4 ms·
> Go back a few years and many here were incredulous if anyone suggested we might be looking at decades to have full door-to-door self-driving. As someone who
by 60654 5y ago
> Go back a few years and many here were incredulous if anyone suggested we might be looking at decades to have full door-to-door self-driving.
As someone who has done this kind of push-back here, I can confirm - this place was highly incredulous of, if not downright hostile, to people with experience in AI who were explaining all these were false promises.
Anyone who actually did robotics knew just how much of a pipe dream this is, how slow progress is, and how solving the easy 50% is worth nothing because the real world gets superlinearly difficult. ML made a great jump, but it only solved parts of the problems we needed solving, and so far failed to introduce a bridge to those other parts. But you try telling people, and they won't listen, and now I understand the curse of Cassandra. :)
But I'm reserving special bile for those CEOs and Directors of Research who knew full well that we don't know how to make this stuff, and that most of it is an open research problem that's decades away from productizing - and yet they marketed it anyway, as if it was a done product that's ready to go, and took customers' and investors' money for something that experts knew was very, very, very clearly vaporware.
- ghaff 5y agoI'm not an expert in the area but I listen to experts like John Leonard, Rodney Brooks, and Missy Cummings who don't have a vested interest and I draw conclusions. Trust me. I'd love to have FSD--although it's not without its problems--but I just don't see it in the near future whatever delusional software developers may think. I know why companies like Uber presented themselves as they did. I'm genuinely curious whether Waymo thought they were closer than they were, drank too much of their own Kool-aid, or just lied.
- 60654 5y agoRod Brooks is a great example, he's someone who has done more in robotics, across a range of paradigms, than maybe anyone else in the world - and who has been very candid in his criticisms of promises around full self driving. But it doesn't matter, people choose to believe marketing hucksters instead. :(
- throw0101a 5y ago> and how solving the easy 50% is worth nothing "The first 90 percent of the code accounts for the first 90 percent of the development time. The remaining 10 percent of the code accounts for the other 90 percent of the development time".[1][2] — Tom Cargill, Bell Labs * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ninety–ninety_rule https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ninety–ninety_rule
- tuatoru 5y ago... although in the case of self driving, it's not "the remaining 10 percent of the code", it's more like "the remaining 900 percent of the code". The real world is fractal edge cases.