3 ms·

Quite frankly sounds super boring. I prefer driving than supervising. Only true unsupervised autonomous driving would be interesting for me (e.g Waymo).

by mhss 1y ago

SoftTalker 1y ago
But doesn’t Waymo autonomous driving only work in certain areas with hyper accurate maps?
- tw04 1y ago
  Correct, because that combined with about $30k in sensors is the only true safe way to do it today.
  - fastball 1y ago
    > the only true safe way An unsubstantiated claim given that there are many, many safe human drivers who have neither LIDAR sensors nor hyper-accurate pre-mapping at their disposal.
    - Dylan16807 1y ago
      Quote the rest of the line please.
      - fastball 1y ago
        "today"? Are there not humans on the road today? There have been a number of safety issues with Waymos, certainly too many to describe them as the one true safe option, today. Entertaining a No True Scotsmen is a bit of a silly exercise anyway, but this semantic game is extra silly.
        alwa 1y ago
        I took "it" to imply "autonomous driving." But I very much agree this is extra silly.
        Dylan16807 1y ago
        The person you replied to was talking about how we can achieve safe autonomous driving today. When I remind you of that context, that your rebuttal is not actually rebutting what they said, I am not performing No True Scotsman. The gap between humans and computers is enormous, not some weird gotcha tactic.
        fastball 1y ago
        I literally rebutted that context. Waymos are not safe autonomous driving today, they have caused various safety issues in the era of "today". I didn't include "today" in my original comment because none of the available options are "the only true safe way to do it today", but I don't think it is constructive to just say that. No True Scotsman was obviously in reference to GC, not you.
        Dylan16807 1y ago
        "Waymos are not safe" could be a rebuttal to what they said. "There are many safe humans" is not a rebuttal to what they said. Your comment above was the latter. > No True Scotsman was obviously in reference to GC, not you. I'm unsure what they said that would qualify. Was it adding "true unsupervised"? I think that's a fair qualification, because most of the point of self driving is lost if I can't look away from the road.
        deleted 1y ago
        [deleted]
  - enigmoid 1y ago
    More like $300k
- mhss 1y ago
  Yes. Once is available more widely to common car owners (either from Waymo or others) that would interest me. Current Tesla supervised style semi autonomous driving I would find either boring or stressful (depending on the scenario). I would rather drive myself. Note Waymo announced a partnership with Toyota, pretty hand wavy, but at least it seems there’s hope the technology may come to regular car owners at some point.
LightBug1 1y ago
100% me ... we're on the same page ... I've said it before. I don't want to become my cars manager ... I want to enjoy my driving. I get that the vast majority aren't car enthusiasts and that's ok, but there is actual pleasure in driving. And even me - when I want a rest from it - lane assist and cruise control are MORE than enough. I can even add these two to old classics without much bother. Going all in on autonomy doesn't interest me at all.

Quite frankly sounds super boring. I prefer driving than supervising. Only true unsupervised autonomous driving would be interesting for me (e.g Waymo).

by mhss 1y ago

Quite frankly sounds super boring. I prefer driving than supervising. Only true unsupervised autonomous driving would be interesting for me (e.g Waymo).

SoftTalker 1y ago

But doesn’t Waymo autonomous driving only work in certain areas with hyper accurate maps?

tw04 1y ago
Correct, because that combined with about $30k in sensors is the only true safe way to do it today.
- fastball 1y ago
  > the only true safe way An unsubstantiated claim given that there are many, many safe human drivers who have neither LIDAR sensors nor hyper-accurate pre-mapping at their disposal.
  - Dylan16807 1y ago
    Quote the rest of the line please.
    - fastball 1y ago
      "today"? Are there not humans on the road today? There have been a number of safety issues with Waymos, certainly too many to describe them as the one true safe option, today. Entertaining a No True Scotsmen is a bit of a silly exercise anyway, but this semantic game is extra silly.
      - alwa 1y ago
        I took "it" to imply "autonomous driving." But I very much agree this is extra silly.
      - Dylan16807 1y ago
        The person you replied to was talking about how we can achieve safe autonomous driving today. When I remind you of that context, that your rebuttal is not actually rebutting what they said, I am not performing No True Scotsman. The gap between humans and computers is enormous, not some weird gotcha tactic.
        fastball 1y ago
        I literally rebutted that context. Waymos are not safe autonomous driving today, they have caused various safety issues in the era of "today". I didn't include "today" in my original comment because none of the available options are "the only true safe way to do it today", but I don't think it is constructive to just say that. No True Scotsman was obviously in reference to GC, not you.
        Dylan16807 1y ago
        "Waymos are not safe" could be a rebuttal to what they said. "There are many safe humans" is not a rebuttal to what they said. Your comment above was the latter. > No True Scotsman was obviously in reference to GC, not you. I'm unsure what they said that would qualify. Was it adding "true unsupervised"? I think that's a fair qualification, because most of the point of self driving is lost if I can't look away from the road.
        deleted 1y ago
        [deleted]
- enigmoid 1y ago
  More like $300k
mhss 1y ago
Yes. Once is available more widely to common car owners (either from Waymo or others) that would interest me. Current Tesla supervised style semi autonomous driving I would find either boring or stressful (depending on the scenario). I would rather drive myself. Note Waymo announced a partnership with Toyota, pretty hand wavy, but at least it seems there’s hope the technology may come to regular car owners at some point.

LightBug1 1y ago

100% me ... we're on the same page ... I've said it before. I don't want to become my cars manager ... I want to enjoy my driving. I get that the vast majority aren't car enthusiasts and that's ok, but there is actual pleasure in driving. And even me - when I want a rest from it - lane assist and cruise control are MORE than enough. I can even add these two to old classics without much bother. Going all in on autonomy doesn't interest me at all.