4 ms·

There seems to be a lot of skepticism in this thread, which I understand, but I really think many people here are underestimating just how much economic incenti

There seems to be a lot of skepticism in this thread, which I understand, but I really think many people here are underestimating just how much economic incentive there is to make this happen. The freight companies want this, the insurance companies want this, and the truck manufacturers want this. This is not an if, this is a when.

vinyl7 3y ago
Until they start causing a bunch of problems like the Cruise taxis
- Dylan16807 3y ago
  That doesn't change the desires. A certain amount of problems are a fact of life. Do you have a particular reason to think the amount will be overwhelming here?
  - vinyl7 3y ago
    Tesla has been doing self driving tech for far longer than anyone else in the space, and they're not near perfect. But really it comes down to public perception right? I think it would only take a couple of big issues to make the public distrust the tech. If Cruise had issues with small taxis, a massive semi is going to be a lot more scary and cause bigger problems. The main thing is that self driving semis are fine if it's going through Nevada or death valley or some other sparsely driven road that doesn't have any intersections. But once the semi enters a suburb or big city...it's going to be an issue.
    - andrewmcwatters 3y ago
      Doing the same thing over and over longer than anyone else isn’t progress.
    - TulliusCicero 3y ago
      No they haven't. Google started in what, 2009? And Tesla just seems rather unserious. It's one thing to miss a prediction several years out, it's quite another to say you're confident "this year" or "next year" with specifics, repeatedly, and constantly miss by miles. Not to mention the obsession with having fewer sensors. Teslas with the FSD beta still routinely screw up basic driving tasks, not edge cases, like deciding to try and run into a cement wall straight ahead.
      - fiddlerwoaroof 3y ago
        I’ve been using Tesla FSD happily for almost a year now
        TulliusCicero 3y ago
        Cool? But we're talking about L4 systems, not L2 systems that can't reliably handle even basic scenarios.
        fiddlerwoaroof 3y ago
        I did 220 miles the other day basically without intervention (only intervened a couple times because I was impatient, not because the car was doing something dangerous): FSD version 12 has, to me, basically proven that their model works and it’s just a matter of polish now. I think Tesla is being conservative about the L rating for their system because getting that wrong in a big way would ruin the company.
        MissTake 3y ago
        Personal anecdotal experience in a car != Facts as it pertains to this story. Semi drivers do that 220 miles (and then some), each and every day, on quiet interstates and havoc strewn city highways. And we’re also talking big rigs here with significantly longer stopping distances and far less maneuverability. And they have to deal with the vagaries of weather. A fully automated rig is no good to anyone if the software decides to not proceed with no driver to override it.
    - ptero 3y ago
      > Tesla has been doing self driving tech for far longer than anyone else in the space, and they're not near perfect. I suspect that Tesla made its life much more difficult by betting the self-driving farm on cameras. Which may have been a case of sales team overriding engineering objections. This is just a guess as I have never worked for Tesla. But I did work on detecting and tracking various things and multi-modal sensing (e.g, camera+radar) is very powerful, as some things that are hard to detect, track or ID using one sensor type will be crystal clear after adding another sensor type. > I think it would only take a couple of big issues to make the public distrust the tech. The public, at least in the rich world, has become pretty bad at understanding risks. A single unlikely but highly dramatic event will affect preferences much stronger than a much more likely, but less media-genic thing with the same outcome (e.g., the death of a single person). This is not an easy hurdle to overcome, but it is possible if self-driving companies put more energy into comparing their safety against human drivers in a simple, clean, easy to understand form. My 2c.
- yyyyttttvvvv 3y ago
  Voices that point this out are silenced.
  - projectileboy 3y ago
    Exactly. The safety issues around autonomous long-haul trucking will be reported on very differently than FSD in consumer autos. Likewise, there may be some human interest pieces here and there on truckers put out of work, but don’t expect a massive public outcry (even though this is going to be a massive economic disruption to rural areas).

vinyl7 3y ago

Until they start causing a bunch of problems like the Cruise taxis

Dylan16807 3y ago
That doesn't change the desires. A certain amount of problems are a fact of life. Do you have a particular reason to think the amount will be overwhelming here?
- vinyl7 3y ago
  Tesla has been doing self driving tech for far longer than anyone else in the space, and they're not near perfect. But really it comes down to public perception right? I think it would only take a couple of big issues to make the public distrust the tech. If Cruise had issues with small taxis, a massive semi is going to be a lot more scary and cause bigger problems. The main thing is that self driving semis are fine if it's going through Nevada or death valley or some other sparsely driven road that doesn't have any intersections. But once the semi enters a suburb or big city...it's going to be an issue.
  - andrewmcwatters 3y ago
    Doing the same thing over and over longer than anyone else isn’t progress.
  - TulliusCicero 3y ago
    No they haven't. Google started in what, 2009? And Tesla just seems rather unserious. It's one thing to miss a prediction several years out, it's quite another to say you're confident "this year" or "next year" with specifics, repeatedly, and constantly miss by miles. Not to mention the obsession with having fewer sensors. Teslas with the FSD beta still routinely screw up basic driving tasks, not edge cases, like deciding to try and run into a cement wall straight ahead.
    - fiddlerwoaroof 3y ago
      I’ve been using Tesla FSD happily for almost a year now
      - TulliusCicero 3y ago
        Cool? But we're talking about L4 systems, not L2 systems that can't reliably handle even basic scenarios.
        fiddlerwoaroof 3y ago
        I did 220 miles the other day basically without intervention (only intervened a couple times because I was impatient, not because the car was doing something dangerous): FSD version 12 has, to me, basically proven that their model works and it’s just a matter of polish now. I think Tesla is being conservative about the L rating for their system because getting that wrong in a big way would ruin the company.
        MissTake 3y ago
        Personal anecdotal experience in a car != Facts as it pertains to this story. Semi drivers do that 220 miles (and then some), each and every day, on quiet interstates and havoc strewn city highways. And we’re also talking big rigs here with significantly longer stopping distances and far less maneuverability. And they have to deal with the vagaries of weather. A fully automated rig is no good to anyone if the software decides to not proceed with no driver to override it.
  - ptero 3y ago
    > Tesla has been doing self driving tech for far longer than anyone else in the space, and they're not near perfect. I suspect that Tesla made its life much more difficult by betting the self-driving farm on cameras. Which may have been a case of sales team overriding engineering objections. This is just a guess as I have never worked for Tesla. But I did work on detecting and tracking various things and multi-modal sensing (e.g, camera+radar) is very powerful, as some things that are hard to detect, track or ID using one sensor type will be crystal clear after adding another sensor type. > I think it would only take a couple of big issues to make the public distrust the tech. The public, at least in the rich world, has become pretty bad at understanding risks. A single unlikely but highly dramatic event will affect preferences much stronger than a much more likely, but less media-genic thing with the same outcome (e.g., the death of a single person). This is not an easy hurdle to overcome, but it is possible if self-driving companies put more energy into comparing their safety against human drivers in a simple, clean, easy to understand form. My 2c.
yyyyttttvvvv 3y ago
Voices that point this out are silenced.
- projectileboy 3y ago
  Exactly. The safety issues around autonomous long-haul trucking will be reported on very differently than FSD in consumer autos. Likewise, there may be some human interest pieces here and there on truckers put out of work, but don’t expect a massive public outcry (even though this is going to be a massive economic disruption to rural areas).