5 ms·

Subtext here is that Cruise's driverless product is done. And the cash wont be spent on further R&D. But on go-to-market strategy. Ultimately culminating in the

by indescions_2018 8y ago

Subtext here is that Cruise's driverless product is done. And the cash wont be spent on further R&D. But on go-to-market strategy. Ultimately culminating in the public rollout of a fleet for major markets. Perhaps centered around the Bolt EV 5-door subcompact. The seismic shift in marketing will be fascinating. From the freedom evoked by taking hairpin curves with the wind tossing your hair about. To a focus on the hardships and hidden costs of car ownership. As passenger attention shifts from watching the road and scenery. To focusing on windowpane display screens. Expect to see branded partnerships with Disney / Netflix. As well as content specifically formulated to entertain or shop during the 20 minute car trip ;)

jonknee 8y ago
> As passenger attention shifts from watching the road and scenery. Why would it shift from scenery? Not having to watch the road means you're free to take in the views. That same classic PCH car shot can be done while looking to the ocean instead of straight ahead.
wil421 8y ago
I’m sorry but I disagree. Driverless cars are a pipe dream at this point. A lot of people are going to die and legislation will catch up eventually. The tech isn’t even standardized with everyone taking different approaches. The article about TI millimeter wave radar that’s was on the front page shed some light. I’m sure this won’t be popular on HN. The Uber crash gave some insight on the real state of things. Tesla is in full PR mode even getting banned from the recent crash’s investigation.
- floathub 8y ago
  I could not agree more. Softbank and the investment community may just be in greater fool mode. Or, to be more generous, perhaps they are taking a long term approach. But anything close to Level 4/5 is a _long_ way away, as even senior technical folks have been admitting recently.
  - Fricken 8y ago
    Waymo is already doing level 4. Check it out, a Waymo van was on Jimmy Kimmel the other day: https://youtu.be/c6twRCBtd-g https://youtu.be/c6twRCBtd-g
    - soVeryTired 8y ago
      Lex Friedman's team at MIT seem to think that fully autonomous driving is a long way off: there are just too many edge cases to deal with. https://arxiv.org/abs/1711.06976 https://arxiv.org/abs/1711.06976 From the abstract: "Until these problems are solved, human beings will remain an integral part of the driving task, monitoring the AI system as it performs anywhere from just over 0% to just under 100% of the driving". Now there's room to be optimistic or pessimistic about how much an AI can help, but the academic consensus is that level five will need many more research breakthroughs. There are some good video lectures that give an overview of the field (but not that much depth) here: https://selfdrivingcars.mit.edu/ https://selfdrivingcars.mit.edu/
      - kazinator 8y ago
        > human beings will remain an integral part of the driving task And not just any humans, for that matter: humans over a certain age who are trained and licensed. A seven-year-old human is smarter than any AI and has better knowledge about the world, yet we don't let them drive.
      - Fricken 8y ago
        Lex Fridman's team has drawn their highly disingenuous conclusions based on studies of automated (not autonomous) systems from Volvo, Tesla and Range Rover. They didn't study a single product from a company working on an actual autonomous driving system, and of course they can't because those products are all currently in development and not available to study.
        soVeryTired 8y ago
        It's fair to criticize a study but when you start calling an academic researcher 'highly disingenuous', you just sound like you have a horse in the race. Did you found an autonomous driving company or something?
- LeonM 8y ago
  > A lot of people are going to die A lot of people already die everyday in car accidents. The only difference will be that we have no one we can blame if the vehicle in question does not have a driver.
  - wil421 8y ago
    I do not need an algorithm or even to think when I’m in a dangerous situation. My mind will react and I will assess the situation afterwards. Millions of years of experience has trained life. I can see the same traits in my dogs.
    - dantheman 8y ago
      And that's how people die. Like slamming the brakes when on ice and losing all traction. Yeah, it's like dogs digging on paved roads -- your millions of years of experience don't apply to when the technology changes.
      - wil421 8y ago
        Or they die because Uber’s algorithm notices a bike 6 seconds before impact, unnoticed it, and finally doesn’t understand what it is.
        ImSkeptical 8y ago
        I hope Uber is not the leader in driverless cars. I believe accidents and fatalities per vehicle mile traveled are the most relevant statistics. If driverless cars can outperform humans on those metrics then they will be a great boon even if they roll over the odd cyclist or get in weird crashes.
        mentat 8y ago
        They had automatic braking turned off on purpose. Blame the humans.
    - icelancer 8y ago
- maxerickson 8y ago
  Why would you want the tech to be standardized? There should be some sensible kind of road test, but it'd be a terrible outcome for regulators to specify exactly how the technology should work for a given model year.
- criticali 8y ago
  i am in the industry and it absolutely is still a pipe dream. 20+ years away, easily.
- Fricken 8y ago
  Waymo just announced it's ordering 62,000 Chrysler Pacifica minivans for use as robotaxis. Do you still think it's just a pipe dream? https://www.theverge.com/2018/5/31/17412908/waymo-chrysler-pacifica-minvan-self-driving-fleet https://www.theverge.com/2018/5/31/17412908/waymo-chrysler-p...
  - alexland 8y ago
    IIRC the robotaxi service will only be offered in Arizona for the time being, which is basically the easiest place to perform at level 4. This might be a good start, but don't be fooled into thinking the improvements required to bring level 4 into markets with reasonable amounts of rain and snow are linear; if the rest of the self driving car industry is any indication, we're nearing a plateau.
shanghaiaway 8y ago
I can't believe you actually believe this. You must be psychotic. There are no self driving cars today nor will there ever be.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

jonknee 8y ago

> As passenger attention shifts from watching the road and scenery. Why would it shift from scenery? Not having to watch the road means you're free to take in the views. That same classic PCH car shot can be done while looking to the ocean instead of straight ahead.

