GM exits robotaxi market, will bring Cruise operations in house • Hacker News Board

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

#491

Post by willvarfar » Wed, Dec 11, 2024, 1:13 PM UTC

throwaway2037 wrote: post #464

logifail wrote: post #372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

Its not what the public think of 'self driving'. Its not like you can tell the autopilot where you want to go and then sit back, sleep, turn around, do something else. You have to monitor it.

So you are basically paying to take legal responsibility for the crashes of a not-quite-ready autopilot whilst still having to keep alert.

The moment there is a true self-driving capability, where you can sit back and let the car drive even if you're not sober etc, then it would be wildly popular.

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

#492

Post by jeremyjh » Wed, Dec 11, 2024, 1:14 PM UTC

sixQuarks wrote: post #480

jeremyjh wrote: post #470

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

The difference is that it’s not Elon saying this anymore. It’s the actual beta testers, and other people that work at Tesla saying this. The Elon hate is so ingrained here, people are ignoring what’s happening right in front of their eyes.

This is what is in front of our eyes: https://www.templetons.com/brad/robocars/timeline.html

Maybe yours see something different.

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

#493

Post by jefftk » Wed, Dec 11, 2024, 1:15 PM UTC

fiddlerwoaroof wrote: post #319

jefftk wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there's some chance that Tesla's approach will work out for them, but I'm not optimistic. Getting self-driving software to "impressively good" happened pretty quickly, and even systems from 2016 would usually pass your "go there without touching the wheel or pedals" test. But from there to "as safe as a human" let alone "as safe as we require human-replacing machines to be" turns out to be quite a hard gap to…

There’s no comparison between what was available when I bought my Tesla in 2020 and what I have today.

When you say "what was available" do you mean what a Tesla was capable of? Because I was trying to talk about things like Cruise driving for 90min at night in a city with no intervention: https://youtu.be/KSRPmng1cmA

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

#494

Post by jcgrillo » Wed, Dec 11, 2024, 1:16 PM UTC

7thpower wrote: post #423

jcgrillo wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When will it be profitable? The carmakers are betting that L3 autonomy is a profitable investment, but robotaxis aren't. Regardless of what Waymo can or can't demonstrate technically. So either the carmakers are wrong or Waymo is. I guess we'll wait and see.

You’re shifting the goal posts, but do you not believe these services can eventually be delivered profitably?

I have absolutely not shifted a goal post. What I believe is immaterial, what's important is that the companies that really know this industry are behaving as if there's no future in robotaxis. That should give you pause.

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

#495

Post by ethagknight » Wed, Dec 11, 2024, 1:16 PM UTC

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’ve had a Yukon with supercruise for 18 months. It is fantastic for highway driving, particularly, we’ve driven it west from Tennessee to Colorado and Florida. Other comments claiming it’s the same as other standard driver-assist packages are incorrect. Totally hands free, no “ping pong” with the lanes.

That said, when trying to BUY a supercruise vehicle, the sales guys were clueless, I had to review the stat sheets of each car to see which ones did or did not have it. GM is treating this technology as “surveys say 2% of the market wants a self driving vehicle” (incorrect question) compared to “install on every vehicle as an available subscription, let the sales team earn their way.” I’m sure the tech is expensive, but it can’t be that much more at the OEM level.

I also have a Tesla with FSD. FSD is truly amazing but still struggles with edge cases like, my office has two entrances, one is blocked by barrels, it tries to turn into the barrels every time.

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

#496

Post by throwaway2037 » Wed, Dec 11, 2024, 1:20 PM UTC

root_axis wrote: post #309

porphyra wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If Tesla were to artificially set up limitations like highway only, daytime, clearly visible lanes, good weather, car in front, no construction zones, no lane changes, etc, then they would easily have been able to offer full L3 and take full liability for it. Tesla FSD is practically perfected, with no accidents whatsoever, under such conditions already. But Elon wouldn't want to release this kind of gimped system as…

> Tesla FSD is practically perfected Absolutely untrue. It's not even close to perfect. I use it a few times a week and while it's seen some significant improvements over the last year, it still makes pretty dangerous mistakes, especially on left turns, right-turn slip lanes, intersections with flashing yellow lights, streets with very worn road lines or where the positioning of the road lines shift from one side of…

