7 ms·

I feel like HN is too skeptical of self driving. Having driven a Tesla for a road trip, I would feel safe letting it do all the work on interstates without the

I feel like HN is too skeptical of self driving. Having driven a Tesla for a road trip, I would feel safe letting it do all the work on interstates without the feedback it currently requires. That's a big step forward. Every day use cases, even if it's not every moment you're in your car, are certainly within reach.

microcolonel 6y ago
> I feel like HN is too skeptical of self driving. Having driven a Tesla for a road trip, I would feel safe letting it do all the work on interstates without the feedback it currently requires. How many times does a Tesla have to actively accelerate and careen into a solid concrete barrier before HN's modicum of skepticism for self driving, particularly Tesla's implementation, is justified?
- freepor 6y ago
  1/2 as many times as a human does. I've driven about 250,000 miles in my life and had 5 accidents, none with injury. But I think a self driving car could do a lot better.
  - ashtonkem 6y ago
    My skepticism of self driving tech is all weather based. Here in LA, I’m confident that a self driving car could do fine; slow traffic (normally), good roads, low precipitation and clear lines make for easy driving. But back when I lived in Colorado I had multiple times when I had to drive on a highway with completely obscured lines, poor weather, and extremely dangerous consequences for failure. I recall one drive in a blizzard where all the cars driving had to negotiate their own space without any feedback of where the lines were supposed to be. If I recall correctly we all settled on 1 fewer lanes than the road “should” have. I do not believe that self driving tech is capable of doing that yet, especially on mixed human/robot roads.
    - renewiltord 6y ago
      The guys who can cover California with AVs will already become extremely wealthy. Maybe the north gets them ten years later, twenty years later, a hundred years later. The economic benefits to local public transit in California alone would be huge. Add in commercial intra-state trucking and you've got a nutty advantage already. Maybe it'll turbo up California's massive economy even more.
    - colejohnson66 6y ago
      Maybe lane marker tracking isn’t the way to go? I’ve always wondered if it would be possible (in the US; through a massive initiative) to just paint lines (or embed something in or on the road) in the center of the lanes and have the cars just follow the lines. How much would that cost?
      - ashtonkem 6y ago
        No paint will solve the problem of snow covering said paint. So you’ll have to embed them. The hardware alone would cost billions of dollars to purchase, and installation would cost either trillions of dollars to rework all the roads now, or decades to install as our road network ages out. Long story short, it’s not feasible.
        colejohnson66 6y ago
        But isn’t that what people said of the National Highway System? That it wasn’t feasible? And yet here we are almost half a century later...
        ashtonkem 6y ago
        I doubt it. Sure, I’m sure there were complaints about the costs, but the value of a massive road network has been known for millennia. Spending a trillion ripping up a perfectly good road network in order to try out a new technology that’ll generate profits for a small number of companies is an insane plan, and genuinely might not work.
  - microcolonel 6y ago
    Not sure what the stats are on this, but I'm pretty sure people don't generally die on the freeway by steering directly into concrete barriers while accelerating.
  - aguyfromnb 6y ago
    >But I think a self driving car could do a lot better. 1 accident every 50,000 miles is not a good record. I don't want 'self-driving' cars on the road that are only marginally better than the worst drivers out there.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

microcolonel 6y ago

> I feel like HN is too skeptical of self driving. Having driven a Tesla for a road trip, I would feel safe letting it do all the work on interstates without the feedback it currently requires. How many times does a Tesla have to actively accelerate and careen into a solid concrete barrier before HN's modicum of skepticism for self driving, particularly Tesla's implementation, is justified?

freepor 6y ago
1/2 as many times as a human does. I've driven about 250,000 miles in my life and had 5 accidents, none with injury. But I think a self driving car could do a lot better.
- ashtonkem 6y ago
  My skepticism of self driving tech is all weather based. Here in LA, I’m confident that a self driving car could do fine; slow traffic (normally), good roads, low precipitation and clear lines make for easy driving. But back when I lived in Colorado I had multiple times when I had to drive on a highway with completely obscured lines, poor weather, and extremely dangerous consequences for failure. I recall one drive in a blizzard where all the cars driving had to negotiate their own space without any feedback of where the lines were supposed to be. If I recall correctly we all settled on 1 fewer lanes than the road “should” have. I do not believe that self driving tech is capable of doing that yet, especially on mixed human/robot roads.
  - renewiltord 6y ago
    The guys who can cover California with AVs will already become extremely wealthy. Maybe the north gets them ten years later, twenty years later, a hundred years later. The economic benefits to local public transit in California alone would be huge. Add in commercial intra-state trucking and you've got a nutty advantage already. Maybe it'll turbo up California's massive economy even more.
  - colejohnson66 6y ago
    Maybe lane marker tracking isn’t the way to go? I’ve always wondered if it would be possible (in the US; through a massive initiative) to just paint lines (or embed something in or on the road) in the center of the lanes and have the cars just follow the lines. How much would that cost?
    - ashtonkem 6y ago
      No paint will solve the problem of snow covering said paint. So you’ll have to embed them. The hardware alone would cost billions of dollars to purchase, and installation would cost either trillions of dollars to rework all the roads now, or decades to install as our road network ages out. Long story short, it’s not feasible.
      - colejohnson66 6y ago
        But isn’t that what people said of the National Highway System? That it wasn’t feasible? And yet here we are almost half a century later...
        ashtonkem 6y ago
        I doubt it. Sure, I’m sure there were complaints about the costs, but the value of a massive road network has been known for millennia. Spending a trillion ripping up a perfectly good road network in order to try out a new technology that’ll generate profits for a small number of companies is an insane plan, and genuinely might not work.
- microcolonel 6y ago
  Not sure what the stats are on this, but I'm pretty sure people don't generally die on the freeway by steering directly into concrete barriers while accelerating.
- aguyfromnb 6y ago
  >But I think a self driving car could do a lot better. 1 accident every 50,000 miles is not a good record. I don't want 'self-driving' cars on the road that are only marginally better than the worst drivers out there.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]