6 ms·

“the truck drove mostly autonomously.” That last 10% is going to be a lot of work. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ninety-ninety_rule https://en.m.wikipedia.o

“the truck drove mostly autonomously.” That last 10% is going to be a lot of work. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ninety-ninety_rule https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ninety-ninety_rule

hprotagonist 7y ago
it's worse than that, of course. You'll find, like a certain Greek philosopher fond of asking annoying questions, that the first 90% of the last 10% will be OK, and that last 10% will be the other 90% of the ... etc. etc. etc.
- ianai 7y ago
  That’s still a hell of a savings.
- angry-sw-dev 7y ago
  In 1995 having a domestic phone call, placed on a wired line, drop due to line issues was effectively inconceivable -- it simply would never happen. In 2015 we were in a time when it happened all the time, people simply accepted that voip was often unreliable. In 2019 the idea of a vehicle around you simply stopping because its driver doesn't know how to handle a situation is extremely rare. I suspect that by 2039 it will be far more commonplace, shrugged off as just a fact of life that electronic drivers fail on a regular basis and need to pull over and wait either for intervention or conditions to change.
  - rightbyte 7y ago
    True ... I kind of forgot how reliable analogue tone switching were. Someone cut of the wire once in the road. It's like I see more and more cars stuck at the roadside. Atleast in the 90s the drove until they started to smoke.
  - scarejunba 7y ago
    Is that actually true? My parents had phones around then and they've always had this habit where they say "Hello! HELLO!" At the shortest momentary pause in the conversation.
    - wccrawford 7y ago
      No, we had calls drop often enough when I was a kid. But we didn't live in a big city, and it wasn't surprising to us when it happened. It happened about as often as it happens to me with a cellphone when neither party is moving between towers and has decent coverage. We expect cell drops because of a technology constraint, even in big cities. Likewise, I think the parent poster is right that we'll expect it more once it starts happening more.
- thaumasiotes 7y ago
  Huh? The comment you're replying to says the first 90% of the work is easy and the last 10% is difficult. What you're saying is very much not "worse than that"; you're saying the first 90% is easy, then it's a small jump to the first 99%, and then just a bit more to the first 99.9%... That's a huge improvement over the last 10% being difficult!
onlyrealcuzzo 7y ago
I'll take a 90% efficiency gain any day. If they can drive I-70 from SF to NYC with no human, or the 10 from Florida to California, that seems like a win, even if the person has to drive in the city. Warehousing will just get shifted around to work with where the trucks can safely drive.
- joe_the_user 7y ago
  I'll take a 90% efficiency gain any day. If you need a safety driver 100% of the time, the net gain in efficiency is 0%. Edit: There's no comment in the article about there being period with no safety driver.
  - nwallin 7y ago
    If it's one safety driver monitoring 4 vehicles it's still a win.
    - acollins1331 7y ago
      Only if your win is continuing devolution of the middle class.
      - p1necone 7y ago
        If having less work that needs to be done is a negative then there's a problem with our system of economics, not with having less work that needs to be done.
      - larnmar 7y ago
        Truck driving is not and has never been a middle-class occupation.
        pm90 7y ago
        False. Truck driving is one of the few steady jobs that remain middle class https://www.bls.gov/ooh/transportation-and-material-moving/mobile/heavy-and-tractor-trailer-truck-drivers.htm https://www.bls.gov/ooh/transportation-and-material-moving/m...
8bitsrule 7y ago
I want to hear more about how it will work when guys who are braking-bad can drive up alongside the truck and determine that there's no human driver. One car in front, one car on the side ...
lukifer 7y ago
> The truck... had to take scheduled breaks but drove mostly autonomously. There were zero “disengagements,” or times the self-driving system had to be suspended because of a problem These seems to imply short bursts of voluntarily shutting off auto-drive; I'd be curious to understand the rationale for when the two human copilots did so.
SigmundA 7y ago
This would still be a big win for long haul trucking, most of time is spent staying in lane on the interstate. The drivers are required to take breaks to stay alert which adds time to the delivery unless alternating drivers. IMO this is where self driving should focus, not city driving. Truck drivers or anyone gets the vehicle on the interstate and you can sleep or whatever to the next exit for fuel or your destination then take over again.
olyjohn 7y ago
The devil is in the details... Which are totally absent from the article. So what if it drove itself down the freeway? This is literally the easiest thing that "self-driving" vehicles manage to do. Did it fuel itself? Did it take exits and drive itself to the gas station? Where did the driver take over when it got near the delivery docks? Did the truck also get clearance and dock itself? Did the truck even pull itself out of the loading dock when it first embarked on it's trip? Those are the hard things to solve, and conveniently are omitted.

