3 ms·

>They MUST be perfect for the general public to accept them No they don't, its far from perfect right now yet its available and you can use it right now provid

by matz1 5y ago

>They MUST be perfect for the general public to accept them No they don't, its far from perfect right now yet its available and you can use it right now provided you have money to buy it.

cogman10 5y ago
Incorrect. What you can buy now is driver assist. I'm talking about actual "no driver at the wheel" driving. AFAIK, the closest there is WAYMO, but they are geo-fenced. There's also some fixed route low speed buses out there. However, there's no self driving you can purchase which allows you to, for example, nap while the car is driving.
- matz1 5y ago
  To get to the so called "no driver at the wheel" driving you have to go through what you called "driver assist" stage, its a continuous improvement. So are you saying people accept it in the far from perfect driver stage now but won't accept it when it become so much improved "no driver at the wheel" stage ?
  - cogman10 5y ago
    Correct. I'm saying that the "no driver at the wheel" stage must be flawless. I've seen some claims that it's "Good enough if it's x times better than a human driver" or "can drive n number of miles without an accident". However, both of those are not the metrics to measure. A "no driver at the wheel" package is good enough when it doesn't run over the neighbor's cat or Timmy on the street. Humans today make that mistake all the time, but that's not a mistake a driverless car can make and get away with. Consider, for example, Uber's killed pedestrian. Sure, it was a tough scenario and the driver wasn't paying attention. But the fact of the matter is everyone had the expectation that the Uber car would not hit that pedestrian even if they were really hard to see. Until that happens, nobody will accept "no driver at the wheel" cars... except maybe in tightly controlled routes/geofences. Otherwise, SDC will require a driver to be attentive at the wheel at all times. That is, telsa's FSD is a very long way away from being able to hit that "telsa taxi service" that elon has pitched. I doubt it can make it with the current sensor set (not enough redundancy).
    - matz1 5y ago
      Well see, I personally accept and support far from perfect no driver at wheel car. I doubt I'm a minority.
      - cogman10 5y ago
        You say that now, will you say that when (not if) a driverless car kills a kid or animal that a human wouldn't? Were you ok with Uber's killing?
        matz1 5y ago
        Human kills already, and yet certainly do not want human to be banned for driving. I too expect and accept that some accident caused by driverless car that kills kid/animal (that human wouldn't do) will happen (if not already happen). To expect otherwise will be unrealistic.

by matz1 5y ago

>They MUST be perfect for the general public to accept them No they don't, its far from perfect right now yet its available and you can use it right now provided you have money to buy it.

cogman10 5y ago

Incorrect. What you can buy now is driver assist. I'm talking about actual "no driver at the wheel" driving. AFAIK, the closest there is WAYMO, but they are geo-fenced. There's also some fixed route low speed buses out there. However, there's no self driving you can purchase which allows you to, for example, nap while the car is driving.

matz1 5y ago
To get to the so called "no driver at the wheel" driving you have to go through what you called "driver assist" stage, its a continuous improvement. So are you saying people accept it in the far from perfect driver stage now but won't accept it when it become so much improved "no driver at the wheel" stage ?
- cogman10 5y ago
  Correct. I'm saying that the "no driver at the wheel" stage must be flawless. I've seen some claims that it's "Good enough if it's x times better than a human driver" or "can drive n number of miles without an accident". However, both of those are not the metrics to measure. A "no driver at the wheel" package is good enough when it doesn't run over the neighbor's cat or Timmy on the street. Humans today make that mistake all the time, but that's not a mistake a driverless car can make and get away with. Consider, for example, Uber's killed pedestrian. Sure, it was a tough scenario and the driver wasn't paying attention. But the fact of the matter is everyone had the expectation that the Uber car would not hit that pedestrian even if they were really hard to see. Until that happens, nobody will accept "no driver at the wheel" cars... except maybe in tightly controlled routes/geofences. Otherwise, SDC will require a driver to be attentive at the wheel at all times. That is, telsa's FSD is a very long way away from being able to hit that "telsa taxi service" that elon has pitched. I doubt it can make it with the current sensor set (not enough redundancy).
  - matz1 5y ago
    Well see, I personally accept and support far from perfect no driver at wheel car. I doubt I'm a minority.
    - cogman10 5y ago
      You say that now, will you say that when (not if) a driverless car kills a kid or animal that a human wouldn't? Were you ok with Uber's killing?
      - matz1 5y ago
        Human kills already, and yet certainly do not want human to be banned for driving. I too expect and accept that some accident caused by driverless car that kills kid/animal (that human wouldn't do) will happen (if not already happen). To expect otherwise will be unrealistic.