4 ms·
> "tech is nowhere near to make self driving cars feasible on scale" To be more specific, Uber's tech is the one that's nowhere near feasible. According to rec
by FreakyT 9y ago
> "tech is nowhere near to make self driving cars feasible on scale"
To be more specific, Uber's tech is the one that's nowhere near feasible. According to recently leaked data, Uber's self driving system is literally orders of magnitude more failure prone than Waymo's[1].
[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/23/technology/uber-self-driving-cars-arizona.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/23/technology/uber-self-driv...
- richardknop 9y agoThat is probably correct. But I am skeptical of even Waymo. I don't think even with Waymo's tech it's reasonable to expect any deployment of self driving cars on a meaningful scale in next 5-10 years (apart from some very controlled conditions like roads or lanes dedicated to self driving cars but that will require infrastructure build-up which will take decade or two).
- bkor 9y agoFrom what I understood elsewhere, the numbers in that article are about different measures (apples vs oranges comparison). Article states: > 5,600 miles before the driver had to take control from the computer to steer out of trouble Apparently they have a number for a) number of miles per intervention and b) number of miles per intervention to prevent an accident. Waymo's number is measure b, Uber's number if measure a.