4 ms·
All their sensors didn't prevent them from crashing into stationary object. You'd think that would be the absolute easiest to avoid, especially with both radar
by trompetenaccoun 2y ago
All their sensors didn't prevent them from crashing into stationary object. You'd think that would be the absolute easiest to avoid, especially with both radar and lidar on board. Accidents like that show the training data and software will be much more important than number of sensors.
https://techcrunch.com/2024/06/12/waymo-second-robotaxi-recall-autonomous-vehicle/ https://techcrunch.com/2024/06/12/waymo-second-robotaxi-reca...
- rvnx 2y agoThe issue was fixed, now handling 100'000 trips per week, and all seems to go well in the last 4 months, this is 1.5 million trips.
- trompetenaccoun 2y agoSo they had "better understanding" of the problem as the other user put it, but their software was still flawed and needed fixing. That's my point. This happened two weeks ago btw: https://www.msn.com/en-in/autos/news/waymo-self-driving-car-crashes-into-san-francisco-bus-ceos-help-confused-robot/ar-AA1rWWP2 https://www.msn.com/en-in/autos/news/waymo-self-driving-car-... I don't mean Waymo is bad or unsafe, it's pretty cool. My point is about true automation needing data and intelligence. A lot more data than we currently have, because the problem is in the "edge" cases, the kind of situation the software has never encountered. Waymo is in the lead for now but they have fewer cars on the road, which means less data.
- jraby3 2y agoAny idea how many accidents and how many fatalities? And how that compares to human drivers?