4 ms·

Waymo self driving is not at all the same as Tesla’s. One is fully driverless and the other requires driver monitoring.

by ra7 3y ago

jjoonathan 3y ago
Yes, but Tesla does have a driver monitoring, so that's the relevant safety number. Nobody, even Tesla, is currently arguing that Tesla FSD is ready for driverless.
- tasty_freeze 3y ago
  You just pointed out that the two driving assists are apples and oranges ... yet it was you who compared Waymo's driverless car total mileage vs Tesla's FSD.
  - jjoonathan 3y ago
    We are talking about safety and risk, not dick measuring the tech stack. Tesla has 150x the miles, which means that for the same risk level they should see 150x the problems. Maybe divide that by 3 to account for highway vs around town. I don't see 50x the number of "Tesla killed my dog" stories as "Waymo killed my dog" stories, so Tesla probably isn't taking egregious risks. What's your heuristic?
simondotau 3y ago
This is correct but misleading. Waymo and Tesla are pursuing strategies so different that attempting to compare them is futile. It's true that within the small geofences in which Waymo operates, their cars are dramatically less likely to come unstuck than a Tesla running FSD beta. On the other hand FSD beta drives on pretty much any public road and not a curated set of pre-driven, pre-mapped, pre-validated streets. Yes there are many geographies where it struggles; there's a cottage industry of people obsessively showing these on YouTube. There are also some areas of the country where FSD beta is utterly rock solid and people routinely drive substantial distances with zero interventions. It's also not entirely accurate to describe Waymo cars as "fully driverless" as they have a team of human employees remotely monitoring the fleet and can remotely operate any vehicle.
- ra7 3y ago
  > It's also not entirely accurate to describe Waymo cars as "fully driverless" as they have a team of human employees remotely monitoring the fleet and can remotely operate any vehicle. This is absolutely not true. Waymo remote agents cannot operate a vehicle. All they can do is answer questions from the vehicle or plot a path to go around if it gets stuck. They cannot make any safety critical interventions. Waymo has talked about this many times. It’s fully driverless because the vehicle is responsible for attaining minimal risk condition all on its own. This is how other L4 companies like Cruise works too. Zoox has a good explanation on how their teleguidance works: https://youtube.com/watch?v=NKQHuutVx78 https://youtube.com/watch?v=NKQHuutVx78
  - simondotau 3y ago
    “Plot a path to go” is controlling the vehicle remotely.
    - ra7 3y ago
      Nope, that’s misleading. Still no “control” over the vehicle because the vehicle is executing the move or it can ignore the instructions. It’s assisting the vehicle. They don’t have the ability to joystick the car.
      - simondotau 3y ago
        Your point is that the Waymo operator isn't really in control because the vehicle can ignore instructions; the on-board computer won't allow the remote operator's instructions to result in a collision. If I attempt to drive my own car into a brick wall, the on-board computer will defy my instructions as best it can too. By your definition, I'm not in control of my car just like Waymo operators aren't. Fact is, a Waymo operator can take enough control of the vehicle to be considered in control of it. It doesn't matter if control comes in the form of a steering wheel or a joystick or drawing vectors on a map. Control is control, whether it's direct, indirect, or funnelled through a governor. Waymo operators can intervene and direct the car as needed.

Waymo self driving is not at all the same as Tesla’s. One is fully driverless and the other requires driver monitoring.

by ra7 3y ago

Waymo self driving is not at all the same as Tesla’s. One is fully driverless and the other requires driver monitoring.

Yes, but Tesla does have a driver monitoring, so that's the relevant safety number. Nobody, even Tesla, is currently arguing that Tesla FSD is ready for driverless.

tasty_freeze 3y ago
You just pointed out that the two driving assists are apples and oranges ... yet it was you who compared Waymo's driverless car total mileage vs Tesla's FSD.
- jjoonathan 3y ago
  We are talking about safety and risk, not dick measuring the tech stack. Tesla has 150x the miles, which means that for the same risk level they should see 150x the problems. Maybe divide that by 3 to account for highway vs around town. I don't see 50x the number of "Tesla killed my dog" stories as "Waymo killed my dog" stories, so Tesla probably isn't taking egregious risks. What's your heuristic?

simondotau 3y ago

This is correct but misleading. Waymo and Tesla are pursuing strategies so different that attempting to compare them is futile. It's true that within the small geofences in which Waymo operates, their cars are dramatically less likely to come unstuck than a Tesla running FSD beta. On the other hand FSD beta drives on pretty much any public road and not a curated set of pre-driven, pre-mapped, pre-validated streets. Yes there are many geographies where it struggles; there's a cottage industry of people obsessively showing these on YouTube. There are also some areas of the country where FSD beta is utterly rock solid and people routinely drive substantial distances with zero interventions. It's also not entirely accurate to describe Waymo cars as "fully driverless" as they have a team of human employees remotely monitoring the fleet and can remotely operate any vehicle.

ra7 3y ago
> It's also not entirely accurate to describe Waymo cars as "fully driverless" as they have a team of human employees remotely monitoring the fleet and can remotely operate any vehicle. This is absolutely not true. Waymo remote agents cannot operate a vehicle. All they can do is answer questions from the vehicle or plot a path to go around if it gets stuck. They cannot make any safety critical interventions. Waymo has talked about this many times. It’s fully driverless because the vehicle is responsible for attaining minimal risk condition all on its own. This is how other L4 companies like Cruise works too. Zoox has a good explanation on how their teleguidance works: https://youtube.com/watch?v=NKQHuutVx78 https://youtube.com/watch?v=NKQHuutVx78
- simondotau 3y ago
  “Plot a path to go” is controlling the vehicle remotely.
  - ra7 3y ago
    Nope, that’s misleading. Still no “control” over the vehicle because the vehicle is executing the move or it can ignore the instructions. It’s assisting the vehicle. They don’t have the ability to joystick the car.
    - simondotau 3y ago
      Your point is that the Waymo operator isn't really in control because the vehicle can ignore instructions; the on-board computer won't allow the remote operator's instructions to result in a collision. If I attempt to drive my own car into a brick wall, the on-board computer will defy my instructions as best it can too. By your definition, I'm not in control of my car just like Waymo operators aren't. Fact is, a Waymo operator can take enough control of the vehicle to be considered in control of it. It doesn't matter if control comes in the form of a steering wheel or a joystick or drawing vectors on a map. Control is control, whether it's direct, indirect, or funnelled through a governor. Waymo operators can intervene and direct the car as needed.