6 ms·

Yes they matter very much sometimes. A CEO like Elon with a very large depth of understanding of this problem space is going to be able to allocate resources mu

by mcot2 6y ago

Yes they matter very much sometimes. A CEO like Elon with a very large depth of understanding of this problem space is going to be able to allocate resources much better than someone without any AI experience. There are many many many dead ends in this space and you need to be able to experiment and pivot quickly which is what Tesla is doing. Waymo is stuck in the mud.

mlyle 6y ago
Waymo actually has level 4 autonomy out there and revenue passengers, and is slowly inching out progress and confidence. Tesla ... Tesla is nowhere near that, and is just doing stuff that scares me.
- mcot2 6y ago
  The stuff that scares you may be the beginings of the technology thats actually needed to get to full L5. We just don’t know yet so anyone that is certain on the internet I would be skeptical of. The bet Elon is making is on pure vision which is a much different approach than Waymo and Cruise are taking.
  - mlyle 6y ago
    It might be. But I find it difficult to believe that having fewer sensors makes things easier. I also just don't think the Tesla cameras have enough angular resolution to perform a lot of scenarios safely, like detecting a much faster vehicle in a short merge. (Note Tesla relies upon the front-facing radars quite a bit, too, so it's not really pure vision).
    - dawnerd 6y ago
      Elon said they’re not going to need the radars going forward. I guess that makes sense if vision gets good enough but they’re going to run into issues like you said if camera placements and poor visibility. They should have stuck cameras facing the left/right from the furthest corners of the car so it can see around corners without inching into the street. But who knows, it seems like they’ve made good progress as is so well see. I don’t understand the people that think they’re never going to upgrade the camera suite though, cybertruck and the semi already have a new camera layout.
      - mlyle 6y ago
        > I don’t understand the people that think they’re never going to upgrade the camera suite though Well, they've committed an awful lot to current FSD customers that I think will be difficult to deliver upon with the current camera suite. I think LIDAR is a huge advantage. There's the direct benefit: you really know exactly where things are. But secondarily, you have ground truth near-perfect range data to use in training your vision system.
    - mcot2 6y ago
      The next beta is not going to use radar. Fewer sensors is much better for Tesla since they need aerodynamics and less power consumption for more vehicle range. Remember they are making a fully integrated product from the start, not bolt-on technology. We don’t yet know the limits of the pure vision approach. Elon is very confident in it and I want to see where it goes. Your comments about resolution may or may not matter.
      - mlyle 6y ago
        > The next beta is not going to use radar. I'll believe it when I see it, no matter what recent statements have been. > Fewer sensors is much better for Tesla since they need aerodynamics and less power consumption for more vehicle range. Automotive radars use like 10W. The least your car is using while driving is like 5000W. This may not be the best place to save power-- getting heat pumps on more vehicles and better ones than the present one would make a far bigger difference. > Your comments about resolution may or may not matter. If you can't see a car that will hit you when you commit to merging on a short merge, it is a slight problem.
