4 ms·
Just like reliability SLAs, I suspect every extra nine requires an exponential increase in investment. My armchair-know-nothing assessment is we're maybe at 90%
by alpha_squared 5y ago
Just like reliability SLAs, I suspect every extra nine requires an exponential increase in investment. My armchair-know-nothing assessment is we're maybe at 90% coverage* right now, with maybe 10x all investment up until this point needed to reach 99%; then 10x that to reach 99.9%. Even at 99.9%, though, a failure scenario still threatens injuring or killing 0.1% of drivers (350,000 motorists for US alone).
* Coverage as a percentage of scenario's occurrence over the total duration of driving. For example, over 90% of a long-distance trip will be spent on a highway following traffic patterns within a lane with the occasional lane change.
- walshemj 5y agoWould not they detect the gates where down ? or are there still that many crossings without gates in the USA
- ecpottinger 5y agoThe place I talked about had no gates, after the accident they added gates.
- bentcorner 5y agoGates are only a suggestion - signals/gates malfunction so often you can find compilation videos of them on youtube.
- rurp 5y agoWhere I live in the Southwest US there are many crossings without gates. I'd say very few of the ones outside of well populated areas have them.
- maxerickson 5y agoWe regularize traffic more than your estimate though. Like 99.99% of the 300 mile drive I took yesterday was sitting in a lane. The hardest part was that Google hadn't mapped a service drive, so it thought the adjacent service drive was the best route (which would be addressed pretty fast if you were trying to deploy self driving service in that area). I don't think we get to level 5 very soon, but level 4 cars will have the ability to go lots of places pretty soon. If I overestimate driveway distances from yesterday, it's like 99.966% lane miles. There was some construction, but it was already well marked for human drivers.