3 ms·

The 1995 result was nowhere close to what we have today. 158km was the maximum distance between disengagements. Waymo's average distance between disengagements

by chroma 7y ago

The 1995 result was nowhere close to what we have today. 158km was the maximum distance between disengagements. Waymo's average distance between disengagements is over 100x that, and they're going on more than just highways.

dx034 7y ago
But they're still using easy environments. Not sure a German motorway without speed limits is easier to navigate than what Waymo faces. I doubt that maximizing the miles between disengagements should be our goal. The goal should be for the car to face the worst conditions imaginable (snow, ice, dirt roads, other drivers ignoring traffic) and somehow manage to survive in those situations.
- Dylan16807 7y ago
  A limited access road is absolutely easier to navigate than a city. Once you can stay in one lane with sufficient following distance, you're done. The problem space is tiny.
  - dx034 7y ago
    If you have a lane. A gravel road with two way traffic (not that uncommon in rural areas) only works because drivers communicate their intentions (esp if one needs to wait at a point where the road is wider). They don't work by fixed rules.
    - Dylan16807 7y ago
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limited-access_road https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limited-access_road I guess I should have said 'controlled access' but anything gravel is not in this category.
- blub 7y ago
  A German motorway without traffic is very easy to navigate, but a typical day to day situation involves several kinds of cars driving at different speed limits and engaging in various maneuvers like overtaking, exiting, merging, switching lanes. There's also traffic jams or heavy traffic situations. If one wants to drive dynamically, one has to overtake and switch lanes quite a lot, which makes this challenging. If one is content with driving like a snail they can stick to the first lane, which is pretty simple and could be managed even by a so-called self-driving car.
- orloffm 7y ago
  The usual roads are probably very easy, they have wide markings. The problem there arises with repair works which mess up the markings and lane width in all possible ways. During summer they are very frequent, and I bet they were the cause of human interventions in those old experiments.
  - pas 7y ago
    No problem, disengage there. The problem seems to br no safe way to disengage. Tesla crashes kill people because of this. (Ding ding, you have 1 second before impact.) Waymo probably wants to nail city driving first, because it's much lower speed, safer.
YeGoblynQueenne 7y ago
>> 158km was the maximum distance between disengagements. That was 158km doing 180 km/h on an authobahn with no upper speed limit and with unrestricted traffic. Anyway, like I say in my other comment Waymo's disengagements mean nothing because, unlike Dickmann's authobahn experiment, there is noone there watching the performance of their cars, other than Waymo employees. As far as anyone can tell, their impressive disengagement record is the result of their cars being driven in the mildest, friendliest conditions possible. It certainly seems that way, taking into account where they drive their cars - in sunny, peaceful Phoenix AZ, and then again, only on roads they've actually mapped. Put these two things together and it's obvious that Dickmann's experiments were run in as close to real-world conditions as possible, whereas Waymo is consistently keeping its cars in closed, controlled, simple environments that tell us nothing about their capability in the real world.

by chroma 7y ago

dx034 7y ago

But they're still using easy environments. Not sure a German motorway without speed limits is easier to navigate than what Waymo faces. I doubt that maximizing the miles between disengagements should be our goal. The goal should be for the car to face the worst conditions imaginable (snow, ice, dirt roads, other drivers ignoring traffic) and somehow manage to survive in those situations.

Dylan16807 7y ago
A limited access road is absolutely easier to navigate than a city. Once you can stay in one lane with sufficient following distance, you're done. The problem space is tiny.
- dx034 7y ago
  If you have a lane. A gravel road with two way traffic (not that uncommon in rural areas) only works because drivers communicate their intentions (esp if one needs to wait at a point where the road is wider). They don't work by fixed rules.
  - Dylan16807 7y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limited-access_road https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limited-access_road I guess I should have said 'controlled access' but anything gravel is not in this category.
blub 7y ago
A German motorway without traffic is very easy to navigate, but a typical day to day situation involves several kinds of cars driving at different speed limits and engaging in various maneuvers like overtaking, exiting, merging, switching lanes. There's also traffic jams or heavy traffic situations. If one wants to drive dynamically, one has to overtake and switch lanes quite a lot, which makes this challenging. If one is content with driving like a snail they can stick to the first lane, which is pretty simple and could be managed even by a so-called self-driving car.
orloffm 7y ago
The usual roads are probably very easy, they have wide markings. The problem there arises with repair works which mess up the markings and lane width in all possible ways. During summer they are very frequent, and I bet they were the cause of human interventions in those old experiments.
- pas 7y ago
  No problem, disengage there. The problem seems to br no safe way to disengage. Tesla crashes kill people because of this. (Ding ding, you have 1 second before impact.) Waymo probably wants to nail city driving first, because it's much lower speed, safer.

YeGoblynQueenne 7y ago

>> 158km was the maximum distance between disengagements. That was 158km doing 180 km/h on an authobahn with no upper speed limit and with unrestricted traffic. Anyway, like I say in my other comment Waymo's disengagements mean nothing because, unlike Dickmann's authobahn experiment, there is noone there watching the performance of their cars, other than Waymo employees. As far as anyone can tell, their impressive disengagement record is the result of their cars being driven in the mildest, friendliest conditions possible. It certainly seems that way, taking into account where they drive their cars - in sunny, peaceful Phoenix AZ, and then again, only on roads they've actually mapped. Put these two things together and it's obvious that Dickmann's experiments were run in as close to real-world conditions as possible, whereas Waymo is consistently keeping its cars in closed, controlled, simple environments that tell us nothing about their capability in the real world.