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

GM exits robotaxi market, will bring Cruise operations in house

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

461–470 of 692 posts

Re: GM exits robotaxi market, will bring Cruise operations in house

#461

Post by b112 »

rgovostes wrote: post #3

> GM said in a statement that “... an increasingly competitive robotaxi market” were the reasons for the change. Isn't there basically Google/Waymo and then, seemingly much further behind, Tesla Cybertaxi, Amazon/Zoox, and Uber/Yandex? Cruise allegedly has one of the most sophisticated autonomous driving platforms, and GM's Super Cruise (if they share any tech) is comparable to Tesla FSD. Strange that they would bow…

I just bought a new Mustang, and from what I can tell it's total junk.

Many others on forums report the same, and here's an example of a component being borked.

AEB, Automatic Emergency Braking, is on by default and always turns back on at vehicle start.

It's dangerous. An example? Even with a camera and a separate radar, it is borked. I've been behind another car, slowing for a light, and hit a downward slope of a large speedbump and SLAM the brakes come on.

Why?

The radar suddenly sees pavement, as the nose of the car is pointed down, but the camera sees car + brake light ahead.

This is at 30km/hr, and everyone is braking fine, the car ahead is not even close. And proof it's not me is the 5 times it happened in 2 weeks, it was always something like this.

I was almost hit 3 times.

It literally panic brakes. Horribly designed.

I finally had it and removed the radar sensor with forscan.

With behaviour like this in something as simple as AEB, by no means would I trust anytiong else. Forums show people complaining about:

* adaptive cruise slowing down, or speeding up because it sees speed limit signs on offramps, or even adjacent roads

* the lane assist pulling strongly because the car thinks an offramp is the main road.

* reports of swerving into other lanes when passing some vehicles, the car confused

It's just junk.

This beta testing on our roads needs to stop.

What cracks me up is this.

If you asked a skilled software dev, if they'd prefer to have software designed by a team, any team, responsible for tgeir life? They'd likely say no.

Because we've all seen the crappy code that gets produced. We know of bugs. We know of failures in testing, automated or not.

These cars ae all extremely buggy, just as any software project is. But beyond that, auto manufacturers are notorious for cutting corners.

I just can't imagine why anyone, this decade, would want to trust auto drive anything.

Re: GM exits robotaxi market, will bring Cruise operations in house

#462

Post by barrkel »

loandbehold wrote: post #439
Mashimo wrote: post #433

Earlier quoted context omitted.

EVs have a way higher initial CO2 footprint. The crossover depends on car and where you get the energy from. I think it's often around the 100 000 km mark where an EV gets the smaller footprint. But like I said, many variables factor in.

Are you claiming manufacturing an EV emits as much CO2 as driving ICE for 100 000 km? That's really hard to believe, you need to cite your sources.

You will have to factor in the CO2 cost of electrical generation mix. The tradeoff will vary widely depending on where you live.

Re: GM exits robotaxi market, will bring Cruise operations in house

#463

Post by tialaramex »

paxys wrote: post #255
cortesoft wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That could also mean that one company just won, right? Ten companies try to do a really hard thing, nine fail, one succeeds, the nine failures close down. Seems pretty reasonable for difficult new tech.

Has Waymo "won"? At its peak Cruise was operating in more cities and had more cars on the road than Waymo does today. Look at how that ended.

When was this peak, which cities and how many cars? Waymo has a few hundred cars, and is serving the public in Phoenix, LA and San Francisco, as far as I can tell Cruise had a kinda shaky San Francisco service, with restricted hours, now discontinued, and they have a tourist zone Dubai service and... some test areas.

So I must be missing a lot of cars and a lot of extra cities with service. Or you've confused ambitions (Cruise wanted to have thousands of vehicles and wanted to be in dozens of US cities by 2027) with reality (Neither of those things happened)

Re: GM exits robotaxi market, will bring Cruise operations in house

#464

Post by throwaway2037 »

logifail wrote: post #372
SkyPuncher wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It seems like drivers did not find the feature compelling and were not renewing. IMO, it's largely because BlueCruise (and all of the similar services) is not sufficiently better than the non-subscription driver assists. I have the option of BlueCruise on my vehicle and it's just not a compelling offer. * It only works on major highways. Beyond actual coverage, major highways are places where the standard driver as…

> it's just not a compelling offer I drive (and have driven) a fair number of rental cars due to travel, and I have to say I feel that way about many new vehicles in their entirety . So much vehicle tech is at best unimpressive and at worst positively in my way as a driver. > It's wickedly expensive We own two cars, 6 and 10 years old respectively, yet I've never felt less motivated to look at new cars than I do now.…

I don't drive, so this is an honest question:

    > So much vehicle tech is at best unimpressive and at worst positively in my way as a driver.
Can you provide some examples? I guess "self-driving" is one.

