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

Rivian Unveils Custom Silicon, R2 Lidar Roadmap, and Universal Hands Free

riviantrackr.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

541–550 of 670 posts

Re: Rivian Unveils Custom Silicon, R2 Lidar Roadmap, and Universal Hands Free

#541

Post by bluGill »

hateselfdriving wrote: post #120
nradov wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The consumers who mock Tesla (and other auto manufacturers) that deliver continuous updates are rapidly dying off or moving into assisted living facilities. They're not going to be buying many new cars in coming years. Pursuing that market segment seems like literally a "dead" end.

Funny, I have another 30-40 years before I'm "dying off or moving to assisted living". Yet, because I work in software engineering and cybersecurity, you'll have to rip my human-driven cars out of my dead hands before I ever use or own a self-driving vehicle. Don't get me wrong, as another commenter brought up, I hate traffic too, and the annual fatalities from vehicles are obviously a tragedy. Neither of them motiva…

Have you ever looked at how humans drive? Not the drunks, but the average person - they are terrible. You are not better. Self driving doesn't have to be very good to be better than humans.

Re: Rivian Unveils Custom Silicon, R2 Lidar Roadmap, and Universal Hands Free

#542

Post by bluGill »

hateselfdriving wrote: post #346
mbg721 wrote: post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought it was safety and environmental regulations, primarily. You have to have airbags, and now antilock brakes, and now rearview cameras, etc. If you were allowed to buy a new car built to the standard of the 1970s, it would be cheap.

I am also very suspect of the origins of some of these regulations as well. Modern airbags are wonderful, don't get me wrong, but it's not unreasonable to question, in the US at least, whether auto manufacturers and their lobbyists have been causing new rules to be invented that coincidentally both require fancy, expensive technology AND increase the difficulty/ cost of meeting the standards as a mean to prevent new…

Emissions regulations should come to mind first. Eye tracking is a lot cheaper than getting an ICE to pass modern emissions (a multi-billion dollar project).

Of course any of the above if they work are a good thing. We are debating cost/benefit here though.

Re: Rivian Unveils Custom Silicon, R2 Lidar Roadmap, and Universal Hands Free

#543

Post by bluGill »

hateselfdriving wrote: post #340
hateselfdriving wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you ever stopped to think _why_ cars specifically are so expensive? The manufacturers need to put on a fake show to the market and consumers and pretend they are innovating with new "features" every year. But in reality they stuff so many expensive, fragile, and difficult/ impossible to replace electronics and gadgets into cars because 1) every single piece in that car is marked up from the price they paid. The…

3) The "smarter"/ more unnecessarily complex the vehicle, the easier it becomes to enact planned obsolescence, forcing you to forever buy a new vehicle every 5-7 years, if not more frequent. 4) The "smarter" the vehicle, the more they get to track you and sell your data. You'd think "oh in that case I'm sure it'll be like google where I'd pay a reduced price that's offset by the ad money". No, they will obviously hap…

> The "smarter"/ more unnecessarily complex the vehicle, the easier it becomes to enact planned obsolescence forcing you to forever buy a new vehicle every 5-7 years, if not more frequent.

This makes it harder not easier!. Cars can only see for $50-100k because they last for many years. When the person who wouldn't caught dead in a car more than 3 years old trades in for a new one it gets sold. If the car only lasted 5-7 years that used car buyer would factor that in and be unwilling to pay nearly as much - they would have no choice because banks won't give you a 6 year loan on a car that only has 2-4 years left.

Planned obsolesce exists, but they are thinking of 12-20 year old cars need to go. Any car that makes it to 25 though is a collectors item and they want you to show it off at car shows (preferably not a daily driver though) so people think you can make cars that go that long.

Re: Rivian Unveils Custom Silicon, R2 Lidar Roadmap, and Universal Hands Free

#544

Post by _yb2s »

HPsquared wrote: post #497
_yb2s wrote: post #477

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe if the tech gets better, but right now these systems do not handle unusual or unexpected events well and are basically just a glorified cruise control, yet are marketed as autonomy and encourage people to stop paying attention.

I mean Waymo et al.

Having driven in SF very recently, the current state of Waymo is an obstacle to the smooth flow of traffic. They drive like a hesitant confused person that is worried they just passed their destination but isn't quite sure.

However, that is during 100% normal expected conditions on specific stretches of road they're heavily pre-trained on. My concern was more about their ability to adapt to the unexpectedly dangerous and unanticipated situation.

