4 ms·

Attempts to prohibit repairing things is stupid and it is stupid on regulators part to not seeing it progresses. But allowing live-testing auto-drive technolog

by Woodi 5y ago

Attempts to prohibit repairing things is stupid and it is stupid on regulators part to not seeing it progresses. But allowing live-testing auto-drive technology on public roads is beyound that. Police should just pull over anyone who turn this on and is on the move and revoke driver driving license. Simple as that. "Oh, but it works for me..." is not how public security standards are created.

Arnt 5y ago
I think you're holding Tesla to a perhaps unreachable standard here. Before I go on, I'd like to digress and come out as a Waymo fanboi. I've been that ever since I read about a demonstration involving the software developers walking in front of the car, blindfolded. I admire that attitude, I really do. They put their feet where it matters. But back to Tesla. What other than public roads is similar to public roads, in the senses necessary for testing driving capability? I know Waymo tests its software on recordings of public roads, but those recordings were made on public roads too. Maybe Tesla does the same, I don't know one way or the other. It's not an answer, because this approach doesn't avoid public roads, it only extracts more value from each test drive. It would be possible to set up a test area. Maybe rent one of those "towns" the film studios have, and use stunt pedestrians, also from the film studios. I worry that those stunt pedestrians wouldn't be really like pedestrians, though, so this too doesn't replace street tests, with the real variety of real people. These things can supplant public tests. It would be possible to regulate this and say, "software may be used for tests on public tests only when the same version of the same software has been run on one million km of recorded test drives" or such. But as far as I can see, not replace.
- loeg 5y ago
  > I know Waymo tests its software on recordings of public roads, but those recordings were made on public roads too. Recording a human driver on public roads is very different from testing a novel software product on public roads.
  - Arnt 5y ago
    I've been told that Waymo (and before that, Google) recorded those traces using employees in the driver's seat, but mostly with the computer making the decisions, not the human. But suppose it was collected by a human. In that case, the first time the software is run completely (all sensors, all software, everything run together) is in the final production deployment. Is that better than testing the very same software earlier, in a beta setting which is identical to production except that sensor data is collected for the development process?

by Woodi 5y ago

Arnt 5y ago

I think you're holding Tesla to a perhaps unreachable standard here. Before I go on, I'd like to digress and come out as a Waymo fanboi. I've been that ever since I read about a demonstration involving the software developers walking in front of the car, blindfolded. I admire that attitude, I really do. They put their feet where it matters. But back to Tesla. What other than public roads is similar to public roads, in the senses necessary for testing driving capability? I know Waymo tests its software on recordings of public roads, but those recordings were made on public roads too. Maybe Tesla does the same, I don't know one way or the other. It's not an answer, because this approach doesn't avoid public roads, it only extracts more value from each test drive. It would be possible to set up a test area. Maybe rent one of those "towns" the film studios have, and use stunt pedestrians, also from the film studios. I worry that those stunt pedestrians wouldn't be really like pedestrians, though, so this too doesn't replace street tests, with the real variety of real people. These things can supplant public tests. It would be possible to regulate this and say, "software may be used for tests on public tests only when the same version of the same software has been run on one million km of recorded test drives" or such. But as far as I can see, not replace.

loeg 5y ago
> I know Waymo tests its software on recordings of public roads, but those recordings were made on public roads too. Recording a human driver on public roads is very different from testing a novel software product on public roads.
- Arnt 5y ago
  I've been told that Waymo (and before that, Google) recorded those traces using employees in the driver's seat, but mostly with the computer making the decisions, not the human. But suppose it was collected by a human. In that case, the first time the software is run completely (all sensors, all software, everything run together) is in the final production deployment. Is that better than testing the very same software earlier, in a beta setting which is identical to production except that sensor data is collected for the development process?