3 ms·
> If they were confident they'd lift the NDA. I really can't say much more, other than I disagree. Please say the little more you can (and thank you for sharin
by anoncareer0212 7y ago
> If they were confident they'd lift the NDA. I really can't say much more, other than I disagree.
Please say the little more you can (and thank you for sharing what you have already!) - there's been something overhanging Waymo for nearly 2 years and no one seems to want to even hint at what it is
(also, if you feel comfy, I wonder when you were last privy to the internal narrative there)
> why is turnover so high if things are going so well?
There's _so_ little external information other than Urmson saying this is far away, Cruise is pumping near-production status, Waymo (confusingly) is in production yet if they were, then they wouldn't been doing what they're doing now. Yet all the ride reviews in the latest PR round sounded awesome!
- 0xB31B1B 7y agoHe’s said what matters. I’m adjacent to the field and agree. The main issue is that getting to 5 nines of reliability in SDC is extremely challenging AND it isn’t good enough. There are infinite random issues to deal with from a simulation/modeling perspective (construction, weather, rain/snow/mud/dust weirdly shaped vehicles, random Uber eats cars stopping in the middle of the street etc) then you also have issues with vehicle and sensor maintenance, maintaining enough bandwidth/compute to support a larger network of SDCs, change management in the vehicles that sees challenges w scale, HD map issues etc. All of these problems are solveable but there are a lot of them.
- anoncareer0212 7y agoHe and the public are familiar with Waymo's solution to edge cases, but after thinking on it, it's unacceptable to get into an accident every 20,000 miles just because the car doesn't realize it needs to dial out to a remote operator