6 ms·

I'm probably in the minority here but I'm not convinced we are particularly close to real self-driving cars. It's definitely possible but I strongly suspect the

by jahnu 10y ago

I'm probably in the minority here but I'm not convinced we are particularly close to real self-driving cars. It's definitely possible but I strongly suspect there are more challenges ahead than most people believe.

kalleboo 10y ago
Especially for the city, rain and night-time driving situations where Uber will find itself a lot of the time
oblio 10y ago
And even if we do get self-driving cars, people forget that there will be an FDA clinic trial like process before they are allowed on the roads, which will take years. Multiply that by the number of states/countries where you want to operate and by the level of bureaucracy in each country. I'd say that from the day the tech actually works properly (which might be many years away, still), it will take at least 10 years for its availability across the globe, if not more.
- foota 10y ago
  Yeah, just like how rigorously Tesla's auto pilot has been vetted?
  - msandford 10y ago
    How long do you think they're going to be allowed to call it "Autopilot" when it's clearly not, and that confusion causes customers to trust it in ways that they shouldn't, and end up dying? I'm not saying Tesla should be stopped or that Elon should go to jail. But I think it's a clear case of false advertising, where lives are on the line.
    - mikeash 10y ago
      Actual airplane "autopilots" can be something as simple as automatic wing leveling or altitude hold. Using that name for Tesla's technology is only inaccurate in that they don't make airplanes. Where did everybody get the idea that "autopilot" implies full autonomy?
      - WordyMcWordface 10y ago
        I expect an inflatable driver to appear and take the wheel, requiring only an occasional top up of air to keep things on the level.
        mikeash 10y ago
        I actually wonder if Airplane! is where people got the idea that "autopilot" means "the plane entirely flies itself." The bit where it's an inflatable doll is obviously satire, but maybe people thought the capabilities were real and the satire was just the doll part?
      - treebeard901 10y ago
        For most people the word autopilot historically has meant full autonomy.
        mikeash 10y ago
        OK, but why? Such a thing has never existed on any production crewed aircraft.
      - msandford 10y ago
        Sure, let's torture language for Tesla's benefit! Why not? I mean, we shouldn't let a silly thing like people's lives get in the way. Since you know about historical autopilots I suspect this will be redundant, but here it is anyhow: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autopilot#Modern_autopilots https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autopilot#Modern_autopilots "Modern" autopilots have been around for a while, something like 40-50 years. Sure if you go back 80 years you can find autopilots that aren't as advanced. If you want to move the goalposts like that, relative to what a reasonable person might expect, knock yourself out.
        mikeash 10y ago
        What part of that article do you think is a point against what I'm saying, exactly? Autoland and taxiing? That requires a Category III airport which many airports, even those served by airliners, aren't. It also requires pilot supervision and pilot intervention in the event of emergency. Hardly autonomous! And there are plenty of systems below that. For example: http://sarasotaavionics.com/category/autopilots/certified-autopilots http://sarasotaavionics.com/category/autopilots/certified-au... Note: single axis and 2-axis. Just like what I said it can be. But yes, the people insisting that "autopilot" does not imply autonomy, simply because no autonomous autopilot exists on any commercial aircraft, are torturing the language. Sure.
- marcoperaza 10y ago
  The number of people who die every year in car accidents is so massive that any big regulatory hold-up for automated cars, which would almost without a doubt reduce deaths by at least an order of magnitude, is politically untenable.
  - anoother 10y ago
    It may be _logically_ untenable. But certainly not politically...
  - rimantas 10y ago
    I don't know about US but there majority of fatal accidents are the results of deilberate misconduct, i.e. someone doing knowingly stupid things. Unless self-driving cars become mandatory they will help very little in this regards, because road hooligans won't be their target market.
puranjay 10y ago
I feel that the hype for self-driving cars is the same as it was for VR in the 90s We had to wait another 15-20 years for those feverished VR dreams to become a reality I reckon it'll be the same for self-driving. We are 20-25 years away, not 5-10
- Noseshine 10y ago
  In addition, only a few days (one or two weeks) ago we had a much commented story linked here on HN that VR is way too hyped. Supprted by quotes from actual executives and/or investors in that business if I recall correctly, so not just the usual negativism that can always be found for any topic if you choose your source well.
  - puranjay 10y ago
    I don't think VR will ever be mainstream unless hardware costs come down drastically and they can figure out a way to make VR headsets look less dorky
- phatfish 10y ago
  In 5-10 years i see self-driving on freeways and maybe other main roads that have standard junctions, markings and signs. Maybe with lanes only for self-driving. A self driving vehicle would do the long-haul and a human would do the tricky city/country lane leg of the journey. Automating the whole journey is a long way off as you say.
jpalomaki 10y ago
One option could be for them to use the self driving cars on some routes, or maybe even on just part of the route. If things were implemented really well, I could imagine travelling part of the journey in self driving car and then jumping to regular one for the "last mile" (or the other way round). This way one could use the self driving cars in the easy, but time consuming sections (for example congested high ways leading to airport).
pjmorris 10y ago
And, even once we get to self-driving cars, it changes the ride-sharing service's economics greatly... those self-driving cars aren't going to buy themselves.
- zanny 10y ago
  Uber can hedge its insane market cap to buy a fleet, and then make effectively free money from that point forward selling rides.
Shivetya 10y ago
As I posted in the Tesla crash thread, the current "self driving" cars are only assisting in conditions the driver actually needs the least help, good visibility and weather conditions. Its not a safety feature yet, it is little more than an advanced cruise control. Until they can prove a self driving car can navigate a road at night in horrible weather conditions with and without other cars then its not self driving. If anything the current crop should be emphasizing that they can warn of bad driving habits.