- echelon 6y ago
  Longbets 20 years $5000 that we won't have driverless cars on real roads and infra carrying 30% or more of human rider miles. Waymo is going to get canned or pivot to a new concept, like bus rapid transit on closed loop systems. This tech has to execute in the six nines or more safety margin, and it won't. You have to solve AGI first. You can tell by the exits that this org isn't doing well. Tesla won't solve this problem either, but they've got a product that sells.
  - mlyle 6y ago
    > Longbets 20 years $5000 that we won't have driverless cars on real roads and infra carrying 30% or more of human rider miles. That's a completely safe bet. US fleet turnover is >15 years. If it were 100% capable and relatively cheap today, you'd barely hit that milestone. > Waymo is going to get canned or pivot to a new concept, like bus rapid transit on closed loop systems. I don't think so.
    - echelon 6y ago
      > That's a completely safe bet. US fleet turnover is >15 years. If it were 100% capable and relatively cheap today, you'd barely hit that milestone. If driverless cars are as revolutionary as proponents claim, fleet turnover would happen much faster.
- Geee 6y ago
  Tesla's cars can drive everywhere (although not always perfectly), even in unfamiliar situations, while Waymo can drive only on a very small geofenced area with restricted routes within the area. Waymo mispresents their performance by having selected only those routes that they can drive in. It's the oldest trick in the book of cheating. Waymo is nowhere near level 4 on all roads. Waymo hasn't been able to expand their drivable area in years. This is their coverage map: https://i.redd.it/yc80awv2o3z51.png https://i.redd.it/yc80awv2o3z51.png
  - mlyle 6y ago
    Watch this entire video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uClWlVCwHsI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uClWlVCwHsI Tesla would kill you half the time making this unprotected left turn. Waymo can make unprotected left turns and have never killed or injured anyone or even bent metal in this situation. :P It's not a particularly challenging left turn. And the goal is to kill you less than .0001% of the time making left turns. Yes, Waymo tries to avoid them in route planning, but it still takes them if necessary.
    - Geee 6y ago
      I have seen that. That is a particular edge case for some reason, which will be fixed soon. Nothing to worry about. Because Tesla's are able to drive everywhere, there's way more ways for it to fail.
      - mlyle 6y ago
        So, you believe in "the next update", we'll go from ~50% reliability on a contended, unprotected left turn to 99.999+%?
        Geee 6y ago
        I didn't say "the next update". Maybe a couple of updates. However, the next update, which is v9 and should be out this month, will be a major one.
- oldgradstudent 6y ago
  > revenue passengers Seriously? At this point, the total revenue they've collected so far still hasn't covered Levandowski's $125M bonus, not to mention anything else.
  - mlyle 6y ago
    A) It's further along than anyone else, and B) it's a critical milestone. People are willing to pay for the experience and the company is able to provide a service for money without drivers to those not pledged to silence. Yes, profitability isn't here yet, nor have they recovered development costs to date. But that is not what was asserted. Instead, they are to (limited) market, which is a milestone.
    - oldgradstudent 6y ago
      It's not that they're not profitable. It's that their revenues are negligible compare to their expenses. Their "revenue-generating service" is a PR stunt.

