6 ms·

> they still haven’t clocked a single driverless mile. This seems maybe technically true but extremely misleading. There is of course always a driver in the ca

> they still haven’t clocked a single driverless mile. This seems maybe technically true but extremely misleading. There is of course always a driver in the car, but they have absolutely clocked many miles with a driver in the car not needing to intervene.

Waterluvian 3y ago
I think what's interesting is how many end-to-end trips, or at least meaningfully distinct segments (eg. the highway portion, the city portion, etc.) driven without any intervention. And how repeatable that is. You could start me in goal for the Leafs and I bet I could clock many hours of scoreless game time in a season.
JAlexoid 3y ago
As someone with a Tesla FSD beta - the "not needing to intervene" is a little bit of a stretch. I would describe it as a system for rapid reaction and lane assist. It's very... very poor at self driving, outside of an empty interstate.
- idopmstuff 3y ago
  Very much depends where you are. It can handle most of CA well in my experience (and from a lot of videos posted on Twitter).
nrki 3y ago
"Technically true" == true "Always a driver in the car" != driverless You often see waymos cruising around sans driver. That's real driverless.
- andsoitis 3y ago
  > You often see waymos cruising around sans driver. That's real driverless. Very cool. Where? I don’t think I’ve ever seen it anywhere in LA.
  - ra7 3y ago
    They are on a promotional tour in a LA, giving rides in specific neighborhoods. Other than that, they operate all over SF and Phoenix.
  - porphyra 3y ago
    Waymos offer truly driverless rides in San Francisco. I just took one last week, without anyone in the driver seat. It's great!
  - fragmede 3y ago
    On December 17th, they'll be at the Original Farmers Market in WeHo from noon til 5pm. https://waymo.com/tour/#schedule https://waymo.com/tour/#schedule Join the waitlist asap so you can get access when they launch in socal.
michaelt 3y ago
Eh, driving the 99.99% of miles where nothing happens is easy. It's the 0.01% of miles where an empty carrier bag blows across the road, or a fire truck is stopped in your lane, or a kid crosses the road without looking, that makes self driving hard.
- ejb999 3y ago
  as it does for real people - especially those that are on their phones while they drive. FSD doesn't need to be perfect, it just needs to be consistently better than the typical/average driver and cause or get into less accidents than real people do. That day is coming - it may be TSLA, it might be someone else, but sooner or later you won't even be able to afford the insurance for a car that is powered by a human if FSD provably is safer in agrregate.
  - idopmstuff 3y ago
    Yep, this is it. It's why it's such a shame about the Cruise incident in SF - people act like it's shocking that an autonomous vehicle didn't do the correct thing when a human driven vehicle launched a person into their windshield. Of course it's terrible that the car drove over the person (and unacceptable that Cruise tried to conceal that fact), but in terms of thinking about the safety of the vehicle you really have to ask yourself whether humans would be able to handle that situation well. Would I definitely react in the optimal way if a person hit my windshield? I wouldn't bet on it, and I would say there is a nontrivial likelihood that I would accidentally step on the gas and run over the person. That's just the nature of dealing with a truly one in a million situation that I'm totally unprepared for (just as the autonomous car was totally unprepared for it).
ra7 3y ago
It's not misleading. It's the true test of L4+ self driving — do you require a driver ready to intervene or not?
minwcnt5 3y ago
There's a massive difference between needing a driver every x miles and never. Waymo has served more than 700,000 rides this year. FSD cannot drive intervention free 700,000+ times in a row (on many different routes), I doubt it can even get close.

Waterluvian 3y ago

I think what's interesting is how many end-to-end trips, or at least meaningfully distinct segments (eg. the highway portion, the city portion, etc.) driven without any intervention. And how repeatable that is. You could start me in goal for the Leafs and I bet I could clock many hours of scoreless game time in a season.

JAlexoid 3y ago

As someone with a Tesla FSD beta - the "not needing to intervene" is a little bit of a stretch. I would describe it as a system for rapid reaction and lane assist. It's very... very poor at self driving, outside of an empty interstate.

idopmstuff 3y ago
Very much depends where you are. It can handle most of CA well in my experience (and from a lot of videos posted on Twitter).

nrki 3y ago

"Technically true" == true "Always a driver in the car" != driverless You often see waymos cruising around sans driver. That's real driverless.

andsoitis 3y ago
> You often see waymos cruising around sans driver. That's real driverless. Very cool. Where? I don’t think I’ve ever seen it anywhere in LA.
- ra7 3y ago
  They are on a promotional tour in a LA, giving rides in specific neighborhoods. Other than that, they operate all over SF and Phoenix.
- porphyra 3y ago
  Waymos offer truly driverless rides in San Francisco. I just took one last week, without anyone in the driver seat. It's great!
- fragmede 3y ago
  On December 17th, they'll be at the Original Farmers Market in WeHo from noon til 5pm. https://waymo.com/tour/#schedule https://waymo.com/tour/#schedule Join the waitlist asap so you can get access when they launch in socal.

michaelt 3y ago

Eh, driving the 99.99% of miles where nothing happens is easy. It's the 0.01% of miles where an empty carrier bag blows across the road, or a fire truck is stopped in your lane, or a kid crosses the road without looking, that makes self driving hard.

ejb999 3y ago
as it does for real people - especially those that are on their phones while they drive. FSD doesn't need to be perfect, it just needs to be consistently better than the typical/average driver and cause or get into less accidents than real people do. That day is coming - it may be TSLA, it might be someone else, but sooner or later you won't even be able to afford the insurance for a car that is powered by a human if FSD provably is safer in agrregate.
- idopmstuff 3y ago
  Yep, this is it. It's why it's such a shame about the Cruise incident in SF - people act like it's shocking that an autonomous vehicle didn't do the correct thing when a human driven vehicle launched a person into their windshield. Of course it's terrible that the car drove over the person (and unacceptable that Cruise tried to conceal that fact), but in terms of thinking about the safety of the vehicle you really have to ask yourself whether humans would be able to handle that situation well. Would I definitely react in the optimal way if a person hit my windshield? I wouldn't bet on it, and I would say there is a nontrivial likelihood that I would accidentally step on the gas and run over the person. That's just the nature of dealing with a truly one in a million situation that I'm totally unprepared for (just as the autonomous car was totally unprepared for it).

ra7 3y ago

It's not misleading. It's the true test of L4+ self driving — do you require a driver ready to intervene or not?

minwcnt5 3y ago

There's a massive difference between needing a driver every x miles and never. Waymo has served more than 700,000 rides this year. FSD cannot drive intervention free 700,000+ times in a row (on many different routes), I doubt it can even get close.