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

GM to Shut Down Ultra Cruise

ojoyoshidareport.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 95 posts

Re: GM to Shut Down Ultra Cruise

#51

Post by gibolt »

tw04 wrote: post #30
tahoeskibum wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I use Tesla FSD everyday. It is not a robotaxi yet, but it makes a big difference in day to day life. I can do most drives without disengagement. To be clear, it needs to get 100x better for robotaxi. But even with its beta flakiness, it is magical.

So do your regular drives just not include any tree lined roads, or have they done some mapping to fix phantom braking in your area? And that’s a serious question, because the stress of trying to anticipate the next phantom brake event completely defeats the purpose in my mind. I’d much rather just drive myself.

Phantom braking has been almost entirely eliminated in the past year. Plenty of others have noted the same experience.

Used to happen to me once every ~100 miles. This year, it only happened once the whole year, and the drop was maybe ~10mph.

Re: GM to Shut Down Ultra Cruise

#52

Post by MobileVet »

ramesh31 wrote: post #35
lorstic wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Vision-only is very very very far behind other techniques. Cruise (the self driving company, not OP) was killed by an overzealous CEO, not by their chosen technique. Waymo drives great in SF.

>Cruise (the self driving company, not OP) was killed by an overzealous CEO, not by their chosen technique. Waymo drives great in SF. Cruise is dead regardless of how you spin it. And Waymo will continue to piddle around SF with their $500,000 frankenstein cars until eternity. Meanwhile Tesla and Comma (both pure vision) are the only operational L3 systems being used every day by regular people to drive millions of m…

Tesla is Level 2.

Too many sources to cite but here is Wikipedia

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla_Autopilot

Re: GM to Shut Down Ultra Cruise

#53

Post by adrr »

gibolt wrote: post #46
adrr wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its not self driving though. I have to pay attention when using it. Tesla doesn't have a Level 3 or higher cars on the road.

Cruise has Teleoperators. Their snafu revealed an intervention every 4-5 miles, which is worse than Tesla's FSD. (Cruise vehicles were also subjectively bad at driving) Leveling means nothing, and are determined by the company. Actual operations and range of operational capability matter.

Tesla doesn't have self driving though. Its level 2. Mercedes has level 3 cars on the road where the driver can legally watch a movie or read a book. Level matters but it dictates what the driver can legally do. Also Mercedes is accepting 100% liability while their cars are in self driving, Tesla makes the driver 100% liable. There's a huge difference.

Re: GM to Shut Down Ultra Cruise

#54

Post by andrewmutz »

thumbsup-_- wrote: post #39
thot_experiment wrote: post #28

I gotta say, I was driven on residential streets/stroads from home to restaurant by a Tesla 3 (using vision alone I think? it was fairly recent) in absolutely POURING rain and I was blown away by how good it was. I think it's hard to get a handle on how good this stuff is because it's such a politically charged field now but I have a hard time believing the folks that say it's never gonna happen, or at least not soon…

It works most of the time but the issue is that "most of the time" is not good enough for these systems. Even if the failure rate is People often make arguments that "oh it will still be less accidents than human drivers", which is true, but, the problem is that human accuracy is a very poor benchmark for autonomous systems. Autonomous systems need to be held to a higher bar, and it's better if that accountability an…

> Autonomous systems need to be held to a higher bar

Why? Won't this lead to a lot of needless deaths at the hands of human drivers while we wait for driverless cars to improve? Why not roll them out once they are safer than human drivers?

Re: GM to Shut Down Ultra Cruise

#55

Post by gibolt »

mtlmtlmtlmtl wrote: post #40
unclad5968 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Waymo is only in cities with conditions basically perfect for self driving. Most of the world lives where weather occurs.

Yeah have fun when it's snowing so hard that all the sensors get covered if you stand still for too long at a light or something. And I do wonder what hail would do to it. Could cause a lot of... interesting input data. And subsequently a lot of interesting driving.

Sensors can already handle rain. Heating elements are not hard to add (if not present now).

