6 ms·

Fully self driving cars are far further off in the future than most in the sector would publicly admit. In controlled environments there’s a lot of potential to

by JCM9 5y ago

Fully self driving cars are far further off in the future than most in the sector would publicly admit. In controlled environments there’s a lot of potential today and things like self driving trams at airports are nothing new. But self driving in the “real world” mixed with humans and all the crazy one-off things that happen in such scenarios is not something that will happen at scale anytime soon. There are still far too many edge cases to work out and for all the amazing things that “AI and ML” can do, handling edge cases is something this technology is actually quite terrible at relative to humans.

paxys 5y ago
I'll go a step further and say they aren't just further off but impossible to achieve until someone can reasonably prove otherwise. We simply aren't going to see cars without a steering wheel and manual controls (i.e. Level 5 automation) for general purpose use on public streets in our lifetime.
- somewhereoutth 5y ago
  Yep. I would argue that driving is AI complete - in the sense that only true Artificial General Intelligence can do it, and so do everything else to. Perhaps this is because it requires cooperating with other General Intelligences (i.e. us) in an open world.
  - smorgusofborg 5y ago
    I'm still mystified as to why no country has switched over to ultra-light rail. The costs of asphalt projects seem to dwarf the cost of doing anything reasonable and leave AI as an exercise for the over confident.
- kobalsky 5y ago
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tBJ0GvsQeak https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tBJ0GvsQeak can't you get a ride in phoenix like today with waymo? or is not open to the public? I mean I understand that their AI is not perfect but it doesn't seem like a pipe dream
Andrew_nenakhov 5y ago
Average human is actually quite terrible in driving cars, as evidenced by the global death toll numbering in dosens of thousands every year. Even halving this number would be a win, losing a lot of people to such edge cases. However, the nature of the problem would not allow for it, because every death from a self-driving car will get excessive coverage and public outrage, and people will prefer losing far more people to human errors than fewer to computer errors.
- rurp 5y ago
  All the more reason for Tesla to avoid sleazy sales tactics like calling adaptive cruise control "self driving", and claiming that cars will be able to drive themselves coast to coast before 2020. People _might_ overreact to deaths from true self driving cars, but we don't know that yet because such vehicles don't exist.
- drfuchs 5y ago
  The annual US death toll alone is dozens of thousands; the global number is well over a million.
- albertgoeswoof 5y ago
  I don’t think that’s the case- I don’t think there’s any evidence that self driving cars are better drivers than human drivers in real world conditions. If this were only a human psychology problem, someone would just dump a fleet of self driving cars on the road and prove they have the tech. The rewards are too good to ignore and surpass any potential fine/regulation, if the tech is good enough. But it’s not there yet, it might never get there. We’re so far off general AI it’s unreal, e.g. a human can drive a car with a single eye open, and one hand on the wheel, and another on a throttle- all from the drivers seat. Even with sensors and data coming in from all over the car, AI can’t manage it.
  - ksdale 5y ago
    I didn't take the parent to be saying that self-driving is better, just that humans are really surprisingly bad, and that's the bar we should be measuring against, not an ideal world where no one dies in traffic accidents.
Manuel_D 5y ago
Full self-driving cars limited to highways is probably a much more reasonable goal. A lot of the issues seem to be with intersections and pedestrian crossings - things that are absent on highways. Plus, infrastructure to assist self-driving cars like beacons on off ramps could feasibly be added.
- tiahura 5y ago
  "infrastructure to assist self-driving cars" That would seem to be a good investment for the industry as a whole, yet the trade group doesn't seem very visible. Possibly the sort of thing that should have been in BBB.
throwaway5752 5y ago
Small, route-constrained mass transit vehicles would solve 80% of this with 20% of the cost. We could call them trollies or buses.
- avalys 5y ago
  And 10% of the convenience, comfort and utility of having your own car. Cities already have buses. Rural areas don’t want them.
  - floxy 5y ago
    Why don't we have an Uber for buses yet? Has this been tried anywhere? Not necessarily a for-profit company, but an app that people could use that would offer potentially better routes / trip times. So the bus wouldn't have to hit locations where no-one was getting picked up / dropped off, etc..
    - bryanlarsen 5y ago
      It has been tried in a few places. Here's one: https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/uber-lyft-ride-hailing-on-demand-public-transit-1.4842699 https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/uber-lyft-ride-hailing-on-d...
    - janfoeh 5y ago
      I'm using these a couple of times a month: https://www.moia.io/en https://www.moia.io/en
  - dml2135 5y ago
    I think that's the key. If self-driving cars ever reach a level of ubiquity, it's going to be on large, open roads and highways. Urban areas will still require a human driving.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - falcolas 5y ago
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
me_me_me 5y ago
> Fully self driving cars are far further off in the future than most in the sector would publicly admit. Full self driving have NOT been solved for highways in a desert. This is literally the easiest real world scenario imaginable. Highly and strictly regulated environment, and no obscurities like snow happening. I don't think there is a hope we will get any close to self drive with current technology. Is the sudden object in front of me a block of concrete that fell of or stray page from newspaper floating by on a wind gust? Hard bake or ignore it? We cant possibly capture all edge cases of real life. You need systems that have cognitive capabilities to deal with real life Or optionally different type of transportation that is not so complex to navigate and understand. There are already fully automated metro lines. Maybe solution is to change the problem itself.

