371–380 of 498 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is it? I have been driving for 25 years and never encountered one. Waymo seems to accept they can’t predict everything so they built a system that’s safe enough to operate in the real world and learn from experience.
I haven't encountered one as a driver either, but I'm pretty sure "Don't drive into roads with water on them" was a basic safety question on the permit test.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe also that cars with a LIDAR rig on the roof are appallingly ugly. Tesla wants to make EVs that look like normal cars (Cybertruck being the oddball here, admittedly).
If I recall correctly, Elon chose to avoid LIDAR (in favour of cameras) due to cost, not cosmetics. Am I wrong?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> A part of growing up is learning to put up with "good enough". "I feel content with good enough in this case." - quote from child whose body got folded in half by a Tesla Your growing up and adulthood sounds a lot like settling for mediocrity from those who push shit on us without asking if we ever wanted it. Floods aren't a special edge case, they happen all the time. The people making these are so stupid and blin…
... which is different from the child whose body got folded in half by someone looking at their phone? I think "good enough" ends up being okay. I _like_ driving. I would do manual mode often still just because I enjoy it. But I'd be completely fine with the option of autopilot in good conditions. Reality is that 99% of the time, my commute is boring and in good conditions. I don't need a self driving mode that can h…
Fair enough, we can apply the same standard: just like the humans who drive like that aren't allowed to drive anymore, the autonomous software that drove the car like this also should be forbidden from operating vehicles. I'm sure you agree that a vehicle operator that's this reckless shouldn't be allowed back on the road just for taking a few classes or being taught a few specific techniques like "killing children or drowning passengers is bad!", so we'll be much safer going forward by just keeping off the road indefinitely. It's for the children, of course!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If a child is "folded in half" by someone looking at their phone, no one accepts that as "good enough", and there is a direct action: the driver responsible will lose their licence and likely end up in prison. If it happens often enough, laws are changed. What happens when a Tesla does the same thing? Besides them lying and hiding information I mean. What remedial action is taken to reduce that specific risk from reo…
>If a child is "folded in half" by someone looking at their phone, no one accepts that as "good enough" But of course we do. Yes, we punish the individual driver that did it, but we still allow humans to drive cars. We accept the fact that driving a car carries sone risks, but we value the convenience of getting to our destination easily more than we value lives of those kids that will get killed from time to time.
To me this doesn't seem like a disaster but just the kind of thing that happens as you role out a service and expose it to new challenges. Presumably they haven't had the chance to do a lot of flood training but now they have that chance. The huge advantage they have over people in general is that ideally if they figure this out then it will stay figured out. Then they can slowly role out and watch for the next hitch…
> The huge advantage they have over people in general is that ideally if they figure this out then it will stay figured out. Then they can slowly role out and watch for the next hitches from new situations. Sure, because human drivers famously have to be taught with each new generation that driving into six feet of water is a bad plan.
To me this doesn't seem like a disaster but just the kind of thing that happens as you role out a service and expose it to new challenges. Presumably they haven't had the chance to do a lot of flood training but now they have that chance. The huge advantage they have over people in general is that ideally if they figure this out then it will stay figured out. Then they can slowly role out and watch for the next hitch…
> The huge advantage they have over people in general is that ideally if they figure this out then it will stay figured out. Then they can slowly role out and watch for the next hitches from new situations. Sure, because human drivers famously have to be taught with each new generation that driving into six feet of water is a bad plan.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As much as one could expect waymo to train on it, one could also expect a functioning city to not have flooded streets
Why? Functioning cities often shutdown for a day here or there for weather. I live in a northern city where we laugh at southern cities for shutting down for 1 inch of snow - but it is the right thing for them because it doesn't happen enough to be worth dealing with. If my city shutdown for 6 inches of snow we would be shutdown unacceptably often so we instead have higher taxes to pay for all the infrastructure need…
I’ve lived in Atlanta for many years, grew up with family in northeast, so I know how to drive in snow and have seen how Boston, New York and Atlanta all deal with it. Atlanta has a very very small fleet to clear snow and ice because the cost of maintaining a large fleet just isn’t worth the low frequency they’re needed. So it’s common for bad ice to shutdown the city for 1-2 days. That’s a valid trade off.
Every once in a while Atlanta would get a bad one and people would start complaining about needing a bigger fleet, then a couple weeks after it’s over just forget about it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
... which is different from the child whose body got folded in half by someone looking at their phone? I think "good enough" ends up being okay. I _like_ driving. I would do manual mode often still just because I enjoy it. But I'd be completely fine with the option of autopilot in good conditions. Reality is that 99% of the time, my commute is boring and in good conditions. I don't need a self driving mode that can h…
I'm waiting for independent analysis of the data. According to those with access to data - but also with reason to lie with statistics - waymo is enough better overall than humans that I'm not comfortable with any human driving on any public road. If you like to drive then do it on a private track/course where your mistakes won't kill other people. Of course the real data is hidden from me and nobody I trust to be in…
Alternately, we could recognize that figuring out where to draw the line for a diverse group with varying behaviors is pretty hard, and any possible place you try to draw it will be strictly less safe than where I might say to draw it instead, unless you're willing to ban cars entirely. I'm guessing you'd say that banning cars entirely isn't realistic, which I'd be forced to agree with, but if you follow up by suggesting that we just ban humans instead, I'll be very interested to hear your realistic plan for how we deal with the fallout of shutting down millions of restaurants and stores that aren't near public transportation, preventing ambulances for bringing people to hospitals, and transporting goods to anywhere that's not directly on a rail line.
Of course, I have an incredible bias on the conversation on whether humans should be allowed to drive, so you might not be able to trust me. Specifically, I haven't driven for over a decade, have never owned my own car, and don't even have an active license anymore, so I don't particularly care about the idea of people liking to drive. It's probably worth it to mentally adjust what I said above to be a bit more sympathetic to human drivers based on that.
To me this doesn't seem like a disaster but just the kind of thing that happens as you role out a service and expose it to new challenges. Presumably they haven't had the chance to do a lot of flood training but now they have that chance. The huge advantage they have over people in general is that ideally if they figure this out then it will stay figured out. Then they can slowly role out and watch for the next hitch…
> The huge advantage they have over people in general is that ideally if they figure this out then it will stay figured out. Then they can slowly role out and watch for the next hitches from new situations. Sure, because human drivers famously have to be taught with each new generation that driving into six feet of water is a bad plan.
This is a valid point that self-driving cars solving the issue once and losslessly deploying the solution to it's fleet is a massive improvement over humans each individually applying the "live and learn" strategy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> A part of growing up is learning to put up with "good enough". "I feel content with good enough in this case." - quote from child whose body got folded in half by a Tesla Your growing up and adulthood sounds a lot like settling for mediocrity from those who push shit on us without asking if we ever wanted it. Floods aren't a special edge case, they happen all the time. The people making these are so stupid and blin…
> what if it isn't a perfectly dry and sunny California day What a silly comment. Waymo is operating in San Francisco, Houston, and Orlando. All of those get lots of rain. Specifically, SF gets lots of "small rain" and Houston and Orlando are more likely to get short bursts of heavy rain. The irony of people who are against self-driving cars for safety reasons: They are already much safer than regular drivers -- acci…