Re: GM exits robotaxi market, will bring Cruise operations in house

#465

Post by jajko »

delabay wrote: post #292
adrr wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You hit it on the nail, the driver didn't have to intervene but they had to be ready to take over at any time. If FSD could safely operate where you had 10 seconds to take over for level 3, why doesn't Tesla go get it certified for L3 driving. FSD isn't even approved for being a drivers aid(hands off, eyes on) in EU and China because Tesla has not demonstrated that it is safe. Even Blue cruise is approved in EU for c…

Imo Mercedes scored a point with their narrow application of L3 driving, Tesla is playing to win the game.

For past decade, with meh results consistently so far. They were/are? selling FSD as premium package and never delivered on promises, that's outright fraud in plain sight.

Technologically Tesla is far behind since one man's ego wants to trump physics and computing limitations and its failing. Still no Lidar.

I don't care about 90 youtube videos of long drives with no intervention. I care about a million out of a million (and maybe 10 on top). Either there is something I can trust with mine and my kids life with, or I am not interested with anything on top adaptive cruise control (since I don't spend my life in stop&go traffic).

Re: GM exits robotaxi market, will bring Cruise operations in house

#466

Post by dooooooomer »

correlator wrote: post #77
jedberg wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And when you go to Tesla for a test drive, they first thing they do is shove it into auto-cruise or whatever they call it whether you want to or not! At least that is what happened to me when I test drove one 10 years ago. Maybe they don't do that anymore.

Wow that must have been a wild experience 10 years ago! Today, I think they should do this. It is rare I need to touch the wheel or pedal these days and people should experience it.

[flagged]

Re: GM exits robotaxi market, will bring Cruise operations in house

#467

Post by throwaway2037 »

lucianbr wrote: post #441
Mashimo wrote: post #433

Earlier quoted context omitted.

EVs have a way higher initial CO2 footprint. The crossover depends on car and where you get the energy from. I think it's often around the 100 000 km mark where an EV gets the smaller footprint. But like I said, many variables factor in.

Is battery manufacturing that bad for the environment? I mean, ICE cars still have wheels, drivetrains, chassis, doors, windows, chairs, electronics, paint and many other things, same as the EVs. The electric motor I can't imagine its worse to produce than a combustion motor. So that leaves batteries as the cause of this huge disparity on day one, that takes 100,000km of fuel consumption to overtake. Is this with the…

My guess: Most of the CO2 emissions for making cars comes from the body of the car. It is basically identical between ICE and EV. I guess a modern car body is a combo of steel and aluminium. (Is that correct?)

Re: GM exits robotaxi market, will bring Cruise operations in house

#468

Post by gitfan86 »

Tesla Driver assistance as it exists today makings driving far easier. You can relax and once you learn where it needs help very rarely take over. It only needs to continue the rate of improvement for another 9 months and you have robot taxi.

Lots of people are ignoring this because of politics.

Re: GM exits robotaxi market, will bring Cruise operations in house

#469

Post by soco »

logifail wrote: post #456
matthewmacleod wrote: post #451

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a straight-up random Google citation ( https://www.cotes.com/blog/greenhouse-gas-emissions-from-ev-... ) Production of EVs and batteries generate more CO2 before the first wheel turns, however, the total carbon footprint of ICE vehicles quickly overtake that of the EVs after 15,000 miles (24,140 km) of driving. - It takes a typical EV about one year in operation to achieve "carbon parity" with an ICE vehicle. - If…

> the total carbon footprint of ICE vehicles quickly overtake that of the EVs after 15,000 miles (24,140 km) of driving Shouldn't we be comparing an old ICE which was already built years ago but is still operating vs building a new EV to replace it? The carbon footprint of building the ICE is almost irrelevant, it's just the ongoing damage it is doing. Compare that with footprint of building and operating the EV that…

Well pretty much everybody at some point replaces their cars. There are not many still driving around their Ford T's. So latest at that point, you will have to compare production+cost vs production+cost.

Re: GM exits robotaxi market, will bring Cruise operations in house

#470

Post by jeremyjh »

gitfan86 wrote: post #468

Tesla Driver assistance as it exists today makings driving far easier. You can relax and once you learn where it needs help very rarely take over. It only needs to continue the rate of improvement for another 9 months and you have robot taxi. Lots of people are ignoring this because of politics.

Its needed another 9 months for about 5 years now. Tell me, was it also for political reasons that Tesla stopped reporting disengagement data?
Post reply on HN