. https://www.thatcham.org/mercedes-to-accept-liability-for-ac...

Working in the AV space, it's really frustrating how confidently people who have no idea about what's hard and what isn't go off about Tesla right now. Mercedes has soundly beaten the last decade of Tesla efforts by reaching L3. I've personally watched FSD go off the rails and into a crash situation within 60 seconds of being turned on three times this month (I have a friend who loves to try it in San Francisco) Had…

> go off about Tesla right now.

People don't go off on Tesla because of its lack of technical prowess. People go off on Tesla because their marketing department is a bunch of pathological liars.

Re: Mercedes beats Tesla to autonomous driving in California

#352

Post by Veserv »

gzer0 wrote: post #43

Friendly reminder that this system is HEAVILY limited, with the following restrictions: - Must be under 40 mph - Only during the daylight and only on certain highways - CANNOT be operated on city/country streets - CANNOT be operated in construction zones - CANNOT be during heavy rain or fog or flood roads And for comparison: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DjZSZTKYEU4 Tesla FSD navigating the complex city streets of…

And here is FSD: https://dawnproject.com/drivers-have-reported-thousands-of-c...

By my count, 46 videos of it not staying in lane, 54 videos of it swerving into objects, 23 videos of it ignoring red lights, 22 videos failing at intersections, 12 videos of pulling out into traffic, 15 videos ignoring road signs, 7 videos ignoring pedestrians, 5 videos ignoring speed limits, 23 videos stopping randomly, 5 videos failing in the snow, 3 videos ignoring buses, 5 videos speeding in school zones with children present, and 3 videos ignoring school bus stop signs.

Re: Mercedes beats Tesla to autonomous driving in California

#353

Post by SkyPuncher »

ImprobableTruth wrote: post #205
PartiallyTyped wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe if we built more of those, more people would be within walking distance of them.

Trains for local transportation make no sense. Trams for high-throughput and buses for everything else is the only sensible thing for local public transport.

I’ve kind of just considered trams, metros, and trains to be the same thing. Their just different scales of wheels following tracks/

Re: Mercedes beats Tesla to autonomous driving in California

#354

Post by worik »

jchoca wrote: post #213
prmoustache wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn't do any business with you for example if that is your default level of ethics.

You say that, but it’s how most companies operate unfortunately.

> You say that, but it’s how most companies operate unfortunately.

Thank goodness you are incorrect.

Most people in business, like most people generally, are ethical human beings. Good to deal with, trust worthy and reliable.

That is my experience.

The sharks that rise to the top of billion dollar companies I only see in the news. My impression is that they are generally mentally disturbed (Elon Musk's "jokes" on Twitter about taking Tesla private is a case in point). But I hope that is a selection bias from the news cycle. Still waiting for the evidence....

Re: Mercedes beats Tesla to autonomous driving in California

#355

Post by Dylan16807 »

worik wrote: post #338
rl3 wrote: post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> For person like me that takes very light naps when sitting, 10 seconds is plenty to wake up and take control. I'd argue that isn't remotely enough time to safely take control. You're betting your brain wakes up sufficiently in that time, and if it doesn't the consequences are potentially deadly. > Also if I am using a tablet doing email or browsing or even playing games, 10 seconds is plenty of time to put the tabl…

>>Also if I am using a tablet doing email or browsing or even playing games, 10 seconds is plenty of time > That's a bit better from an alertness standpoint How do you know? Subjective measurement of time is very inaccurate. I have experienced this, when I timed some regular activities I undertook every day, total habit. I would have said they took me ten seconds. When I timed them, it was forty five seconds. I have…

I'm not worried that it will actually take anyone 45 seconds to put down a tablet when the car is doing the handover.

Re: Mercedes beats Tesla to autonomous driving in California

#356

Post by Dylan16807 »

torginus wrote: post #296
thegrim33 wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"do your email, or take a nap" <- The definition of an SAE Level 3 system is that you must remain in the seat, prepared to take control immediately when the system requests you to. Taking a nap or otherwise not paying attention is not what such a system supports.

Afaik the key differentiator of a L3 and a L2 system is that if you don't take control when the system requests you to, the L3 system can safely stop/pull aside while all bets are off with an L2 system.

You remember wrong. That's the difference between L3 and L4.

The L2/L3 difference is that with L2 you have to supervise at all times and you have to decide to take control.

Re: Mercedes beats Tesla to autonomous driving in California

#357

Post by est31 »

worik wrote: post #341
bmicraft wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Without any comparison to humans those numbers are completely meaningless

> Without any comparison to humans those numbers are completely meaningless I disagree. What I want to know, is is it safe? Not is it safer than the average human driver, but is it safe in an absolute sense. When a human driver crashes we can almost always pin the cause down to human error. Errors caused by some human failing, being less than they could be. The promise of machines is that they are consistent. They ar…

Sure it's different whether you were hit by a malfunctioning machine that was confused by sunlight or whether you were hit by a driver who wasn't paying attention because they texted. In one instance you have the person genuinely apologize to you while in the autonomous car case, maybe there wasn't a passenger at all.

But on the other hand, if you can identify the most accident prone group of humans, and require them to use AI cars, and with this you could significantly reduce the number of road kills/accidents, wouldn't that be an improvement?

Re: Mercedes beats Tesla to autonomous driving in California

#358

Post by worik »

Longhanks wrote: post #149
barbariangrunge wrote: post #49

We’ve actually had nearly self driving vehicles for over a century. They’re called trains. We should invest in some. The navigation problem gets way easier

Do you have a train station in front of your house and any target destination you can imagine wanting to go to? Because most people don't.

> Do you have a train station in front of your house

There is one 100 metres from my house. I cannot catch trains at it because some reason I do not understand the powers that be will spend zillions on roads and SFA on rail tracks.

I also know that the companies that run the rail system have not updated their logistics as if it is the twenty first century. I cannot pt a box on the railways, and pick it up in another city, faster than driving it be truck no matter how well I plan it.

I can track my goods on road transport close to real time.

Re: Mercedes beats Tesla to autonomous driving in California

#359

Post by Dylan16807 »

meghan_rain wrote: post #339
natch wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every time you disengage it invites you to leave immediate voice feedback as to why, and presumably they are using all this feedback in conjunction with camera and data feeds from cars that are opted in (which includes all FSD beta cars I believe). So, they are getting what they need to make it better.

> Every time you disengage it invites you to leave immediate voice feedback as to why lmao do people do this for free?

You're still driving, so it doesn't take any time. And not only can it lead to bug fixes, it can be cathartic to complain.

Re: Mercedes beats Tesla to autonomous driving in California

#360

Post by worik »

berkes wrote: post #199
Longhanks wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have a train station in front of your house and any target destination you can imagine wanting to go to? Because most people don't.

Yes. And yes. I live in the Netherlands and we have this. Because it is what people want and need. And because it's been invested in for decades. And because it has a way higher ROI than car infra.

> I live in the Netherlands and we have this. Because it is what people want and need. And because it's been invested in for decades. And because it has a way higher ROI than car infra.

That would be those incompetent Eurocrats....

Post reply on HN