by JCM9 5y ago

paxys 5y ago

I'll go a step further and say they aren't just further off but impossible to achieve until someone can reasonably prove otherwise. We simply aren't going to see cars without a steering wheel and manual controls (i.e. Level 5 automation) for general purpose use on public streets in our lifetime.

somewhereoutth 5y ago
Yep. I would argue that driving is AI complete - in the sense that only true Artificial General Intelligence can do it, and so do everything else to. Perhaps this is because it requires cooperating with other General Intelligences (i.e. us) in an open world.
- smorgusofborg 5y ago
  I'm still mystified as to why no country has switched over to ultra-light rail. The costs of asphalt projects seem to dwarf the cost of doing anything reasonable and leave AI as an exercise for the over confident.
kobalsky 5y ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tBJ0GvsQeak https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tBJ0GvsQeak can't you get a ride in phoenix like today with waymo? or is not open to the public? I mean I understand that their AI is not perfect but it doesn't seem like a pipe dream

Andrew_nenakhov 5y ago

Average human is actually quite terrible in driving cars, as evidenced by the global death toll numbering in dosens of thousands every year. Even halving this number would be a win, losing a lot of people to such edge cases. However, the nature of the problem would not allow for it, because every death from a self-driving car will get excessive coverage and public outrage, and people will prefer losing far more people to human errors than fewer to computer errors.

rurp 5y ago
All the more reason for Tesla to avoid sleazy sales tactics like calling adaptive cruise control "self driving", and claiming that cars will be able to drive themselves coast to coast before 2020. People _might_ overreact to deaths from true self driving cars, but we don't know that yet because such vehicles don't exist.
drfuchs 5y ago
The annual US death toll alone is dozens of thousands; the global number is well over a million.
albertgoeswoof 5y ago
I don’t think that’s the case- I don’t think there’s any evidence that self driving cars are better drivers than human drivers in real world conditions. If this were only a human psychology problem, someone would just dump a fleet of self driving cars on the road and prove they have the tech. The rewards are too good to ignore and surpass any potential fine/regulation, if the tech is good enough. But it’s not there yet, it might never get there. We’re so far off general AI it’s unreal, e.g. a human can drive a car with a single eye open, and one hand on the wheel, and another on a throttle- all from the drivers seat. Even with sensors and data coming in from all over the car, AI can’t manage it.
- ksdale 5y ago
  I didn't take the parent to be saying that self-driving is better, just that humans are really surprisingly bad, and that's the bar we should be measuring against, not an ideal world where no one dies in traffic accidents.

Manuel_D 5y ago

Full self-driving cars limited to highways is probably a much more reasonable goal. A lot of the issues seem to be with intersections and pedestrian crossings - things that are absent on highways. Plus, infrastructure to assist self-driving cars like beacons on off ramps could feasibly be added.

tiahura 5y ago
"infrastructure to assist self-driving cars" That would seem to be a good investment for the industry as a whole, yet the trade group doesn't seem very visible. Possibly the sort of thing that should have been in BBB.

throwaway5752 5y ago

Small, route-constrained mass transit vehicles would solve 80% of this with 20% of the cost. We could call them trollies or buses.

avalys 5y ago
And 10% of the convenience, comfort and utility of having your own car. Cities already have buses. Rural areas don’t want them.
- floxy 5y ago
  Why don't we have an Uber for buses yet? Has this been tried anywhere? Not necessarily a for-profit company, but an app that people could use that would offer potentially better routes / trip times. So the bus wouldn't have to hit locations where no-one was getting picked up / dropped off, etc..
  - bryanlarsen 5y ago
    It has been tried in a few places. Here's one: https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/uber-lyft-ride-hailing-on-demand-public-transit-1.4842699 https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/uber-lyft-ride-hailing-on-d...
  - janfoeh 5y ago
    I'm using these a couple of times a month: https://www.moia.io/en https://www.moia.io/en
- dml2135 5y ago
  I think that's the key. If self-driving cars ever reach a level of ubiquity, it's going to be on large, open roads and highways. Urban areas will still require a human driving.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- falcolas 5y ago

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

me_me_me 5y ago

> Fully self driving cars are far further off in the future than most in the sector would publicly admit. Full self driving have NOT been solved for highways in a desert. This is literally the easiest real world scenario imaginable. Highly and strictly regulated environment, and no obscurities like snow happening. I don't think there is a hope we will get any close to self drive with current technology. Is the sudden object in front of me a block of concrete that fell of or stray page from newspaper floating by on a wind gust? Hard bake or ignore it? We cant possibly capture all edge cases of real life. You need systems that have cognitive capabilities to deal with real life Or optionally different type of transportation that is not so complex to navigate and understand. There are already fully automated metro lines. Maybe solution is to change the problem itself.