“the truck drove mostly autonomously.” That last 10% is going to be a lot of work. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ninety-ninety_rule https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ninety-ninety_rule

hprotagonist 7y ago

it's worse than that, of course. You'll find, like a certain Greek philosopher fond of asking annoying questions, that the first 90% of the last 10% will be OK, and that last 10% will be the other 90% of the ... etc. etc. etc.

ianai 7y ago
That’s still a hell of a savings.
angry-sw-dev 7y ago
In 1995 having a domestic phone call, placed on a wired line, drop due to line issues was effectively inconceivable -- it simply would never happen. In 2015 we were in a time when it happened all the time, people simply accepted that voip was often unreliable. In 2019 the idea of a vehicle around you simply stopping because its driver doesn't know how to handle a situation is extremely rare. I suspect that by 2039 it will be far more commonplace, shrugged off as just a fact of life that electronic drivers fail on a regular basis and need to pull over and wait either for intervention or conditions to change.
- rightbyte 7y ago
  True ... I kind of forgot how reliable analogue tone switching were. Someone cut of the wire once in the road. It's like I see more and more cars stuck at the roadside. Atleast in the 90s the drove until they started to smoke.
- scarejunba 7y ago
  Is that actually true? My parents had phones around then and they've always had this habit where they say "Hello! HELLO!" At the shortest momentary pause in the conversation.
  - wccrawford 7y ago
    No, we had calls drop often enough when I was a kid. But we didn't live in a big city, and it wasn't surprising to us when it happened. It happened about as often as it happens to me with a cellphone when neither party is moving between towers and has decent coverage. We expect cell drops because of a technology constraint, even in big cities. Likewise, I think the parent poster is right that we'll expect it more once it starts happening more.
thaumasiotes 7y ago
Huh? The comment you're replying to says the first 90% of the work is easy and the last 10% is difficult. What you're saying is very much not "worse than that"; you're saying the first 90% is easy, then it's a small jump to the first 99%, and then just a bit more to the first 99.9%... That's a huge improvement over the last 10% being difficult!

onlyrealcuzzo 7y ago

I'll take a 90% efficiency gain any day. If they can drive I-70 from SF to NYC with no human, or the 10 from Florida to California, that seems like a win, even if the person has to drive in the city. Warehousing will just get shifted around to work with where the trucks can safely drive.

joe_the_user 7y ago
I'll take a 90% efficiency gain any day. If you need a safety driver 100% of the time, the net gain in efficiency is 0%. Edit: There's no comment in the article about there being period with no safety driver.
- nwallin 7y ago
  If it's one safety driver monitoring 4 vehicles it's still a win.
  - acollins1331 7y ago
    Only if your win is continuing devolution of the middle class.
    - p1necone 7y ago
      If having less work that needs to be done is a negative then there's a problem with our system of economics, not with having less work that needs to be done.
    - larnmar 7y ago
      Truck driving is not and has never been a middle-class occupation.
      - pm90 7y ago
        False. Truck driving is one of the few steady jobs that remain middle class https://www.bls.gov/ooh/transportation-and-material-moving/mobile/heavy-and-tractor-trailer-truck-drivers.htm https://www.bls.gov/ooh/transportation-and-material-moving/m...

8bitsrule 7y ago

I want to hear more about how it will work when guys who are braking-bad can drive up alongside the truck and determine that there's no human driver. One car in front, one car on the side ...

lukifer 7y ago

> The truck... had to take scheduled breaks but drove mostly autonomously. There were zero “disengagements,” or times the self-driving system had to be suspended because of a problem These seems to imply short bursts of voluntarily shutting off auto-drive; I'd be curious to understand the rationale for when the two human copilots did so.

SigmundA 7y ago

This would still be a big win for long haul trucking, most of time is spent staying in lane on the interstate. The drivers are required to take breaks to stay alert which adds time to the delivery unless alternating drivers. IMO this is where self driving should focus, not city driving. Truck drivers or anyone gets the vehicle on the interstate and you can sleep or whatever to the next exit for fuel or your destination then take over again.

olyjohn 7y ago

The devil is in the details... Which are totally absent from the article. So what if it drove itself down the freeway? This is literally the easiest thing that "self-driving" vehicles manage to do. Did it fuel itself? Did it take exits and drive itself to the gas station? Where did the driver take over when it got near the delivery docks? Did the truck also get clearance and dock itself? Did the truck even pull itself out of the loading dock when it first embarked on it's trip? Those are the hard things to solve, and conveniently are omitted.