491–500 of 652 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Robots are better at plenty of things than humans.
Specialized things, sure. Agree. But driving has to be almost AGI: an almost entirely open and unrestrained field of endeavor.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Does it really matter? If there's no Elon, there's no SpaceX. And I say this as someone that doesn't buy into the founder cult.
> If there's no Elon, there's no SpaceX. Why not? What mystical gift does this one person have that 7 billion other people don't, that permits him and only him to run the company? This is a really unpopular opinion on a web site that exalts founders, but I don't think it really takes much special skill to run a company. Most (but admittedly not all) CEOs are in their position not because of their know-how, but becaus…
Another example Cook (coming from Compaq) is perfectly able to run Apple. A lot of people could have thought about iPhones and Macs but Jobs deserves some credit to actually start the company with Wozniak and actually pushing it to deliver those products.
Repeat with any successful FAANG or company in general.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
By this point you're just repeatedly making insinuations about shillage and astroturfing which is in the guidelines as a thing to not do.
The motivations for my comment was seeing well-meaning comments being downvoted for no apparent reason. On the other end of the spectrum, and perhaps more importantly, someone claiming the car is so safe that they jumped out in front of it without the driver noticing, and it stopped safely. Does that, to you, seem like a responsible thing to post, even assuming it were true? As for the breaking of rules, dang has com…
You should just read them when you have a chance since they address the stuff you bring up simply and directly. Don't start meta-threads about votes. Don't accuse fellow users of shillage, brigading, astro-turfing, etc, without evidence. If you suspect abuse, email the mods. It's all in there, along with the rationale.
I still want to know who goes to prison when a pedestrian or cyclist is killed. Because no-one is arguing someone will be killed, only that "human drivers kill people too" or "machines will kill fewer, eventually". Will it be the passenger? The coder for bad code? The person who assembled the hardware for improperly tested malfunctioning sensors? The person who made the malfunctioning sensors? Who? Because someone is…
There are plenty of similar precedents for this, and it's airline industry. Literally hundreds of planes have fallen out of sky and thousands of people perished due to design flaws, improper maintenance, be it using wrong parts, bad repairs, failing to inspect, etc.
Yet, individuals working at plane makers or mechanics rarely get jail time. Sure, companies are held responsible, can pay restitutions, but jail time is exceedingly rare.
Can we just call out how incredibly awesome this is? We might stumble along the way but this is as big as moving from horse carts to cars. Respect to all of you working on self driving cars!
> Can we just call out how incredibly awesome this is? We might stumble along the way but this is as big as moving from horse carts to cars. I find it a bit hard to believe that people aren't more concerned about calling out what exact legal framework this operation is being allowed under. Having a car without a driver in it driving around seems like a massive risk for the drivers, pedestrians, and bicyclists sharing…
Can we just call out how incredibly awesome this is? We might stumble along the way but this is as big as moving from horse carts to cars. Respect to all of you working on self driving cars!
> Can we just call out how incredibly awesome this is? We might stumble along the way but this is as big as moving from horse carts to cars. I find it a bit hard to believe that people aren't more concerned about calling out what exact legal framework this operation is being allowed under. Having a car without a driver in it driving around seems like a massive risk for the drivers, pedestrians, and bicyclists sharing…
I'll stay out of SF until this ends in a huge lawsuit.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Does it really matter? If there's no Elon, there's no SpaceX. And I say this as someone that doesn't buy into the founder cult.
> If there's no Elon, there's no SpaceX. Why not? What mystical gift does this one person have that 7 billion other people don't, that permits him and only him to run the company? This is a really unpopular opinion on a web site that exalts founders, but I don't think it really takes much special skill to run a company. Most (but admittedly not all) CEOs are in their position not because of their know-how, but becaus…
Attrition rate among space startups is insane. A lot of exciting projects like Armadillo Aerospace (by John Carmack of DOOM fame) crashed and burned. The graveyard of defunct space companies is huge.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It might actually do a lot better than you and I. Remember, it's equipped with radar so it can probably see cars the next block over.
radar doesn't see around corners. At any rate, would have to see some evidence that it can handle the worst of The City before I took a ride, like the incessant construction, steel plates on the road covering new holes, taped off lane changes, resulting traffic jams where merging is happening and so on. It's a really difficult environment for a human and I've never heard the claim yet that self-driving was better tha…
As to the earlier question about intersections at steep streets, I would guess they just avoid the most difficult blocks. But they do also have superhuman vision, since they have lidar and cameras on the roof of the car (higher vantage point than a human).
Based on this image: https://images.ctfassets.net/95kuvdv8zn1v/6h1C7lPC79OLOlddEE... They and their VC backers are clearly betting on the concept that radars + lidar + imaging will be the ultimate successful solution in full self driving cars, as a completely opposite design and engineering philosophy from Tesla attempting to do "full self driving" with camera sensors and categorical rejection of lidar. It is interes…
Cruise CEO here. Our strategy has been to solve the challenges needed to operate driverless robotaxis on a well-equipped vehicle, then aggressively drive the cost down. Many OEMs are doing this in reverse order. They're trying to squeeze orders of magnitude of performance gains out of really low-cost hardware. Today it's unclear what strategy will win. In a few years our next generation of low-cost compute and sensin…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What were his reasons? Searching the web reveals lots of machismo and assorted hero worship, but no actual solid technical arguments. Nobody in the field seems to think a vision-only solution is practical, other than Tesla, who are also not providing solid technical arguments that I can find. This IEEE item seems to summarize the situation well. https://spectrum.ieee.org/tesla-places-big-bet-vision-only-s...
It was a discussion about how such a system must function with all the different inputs vs the vision only model. If you have radar and lidar and vision, then you have at least three different specialist machine learning models running, and then another model running that takes their outputs and decides what the car is going to do. You may have even more than that, some doing specific tasks like localization. Neural…
So the claim is there is absolutely no scenario where the other systems can contribute which seems to be false. E.g. Tesla's cameras are blinded pointing straight on into the sun, the car even tells you the cameras are blinded. If the cameras are splashed with mud they'll also see nothing. Tesla's radar was able to see "through" some obstacles which the vision system can not (and you can see that in the traffic visualizations).
Now how far do you want to fuse, do you just want to overlap the unique sensing abilities of each of those systems? How do you handle conflict when you're in the regions where all systems sense "equally" well. Sure, there's questions. But clearly having more data can't make things worse.
Elon's argument that that's the way to go because that's how humans drive is just ridiculous. And I say this as a proud Model 3 owner (great car, will never ever be autonomous, I don't care). It doesn't pass the sniff test.