Re: Rivian Unveils Custom Silicon, R2 Lidar Roadmap, and Universal Hands Free

#545

Post by bluGill »

danielheath wrote: post #313
TulliusCicero wrote: post #18

Autonomy subscriptions are how things are going to go, I called this a long time ago. It makes too much sense in terms of continuous development and operations/support to not have a subscription -- and subscriptions will likely double as insurance at some point in the future (once the car is driving itself 100% of the time, and liability is always with the self driving stack anyway). Of course, people won't like this…

Why would I own my own car in this scenario (vs paying one of the autonomous driving companies to send a car my way when I need one)?

Because if you own your car you leave your golf clubs in there just in case you get invited for a round.

If you are the type who is willing to be seen in a used car you can save a lot of money since the rental car needs to be newer cars just in case someone who wouldn't be seen in a used car wants one - and this adds a lot of cost.

Re: Rivian Unveils Custom Silicon, R2 Lidar Roadmap, and Universal Hands Free

#546

Post by bluGill »

testing22321 wrote: post #104
paxys wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do people own cars when they can just Uber?

Because it’s not convenient enough, and too expensive. Fix those two and personal car ownership will plummet in many places. Many people don’t want to own a car, pay for insurance, gas, tires, oil changes, parking, washing etc. Car ownership sucks horribly for most people, it’s just currently the best option. That will change.

> pay for insurance, gas, tires, oil changes, parking, washing etc.

If you use a car you are paying for those costs. There is no getting around it. If you uber it is indirect, but part of your costs per ride is going to those things. Renting a car gets someone else to do them - but you are paying them to do that somehow. (self driving make trade parking for gas where parking is expensive, so in the densits areas this can make sense, but only because the car is driving empty out to the suburbs in the morning and empty back into the city in the evening - so it increases traffic)

If you own your car you can choose to not keep it clean. The rental will not allow that choice and so you pay for it.

Re: Rivian Unveils Custom Silicon, R2 Lidar Roadmap, and Universal Hands Free

#547

Post by bluGill »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #377
staticshock wrote: post #356

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Direct quote from RJ Scaringe, founder/CEO of Rivian: > This is a decision. It's generated, I said there's many millions of decisions, many of them will never get noticed and they're just under the surface. One of those decisions that's been noticed quite a bit is the fact that we've intentionally not included CarPlay in the vehicle. And that's not to say we don't think a close partnership with Apple is important. So…

Bullshit response. It would cost Rivian nothing to allow Apple (and Android) devices to use the monitor in the car as a second screen to be able to play music and whatnot, they just don’t want to to increase vendor lock in. They could easily make their screen compatible with Carplay/Android Auto and provide whatever experience Rivian wants to at the same time, and they could let the drivers choose which to use. And I…

Could they? I've been told Apple certifies every car before they allow carplay and this costs a lot. I can't verify (the people who tell me this are under NDA and so won't speak on the record)

Re: Rivian Unveils Custom Silicon, R2 Lidar Roadmap, and Universal Hands Free

#548

Post by [deleted] »

colordrops wrote: post #348
ok_dad wrote: post #305

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd like to see data on the distances people drive on a regular basis. For America where I am from, I think that a vast majority of people could use EVs today with the ranges they have today. I didn't see any EVs with ranges below 200+ miles and most had 260+. If you have to go further than that on a regular basis, I think that most cars won't work for your specific needs, let alone EVs. The whole range argument seem…

I'm speaking out of personal experience as an EV owner in Los Angeles that takes occasional road trips. It's those occasional road trips that are preventing me from going full EV. And I'm like 99% certain I'm not a tiny minority.

[deleted]

Re: Rivian Unveils Custom Silicon, R2 Lidar Roadmap, and Universal Hands Free

#549

Post by ok_dad »

colordrops wrote: post #348
ok_dad wrote: post #305

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd like to see data on the distances people drive on a regular basis. For America where I am from, I think that a vast majority of people could use EVs today with the ranges they have today. I didn't see any EVs with ranges below 200+ miles and most had 260+. If you have to go further than that on a regular basis, I think that most cars won't work for your specific needs, let alone EVs. The whole range argument seem…

I'm speaking out of personal experience as an EV owner in Los Angeles that takes occasional road trips. It's those occasional road trips that are preventing me from going full EV. And I'm like 99% certain I'm not a tiny minority.

I wonder if there is data out there for this kind of thing. I'd like to see it to see which one of us is correct or if we're both wrong (or right).
Post reply on HN