wil421 8y ago

I’m sorry but I disagree. Driverless cars are a pipe dream at this point. A lot of people are going to die and legislation will catch up eventually. The tech isn’t even standardized with everyone taking different approaches. The article about TI millimeter wave radar that’s was on the front page shed some light. I’m sure this won’t be popular on HN. The Uber crash gave some insight on the real state of things. Tesla is in full PR mode even getting banned from the recent crash’s investigation.

floathub 8y ago
I could not agree more. Softbank and the investment community may just be in greater fool mode. Or, to be more generous, perhaps they are taking a long term approach. But anything close to Level 4/5 is a _long_ way away, as even senior technical folks have been admitting recently.
- Fricken 8y ago
  Waymo is already doing level 4. Check it out, a Waymo van was on Jimmy Kimmel the other day: https://youtu.be/c6twRCBtd-g https://youtu.be/c6twRCBtd-g
  - soVeryTired 8y ago
    Lex Friedman's team at MIT seem to think that fully autonomous driving is a long way off: there are just too many edge cases to deal with. https://arxiv.org/abs/1711.06976 https://arxiv.org/abs/1711.06976 From the abstract: "Until these problems are solved, human beings will remain an integral part of the driving task, monitoring the AI system as it performs anywhere from just over 0% to just under 100% of the driving". Now there's room to be optimistic or pessimistic about how much an AI can help, but the academic consensus is that level five will need many more research breakthroughs. There are some good video lectures that give an overview of the field (but not that much depth) here: https://selfdrivingcars.mit.edu/ https://selfdrivingcars.mit.edu/
    - kazinator 8y ago
      > human beings will remain an integral part of the driving task And not just any humans, for that matter: humans over a certain age who are trained and licensed. A seven-year-old human is smarter than any AI and has better knowledge about the world, yet we don't let them drive.
    - Fricken 8y ago
      Lex Fridman's team has drawn their highly disingenuous conclusions based on studies of automated (not autonomous) systems from Volvo, Tesla and Range Rover. They didn't study a single product from a company working on an actual autonomous driving system, and of course they can't because those products are all currently in development and not available to study.
      - soVeryTired 8y ago
        It's fair to criticize a study but when you start calling an academic researcher 'highly disingenuous', you just sound like you have a horse in the race. Did you found an autonomous driving company or something?
LeonM 8y ago
> A lot of people are going to die A lot of people already die everyday in car accidents. The only difference will be that we have no one we can blame if the vehicle in question does not have a driver.
- wil421 8y ago
  I do not need an algorithm or even to think when I’m in a dangerous situation. My mind will react and I will assess the situation afterwards. Millions of years of experience has trained life. I can see the same traits in my dogs.
  - dantheman 8y ago
    And that's how people die. Like slamming the brakes when on ice and losing all traction. Yeah, it's like dogs digging on paved roads -- your millions of years of experience don't apply to when the technology changes.
    - wil421 8y ago
      Or they die because Uber’s algorithm notices a bike 6 seconds before impact, unnoticed it, and finally doesn’t understand what it is.
      - ImSkeptical 8y ago
        I hope Uber is not the leader in driverless cars. I believe accidents and fatalities per vehicle mile traveled are the most relevant statistics. If driverless cars can outperform humans on those metrics then they will be a great boon even if they roll over the odd cyclist or get in weird crashes.
      - mentat 8y ago
        They had automatic braking turned off on purpose. Blame the humans.
  - icelancer 8y ago
maxerickson 8y ago
Why would you want the tech to be standardized? There should be some sensible kind of road test, but it'd be a terrible outcome for regulators to specify exactly how the technology should work for a given model year.
criticali 8y ago
i am in the industry and it absolutely is still a pipe dream. 20+ years away, easily.
Fricken 8y ago
Waymo just announced it's ordering 62,000 Chrysler Pacifica minivans for use as robotaxis. Do you still think it's just a pipe dream? https://www.theverge.com/2018/5/31/17412908/waymo-chrysler-pacifica-minvan-self-driving-fleet https://www.theverge.com/2018/5/31/17412908/waymo-chrysler-p...
- alexland 8y ago
  IIRC the robotaxi service will only be offered in Arizona for the time being, which is basically the easiest place to perform at level 4. This might be a good start, but don't be fooled into thinking the improvements required to bring level 4 into markets with reasonable amounts of rain and snow are linear; if the rest of the self driving car industry is any indication, we're nearing a plateau.

shanghaiaway 8y ago

I can't believe you actually believe this. You must be psychotic. There are no self driving cars today nor will there ever be.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]