by jahnu 10y ago

kalleboo 10y ago

Especially for the city, rain and night-time driving situations where Uber will find itself a lot of the time

oblio 10y ago

And even if we do get self-driving cars, people forget that there will be an FDA clinic trial like process before they are allowed on the roads, which will take years. Multiply that by the number of states/countries where you want to operate and by the level of bureaucracy in each country. I'd say that from the day the tech actually works properly (which might be many years away, still), it will take at least 10 years for its availability across the globe, if not more.

foota 10y ago
Yeah, just like how rigorously Tesla's auto pilot has been vetted?
- msandford 10y ago
  How long do you think they're going to be allowed to call it "Autopilot" when it's clearly not, and that confusion causes customers to trust it in ways that they shouldn't, and end up dying? I'm not saying Tesla should be stopped or that Elon should go to jail. But I think it's a clear case of false advertising, where lives are on the line.
  - mikeash 10y ago
    Actual airplane "autopilots" can be something as simple as automatic wing leveling or altitude hold. Using that name for Tesla's technology is only inaccurate in that they don't make airplanes. Where did everybody get the idea that "autopilot" implies full autonomy?
    - WordyMcWordface 10y ago
      I expect an inflatable driver to appear and take the wheel, requiring only an occasional top up of air to keep things on the level.
      - mikeash 10y ago
        I actually wonder if Airplane! is where people got the idea that "autopilot" means "the plane entirely flies itself." The bit where it's an inflatable doll is obviously satire, but maybe people thought the capabilities were real and the satire was just the doll part?
    - treebeard901 10y ago
      For most people the word autopilot historically has meant full autonomy.
      - mikeash 10y ago
        OK, but why? Such a thing has never existed on any production crewed aircraft.
    - msandford 10y ago
      Sure, let's torture language for Tesla's benefit! Why not? I mean, we shouldn't let a silly thing like people's lives get in the way. Since you know about historical autopilots I suspect this will be redundant, but here it is anyhow: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autopilot#Modern_autopilots https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autopilot#Modern_autopilots "Modern" autopilots have been around for a while, something like 40-50 years. Sure if you go back 80 years you can find autopilots that aren't as advanced. If you want to move the goalposts like that, relative to what a reasonable person might expect, knock yourself out.
      - mikeash 10y ago
        What part of that article do you think is a point against what I'm saying, exactly? Autoland and taxiing? That requires a Category III airport which many airports, even those served by airliners, aren't. It also requires pilot supervision and pilot intervention in the event of emergency. Hardly autonomous! And there are plenty of systems below that. For example: http://sarasotaavionics.com/category/autopilots/certified-autopilots http://sarasotaavionics.com/category/autopilots/certified-au... Note: single axis and 2-axis. Just like what I said it can be. But yes, the people insisting that "autopilot" does not imply autonomy, simply because no autonomous autopilot exists on any commercial aircraft, are torturing the language. Sure.
marcoperaza 10y ago
The number of people who die every year in car accidents is so massive that any big regulatory hold-up for automated cars, which would almost without a doubt reduce deaths by at least an order of magnitude, is politically untenable.
- anoother 10y ago
  It may be _logically_ untenable. But certainly not politically...
- rimantas 10y ago
  I don't know about US but there majority of fatal accidents are the results of deilberate misconduct, i.e. someone doing knowingly stupid things. Unless self-driving cars become mandatory they will help very little in this regards, because road hooligans won't be their target market.

puranjay 10y ago

I feel that the hype for self-driving cars is the same as it was for VR in the 90s We had to wait another 15-20 years for those feverished VR dreams to become a reality I reckon it'll be the same for self-driving. We are 20-25 years away, not 5-10

Noseshine 10y ago
In addition, only a few days (one or two weeks) ago we had a much commented story linked here on HN that VR is way too hyped. Supprted by quotes from actual executives and/or investors in that business if I recall correctly, so not just the usual negativism that can always be found for any topic if you choose your source well.
- puranjay 10y ago
  I don't think VR will ever be mainstream unless hardware costs come down drastically and they can figure out a way to make VR headsets look less dorky
phatfish 10y ago
In 5-10 years i see self-driving on freeways and maybe other main roads that have standard junctions, markings and signs. Maybe with lanes only for self-driving. A self driving vehicle would do the long-haul and a human would do the tricky city/country lane leg of the journey. Automating the whole journey is a long way off as you say.

jpalomaki 10y ago

One option could be for them to use the self driving cars on some routes, or maybe even on just part of the route. If things were implemented really well, I could imagine travelling part of the journey in self driving car and then jumping to regular one for the "last mile" (or the other way round). This way one could use the self driving cars in the easy, but time consuming sections (for example congested high ways leading to airport).

pjmorris 10y ago

And, even once we get to self-driving cars, it changes the ride-sharing service's economics greatly... those self-driving cars aren't going to buy themselves.

zanny 10y ago
Uber can hedge its insane market cap to buy a fleet, and then make effectively free money from that point forward selling rides.

Shivetya 10y ago

As I posted in the Tesla crash thread, the current "self driving" cars are only assisting in conditions the driver actually needs the least help, good visibility and weather conditions. Its not a safety feature yet, it is little more than an advanced cruise control. Until they can prove a self driving car can navigate a road at night in horrible weather conditions with and without other cars then its not self driving. If anything the current crop should be emphasizing that they can warn of bad driving habits.