3 ms·

That's why they are now expanding to San Francisco: https://arstechnica.com/cars/2021/05/real-robotaxi-service-gets-a-step-closer-in-san-francisco/ https://ars

That's why they are now expanding to San Francisco: https://arstechnica.com/cars/2021/05/real-robotaxi-service-gets-a-step-closer-in-san-francisco/ https://arstechnica.com/cars/2021/05/real-robotaxi-service-g...

viscanti 5y ago
It's a PR stunt and an attempt to continue to show "progress" so they can keep getting funding. Their current design requires up-to-date ultra high definition 3d mapping, perfect weather conditions, and a minimal amount of traffic weirdness. Maybe 5g gives them a way to keep up to date 3d maps onboard, but even if that works out the data costs and cost to continually re-map the streets makes it so the unit economics don't work. It's not like they just need a few more miles of "learning", the foundation of their entire strategy is flawed and can't scale.
- amacneil 5y ago
  Weather and traffic - fair criticisms. HD Maps - really aren’t as difficult as you’re making them out to be. Most AV companies can update their maps using sensor data from their own fleet. And the cars need to recharge/service at a facility every few hours anyway. So there certainly isn’t any need for 5g or expensive cell data to make HD maps scale.
- Matrixik 5y ago
  It's not in this article but I read it in other on ars that they go to SF because it turns out that they was on too easy roads.
Animats 5y ago
That's encouraging. It's hard, and there's a market. If and when they can eliminate the "safety driver", it's real. DMV has three levels of license for self-driving vehicles. - "Testing with a driver". This has about the same restrictions as a learner's permit - must have a licensed driver onboard, no vehicles over 10,000 lbs, no carrying passengers for hire. Over 50 companies have that license. Uber flunked this and had their license to drive autonomously revoked in 2016. So Uber went to Arizona and killed a pedestrian. Then Arizona suspended their license and Uber stopped. - "Testing without a driver". This is tougher to get. There are specific technical requirements. There are communications requirements. A "law enforcement interaction plan" ("How do we stop this thing?") SAE Level 4 or 5 is required; 3 is not good enough. Operation may be restricted to certain types of roads (freeway, campus) and limited in speed. Eight companies have this license now, which is encouraging. - "Deployment". Only one company has qualified: Nuro, which makes slow-speed shuttle buses. This is the Commercial Drivers License level for self-driving vehicles. DMV has a staged approach. It seems to work. Companies can test, and failures get reported and publicized. Complaints about the California DMV being too restrictive about testing have subsided. Most of the companies that couldn't meet the requirements are gone. There's slow, steady progress. Alphabet/Waymo and GM/Cruise are getting close to deployable systems.

viscanti 5y ago

It's a PR stunt and an attempt to continue to show "progress" so they can keep getting funding. Their current design requires up-to-date ultra high definition 3d mapping, perfect weather conditions, and a minimal amount of traffic weirdness. Maybe 5g gives them a way to keep up to date 3d maps onboard, but even if that works out the data costs and cost to continually re-map the streets makes it so the unit economics don't work. It's not like they just need a few more miles of "learning", the foundation of their entire strategy is flawed and can't scale.

amacneil 5y ago
Weather and traffic - fair criticisms. HD Maps - really aren’t as difficult as you’re making them out to be. Most AV companies can update their maps using sensor data from their own fleet. And the cars need to recharge/service at a facility every few hours anyway. So there certainly isn’t any need for 5g or expensive cell data to make HD maps scale.
Matrixik 5y ago
It's not in this article but I read it in other on ars that they go to SF because it turns out that they was on too easy roads.

Animats 5y ago

That's encouraging. It's hard, and there's a market. If and when they can eliminate the "safety driver", it's real. DMV has three levels of license for self-driving vehicles. - "Testing with a driver". This has about the same restrictions as a learner's permit - must have a licensed driver onboard, no vehicles over 10,000 lbs, no carrying passengers for hire. Over 50 companies have that license. Uber flunked this and had their license to drive autonomously revoked in 2016. So Uber went to Arizona and killed a pedestrian. Then Arizona suspended their license and Uber stopped. - "Testing without a driver". This is tougher to get. There are specific technical requirements. There are communications requirements. A "law enforcement interaction plan" ("How do we stop this thing?") SAE Level 4 or 5 is required; 3 is not good enough. Operation may be restricted to certain types of roads (freeway, campus) and limited in speed. Eight companies have this license now, which is encouraging. - "Deployment". Only one company has qualified: Nuro, which makes slow-speed shuttle buses. This is the Commercial Drivers License level for self-driving vehicles. DMV has a staged approach. It seems to work. Companies can test, and failures get reported and publicized. Complaints about the California DMV being too restrictive about testing have subsided. Most of the companies that couldn't meet the requirements are gone. There's slow, steady progress. Alphabet/Waymo and GM/Cruise are getting close to deployable systems.