Thank you to post your personal experience. One pattern that I have noticed about Tesla FSD stories on HN: it is black and white, with little grey area. Either people live an area where the roads are easy for FSD to navigate, and they come here to say "It is perfect!". And vice versa: People live in a place with a bunch of complex roads and intersections where FSD does not perform well... And they come to HN to share their experience. (Privately, I cannot wait to see self-driving models try driving on Jakarta or Napoli. It will so much fun to watch those on YouTube!) I do think that Elon/Tesla is taking a crazy gamble to release FSD early to gain billions of hours of training data! I can understand where this would make some people uncomfortable, due to the safety concerns. Except Waymo, who else has the training data that Tesla has at this point? Wiki tells me that FSD has been driving on public roads since 2016. That must an astonishing amount of training data accumulated in the last 8 years! I assume he will be tasking X.ai with improving the FSD model using this enormous training data.

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

#497

Post by infecto » Wed, Dec 11, 2024, 1:26 PM UTC

Shawnj2 wrote: post #398

logifail wrote: post #372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.…

As long as your old cars are like Toyota corolla/camry’s and not like giant gas guzzling SUV’s or trucks keeping them on the road is better than buying a new EV IMO. I think the current EV gen is kind of doomed because of the fact the next EV gen is going to have massive QOL features the current one doesn’t and waiting for a more compelling car is worth doing IMO

Even vehicles with poor fuel efficiency are better to keep on the road until EOL. This is why cash for clunkers was such a terrible program.

I don't follow your take on the current EV gen either. A car at the end of the day derives most of its value from taking you one place to another. The current gen of EVs do this and do it well. "current EV gen is kind of doomed" that is just hyperbole, nothing is changing in the near future that would doom current EV vehicles on the road.

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

#498

Post by gwbas1c » Wed, Dec 11, 2024, 1:28 PM UTC

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…

> Interest in autonomous driving appears to be cooling across the board.

I've had one Tesla for 6 years, another for 2: I've gotten to a point where I find Autopilot boring and turn it off just for something to do.

My older Tesla has enhanced Autopilot. As impressive as it is, it's very glitchy. I primarily use it so I don't speed.

Because enhanced autopilot was so glitchy, when we added a 2nd Tesla to the household, we didn't pay for FSD. (Enhanced autopilot was too expensive given how glitchy it was in my older car.) The free trials of FSD in the 2nd Tesla are impressive... And glitchy. I constantly need to take over on surface roads; but it is very nice on freeways.

The thing is, "self driving" as a feature just isn't worth the sticker price. If you're sitting in the driver's seat, and there's nothing to do, you can just save yourself a boatload of cash and drive the car yourself. Especially if you have to remain alert at all times, the best way to cut the boredom is to drive the car.

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

#499

Post by jcgrillo » Wed, Dec 11, 2024, 1:30 PM UTC

rcxdude wrote: post #446

thfuran wrote: post #436

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>the next EV gen is going to have massive QOL features the current one doesn’t Like what?

I think proper V2H/V2G (vehicle to home/grid) is a big one that is very rare at the moment but is probably making a lot of people who could buy an EV at the moment (i.e. have a garage/driveway in a city) hold off until it's more common, because it makes the economics a lot more attractive. (In general, because of cratering manufacturing costs, improving tech, and a still low trust for battery health, being an EV earl…

I'm not super convinced about the V2H stuff, tbh. I only need backup power at home to keep the heat on when I'm not there. If I'm not there almost certainly my car isn't either. When I am there I can light a candle and run the wood stove to keep the pipes from freezing. So a stationary battery bank for my solar system makes a lot more sense than trying to use my car for that purpose.

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

#500

Post by trollbridge » Wed, Dec 11, 2024, 1:33 PM UTC

calciphus wrote: post #486

barrkel wrote: post #462

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

By that logic, also the CO2 footprint of manufacturing and transporting the fuel for an equivalent ICE vehicle, which is always conveniently left out of such calculations.

And also the footprint of building more generation stations (big) or building “renewable energy” generation (even bigger), which also conveniently gets left out.

The greenest choice most of us can make is an old, used car with reasonable emissions and that’s fuel efficient. Like a 15 year old Civic or Corolla. Or do what a colleague of mine did - he revived a first generation Prius, flashed newer software onto it, and salvaged a battery pack from a newer, wrecked Prius.