by mcot2 6y ago

mlyle 6y ago

Waymo actually has level 4 autonomy out there and revenue passengers, and is slowly inching out progress and confidence. Tesla ... Tesla is nowhere near that, and is just doing stuff that scares me.

mcot2 6y ago
The stuff that scares you may be the beginings of the technology thats actually needed to get to full L5. We just don’t know yet so anyone that is certain on the internet I would be skeptical of. The bet Elon is making is on pure vision which is a much different approach than Waymo and Cruise are taking.
- mlyle 6y ago
  It might be. But I find it difficult to believe that having fewer sensors makes things easier. I also just don't think the Tesla cameras have enough angular resolution to perform a lot of scenarios safely, like detecting a much faster vehicle in a short merge. (Note Tesla relies upon the front-facing radars quite a bit, too, so it's not really pure vision).
  - dawnerd 6y ago
    Elon said they’re not going to need the radars going forward. I guess that makes sense if vision gets good enough but they’re going to run into issues like you said if camera placements and poor visibility. They should have stuck cameras facing the left/right from the furthest corners of the car so it can see around corners without inching into the street. But who knows, it seems like they’ve made good progress as is so well see. I don’t understand the people that think they’re never going to upgrade the camera suite though, cybertruck and the semi already have a new camera layout.
    - mlyle 6y ago
      > I don’t understand the people that think they’re never going to upgrade the camera suite though Well, they've committed an awful lot to current FSD customers that I think will be difficult to deliver upon with the current camera suite. I think LIDAR is a huge advantage. There's the direct benefit: you really know exactly where things are. But secondarily, you have ground truth near-perfect range data to use in training your vision system.
  - mcot2 6y ago
    The next beta is not going to use radar. Fewer sensors is much better for Tesla since they need aerodynamics and less power consumption for more vehicle range. Remember they are making a fully integrated product from the start, not bolt-on technology. We don’t yet know the limits of the pure vision approach. Elon is very confident in it and I want to see where it goes. Your comments about resolution may or may not matter.
    - mlyle 6y ago
      > The next beta is not going to use radar. I'll believe it when I see it, no matter what recent statements have been. > Fewer sensors is much better for Tesla since they need aerodynamics and less power consumption for more vehicle range. Automotive radars use like 10W. The least your car is using while driving is like 5000W. This may not be the best place to save power-- getting heat pumps on more vehicles and better ones than the present one would make a far bigger difference. > Your comments about resolution may or may not matter. If you can't see a car that will hit you when you commit to merging on a short merge, it is a slight problem.
echelon 6y ago
Longbets 20 years $5000 that we won't have driverless cars on real roads and infra carrying 30% or more of human rider miles. Waymo is going to get canned or pivot to a new concept, like bus rapid transit on closed loop systems. This tech has to execute in the six nines or more safety margin, and it won't. You have to solve AGI first. You can tell by the exits that this org isn't doing well. Tesla won't solve this problem either, but they've got a product that sells.
- mlyle 6y ago
  > Longbets 20 years $5000 that we won't have driverless cars on real roads and infra carrying 30% or more of human rider miles. That's a completely safe bet. US fleet turnover is >15 years. If it were 100% capable and relatively cheap today, you'd barely hit that milestone. > Waymo is going to get canned or pivot to a new concept, like bus rapid transit on closed loop systems. I don't think so.
  - echelon 6y ago
    > That's a completely safe bet. US fleet turnover is >15 years. If it were 100% capable and relatively cheap today, you'd barely hit that milestone. If driverless cars are as revolutionary as proponents claim, fleet turnover would happen much faster.
Geee 6y ago
Tesla's cars can drive everywhere (although not always perfectly), even in unfamiliar situations, while Waymo can drive only on a very small geofenced area with restricted routes within the area. Waymo mispresents their performance by having selected only those routes that they can drive in. It's the oldest trick in the book of cheating. Waymo is nowhere near level 4 on all roads. Waymo hasn't been able to expand their drivable area in years. This is their coverage map: https://i.redd.it/yc80awv2o3z51.png https://i.redd.it/yc80awv2o3z51.png
- mlyle 6y ago
  Watch this entire video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uClWlVCwHsI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uClWlVCwHsI Tesla would kill you half the time making this unprotected left turn. Waymo can make unprotected left turns and have never killed or injured anyone or even bent metal in this situation. :P It's not a particularly challenging left turn. And the goal is to kill you less than .0001% of the time making left turns. Yes, Waymo tries to avoid them in route planning, but it still takes them if necessary.
  - Geee 6y ago
    I have seen that. That is a particular edge case for some reason, which will be fixed soon. Nothing to worry about. Because Tesla's are able to drive everywhere, there's way more ways for it to fail.
    - mlyle 6y ago
      So, you believe in "the next update", we'll go from ~50% reliability on a contended, unprotected left turn to 99.999+%?
      - Geee 6y ago
        I didn't say "the next update". Maybe a couple of updates. However, the next update, which is v9 and should be out this month, will be a major one.
oldgradstudent 6y ago
> revenue passengers Seriously? At this point, the total revenue they've collected so far still hasn't covered Levandowski's $125M bonus, not to mention anything else.
- mlyle 6y ago
  A) It's further along than anyone else, and B) it's a critical milestone. People are willing to pay for the experience and the company is able to provide a service for money without drivers to those not pledged to silence. Yes, profitability isn't here yet, nor have they recovered development costs to date. But that is not what was asserted. Instead, they are to (limited) market, which is a milestone.
  - oldgradstudent 6y ago
    It's not that they're not profitable. It's that their revenues are negligible compare to their expenses. Their "revenue-generating service" is a PR stunt.