3 ms·
I think the reason is obvious: the hardware and software tech is just not there yet. The hardware that may be actually required to make this work well may stil
by mtgx 9y ago
I think the reason is obvious: the hardware and software tech is just not there yet.
The hardware that may be actually required to make this work well may still cost tens of thousands of dollars, which means car makers will avoid using it and will use cheaper options like cameras and radar.
While on the software side, we may be 80% of the road there, but the other 20% and solving every single edge case out of potentially millions will take another decade or more.
And that's without even mentioning software bugs that could make the whole system crash. I think someone mentioned recently that there are on average 15 bugs every 1,000 lines or code or something. Either way, we should expect a lot of bugs to be in this software. Remember Toyota's "spaghetti code"? And now we're just going to assume that Toyota's self-driving cars are going to drive us safely within 3 years?
And of course nobody wants to talk about how these cars will be hacked remotely.
- Piskvorrr 9y agoYup. "80% success" is seen as "It Works Great" by the same technooptimists who would throw a hissy fit over a network service with a mere 80% SLA.
- oldgradstudent 9y agoAnd even if the "software part" is perfect, the machine learning part is still a black box. You don't know when will it fail or how will it fail.