6 ms·
> With fully driverless operation starting in SF (and with several years in Phoenix) As I understand it, they will only operate within a "grid". In other words
by mbesto 5y ago
> With fully driverless operation starting in SF (and with several years in Phoenix)
As I understand it, they will only operate within a "grid". In other words, its use case will be limited to essentially a customized route city bus.
> widely rolled out within ten years seems very plausible.
Define "widely". We are decades away from a driverless car driving in snow.
- jefftk 5y ago> Define "widely". We are decades away from a driverless car driving in snow. I agree snow is a lot harder (I don't think it's decades, though). But the cases moritonal brought up mostly don't require that.
- jslaby 5y agoOr black ice.. hitting the brakes and seeing how far you slide is the only test to determine safety, from my experience.
- aranchelk 5y agoWith copious sensor data and individual wheel control, I bet one could devise a more elegant solution.
- Dylan16807 5y agoIs that hard for a computer to do? The mere fact that it won't panic on black ice is already a huge advantage. And it will have very detailed feedback to and from the traction control systems.
- moritonal 5y agoOddly enough from what I've seen when it snows I'd imagine a computer's ability to simulate a multi-car situation in snow _vastly_ outmatches your normal humans.
- mantas 5y agoWhat if sensors are covered in snow? Parktronics routinely get covered by snow/slush/ice when driving.
- 300bps 5y agoMy car’s visual sensors (i.e. my eyes) are often blocked by snow and ice. When that happens I hit a button to turn on the defroster that then gets rid of the snow and ice. Could they use a similar system?
- mbesto 5y agoWhat do they do while it defrosts? Sit there?
- tuatoru 5y agoAnd if the defroster fails, like many I've seen? Phone for help?
- Dylan16807 5y agoSure! Humans get snowed in sometimes too.
- hedora 5y agoIf only there were some sort of "wind shield" to protect the sensor clusters. Can I patent that?
- tablespoon 5y ago> Oddly enough from what I've seen when it snows I'd imagine a computer's ability to simulate a multi-car situation in snow _vastly_ outmatches your normal humans. What's the basis for your imagining? Whenever I read some strong "computer > human" statement like that, I can't help but think it's substantially based on science fiction (which can make technology work fantastically well because it's not real, e.g. like Six Million Dollar Man vs actual prosthetic limbs). Also, have you heard about the time I was driving on the highway in winter weather, and my adaptive cruise control would stop working every few dozen miles because I had to get out and scrape ice off the sensor?
- warcher 5y agoJoke's on you, we're getting rid of snow!
- _carbyau_ 5y agoI had to laugh or I'd cry. :-)
- minwcnt5 5y agoNah, your understanding is incorrect. I've used it in Phoenix and it goes places a bus wouldn't like residential culdesacs and parking lots (whithin the geofence).
- airstrike 5y ago> like residential culdesacs and parking lots Literally the two easiest places it could go into
- treesprite82 5y agoLower stakes because of the speed, but a lot of special cases. Higher chance of pedestrians and parked cars in the road for both. Parking lots will have a lot of cars moving in atypical ways, and markings aren't as standardized as on roads.
- airstrike 5y agoSure, but at 5mph everything is easier
- dane-pgp 5y agoSure a computer can beat an expert human at chess, but get back to me when it can beat an expert go player.
- airstrike 5y agoSelf-driving is not even on the same scale of complexity as a board game. The latter is an inherently digital problem, easy to parse and not played in “real time”
- dane-pgp 5y ago> The latter is an inherently digital problem, easy to parse and not played in “real time” So people should have been able to correctly predict how easy it would be for a computer to master go, right?