Re: GM to Shut Down Ultra Cruise

#56

Post by ra7 »

gibolt wrote: post #46
adrr wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its not self driving though. I have to pay attention when using it. Tesla doesn't have a Level 3 or higher cars on the road.

Cruise has Teleoperators. Their snafu revealed an intervention every 4-5 miles, which is worse than Tesla's FSD. (Cruise vehicles were also subjectively bad at driving) Leveling means nothing, and are determined by the company. Actual operations and range of operational capability matter.

Cruise’s teleoperators cannot perform any safety critical interventions like preventing a crash in a fraction of a second, which Tesla drivers can and do. If you remove the driver from Tesla, their intervention rate would be even worse. No matter how you slice it, a driverless car is more capable than one that requires a driver.

Re: GM to Shut Down Ultra Cruise

#57

Post by gibolt »

dexwiz wrote: post #27
yellow_postit wrote: post #3

Self driving is going the way of fusion power. Always just a couple years away. I still believe divided highway trucking between major cities with last mile handoff to humans has legs, but I wonder how much the Tesla claims have poisoned the proverbial well of a more constrained system for the foreseeable future.

Waymo appears to be the real deal. Last night I saw one navigate a situation with a hesitant pedestrian better than most human drivers. And before people chime in with "ideal conditions," it was at night in the rain. I never trusted the Cruise cars, they would drive like a teenager that was afraid of the road. But Waymo seems a step up even from the Uber drivers.

Waymo and Tesla are the only real competition left in the U.S. The deciding factor is how fast Waymo can roll out to more locales before Tesla gets closer to level 5 over the next 3-5 years.

After that, vehicle production and operations cost will be the main factor in the race to $0

Re: GM to Shut Down Ultra Cruise

#58

Post by lorstic »

andrewmutz wrote: post #54
thumbsup-_- wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It works most of the time but the issue is that "most of the time" is not good enough for these systems. Even if the failure rate is People often make arguments that "oh it will still be less accidents than human drivers", which is true, but, the problem is that human accuracy is a very poor benchmark for autonomous systems. Autonomous systems need to be held to a higher bar, and it's better if that accountability an…

> Autonomous systems need to be held to a higher bar Why? Won't this lead to a lot of needless deaths at the hands of human drivers while we wait for driverless cars to improve? Why not roll them out once they are safer than human drivers?

Because society can't handle that.

And I think that's a fine reason. Even if you don't think it's a fine reason, it's not going to change.

Re: GM to Shut Down Ultra Cruise

#59

Post by joshe »

brucethemoose2 wrote: post #38
thot_experiment wrote: post #28

I gotta say, I was driven on residential streets/stroads from home to restaurant by a Tesla 3 (using vision alone I think? it was fairly recent) in absolutely POURING rain and I was blown away by how good it was. I think it's hard to get a handle on how good this stuff is because it's such a politically charged field now but I have a hard time believing the folks that say it's never gonna happen, or at least not soon…

The thing about machine learning is that it can fail very suddenly, in a very unhuman way. So even if self driving works most of the time, it takes a lot of work to address weird edge cases even the most inebriated human would not mess up, that other drivers/pedestrians would not anticipate.

Nah, it's failure mode is to slow down and pull over. It would be amazing if drunk humans did the same.

Re: GM to Shut Down Ultra Cruise

#60

Post by danhor »

andrewmutz wrote: post #54
thumbsup-_- wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It works most of the time but the issue is that "most of the time" is not good enough for these systems. Even if the failure rate is People often make arguments that "oh it will still be less accidents than human drivers", which is true, but, the problem is that human accuracy is a very poor benchmark for autonomous systems. Autonomous systems need to be held to a higher bar, and it's better if that accountability an…

> Autonomous systems need to be held to a higher bar Why? Won't this lead to a lot of needless deaths at the hands of human drivers while we wait for driverless cars to improve? Why not roll them out once they are safer than human drivers?

People are less fine with risk if it's less controllable by themselves. Every mode of transport where people don't directly control their fate is held to a much higher safety standard (and partially as a result) much safer. Aviation, Trains, Busses, ... .
Post reply on HN