4 ms·

You can point to the bitter lesson to support your claim, but on the other hand I can point to the massive investment in capital and time to get self-driving ca

You can point to the bitter lesson to support your claim, but on the other hand I can point to the massive investment in capital and time to get self-driving cars viable to support my more bearish view.

AndrewKemendo 2mo ago
Yesterday evening I rode 12 miles in a Waymo actively dodging pedestrians and obstacles dynamically in an open ended environment. Multiples better experience than the two Ubers I had later that evening. What are you bearish about precisely?
- qsera 2mo ago
  It is amusing to observe that the tech marketing of today are milking the shit out of this trick. The trick being to tread continuously through some non-obvious happy path. And average people will be convinced that you really have some breakthrough tech. But hey, this is not something new. Magicians were taking advantage of such things for centuries ..
  - AndrewKemendo 2mo ago
    Please describe the trick you’re suggesting
    - qsera 2mo ago
      1. Make some thing that work in very limited of amount of real world cases 2. Deploy it somewhere where it won't encounter things it won't handle. 3. Market the shit out of the above fact and how well it work there. 4. Let the naive population who have a tendency to take one look, and imagine how it will automatically progress to some arbitrary influx point. 5. Get a lot of funding from people in point 4 and feed it to point 3, and keep going.
      - jryle70 2mo ago
        > 1. Make some thing that work in very limited of amount of real world cases > 2. Deploy it somewhere where it won't encounter things it won't handle Who are doing these? Waymo? how? You're talking BS if you can't elaborate.
        qsera 2mo ago
        Of course it will appear BS to you. That is why it works.
        AndrewKemendo 2mo ago
        Why couldn’t this trick be pulled off two decades ago? After all autonomous vehicles has been well funded research since the 1980s the DARPA grand challenge being one of the previously most important benchmarks. I think you might just need a history lesson friend
        qsera 2mo ago
        Internet and the ad/marketing/propoganda/pr powers that comes with it..
- jhanschoo 2mo ago
  I'm not talking about the state of today's self-driving cars, I'm talking about how we got to here. Also don't forget the overarching claim regarding lack of sensor and actuator fidelity in the parent comment; self-driving cars in contrast have expensive LIDAR in them and we still don't think camera-based self-driving cars are safe enough.
  - AndrewKemendo 2mo ago
    Yea we got here through recognizing the bitter lesson is a description of reality and adopting techniques that exploit it The entire history of this field is precisely that problem and repeatedly demonstrated
    - jhanschoo 2mo ago
      I don't know how you can read my comment, not respond to my comment saying that today's self-driving cars use LIDAR, and continue to reiterate your point. I don't think I was clear and explicit, it being tedious to write, and I apologize for that. I also apologize for shifting the goalposts as I had not written out my own position, which is not exactly in the "grandparent commenter"'s position (that I had not previously given enough attention understanding), but it is also not in agreement with yours. I don't mean to say that we are not presently in the "bitter lesson" (your idea of what the bitter lesson says) regime. I definitely think that a lot of progress can be done right now by emphasizing the humanoid robotics platform as a foundation. What I mean to say is that I don't know if that platform with the hardware we have today is sufficient for parity with human housekeeping tasks in the domains that we wish it to have parity. The bitter lesson itself (not your understanding of it) is in fact silent on this as it is in relation to feature engineering, where it is a clear point, but you seem to be adapting it uncritically wholesale to mean something more than what it is written about. My position is that, it is unclear whether today's sensor platform is sufficient for parity. It is less strong than the blog post author's "Why Today’s Humanoids Won’t Learn", it is a "We can't say whether or not today's humanoids will learn", but it is something that also contradicts a "the bitter lesson means today's humanoids will learn" thesis. The self-driving car supports my claim, because after so much investment in capital and time, we ended up with a car with comparatively expensive LIDAR sensors as our preferred platform.

AndrewKemendo 2mo ago

Yesterday evening I rode 12 miles in a Waymo actively dodging pedestrians and obstacles dynamically in an open ended environment. Multiples better experience than the two Ubers I had later that evening. What are you bearish about precisely?

qsera 2mo ago
It is amusing to observe that the tech marketing of today are milking the shit out of this trick. The trick being to tread continuously through some non-obvious happy path. And average people will be convinced that you really have some breakthrough tech. But hey, this is not something new. Magicians were taking advantage of such things for centuries ..
- AndrewKemendo 2mo ago
  Please describe the trick you’re suggesting
  - qsera 2mo ago
    1. Make some thing that work in very limited of amount of real world cases 2. Deploy it somewhere where it won't encounter things it won't handle. 3. Market the shit out of the above fact and how well it work there. 4. Let the naive population who have a tendency to take one look, and imagine how it will automatically progress to some arbitrary influx point. 5. Get a lot of funding from people in point 4 and feed it to point 3, and keep going.
    - jryle70 2mo ago
      > 1. Make some thing that work in very limited of amount of real world cases > 2. Deploy it somewhere where it won't encounter things it won't handle Who are doing these? Waymo? how? You're talking BS if you can't elaborate.
      - qsera 2mo ago
        Of course it will appear BS to you. That is why it works.
        AndrewKemendo 2mo ago
        Why couldn’t this trick be pulled off two decades ago? After all autonomous vehicles has been well funded research since the 1980s the DARPA grand challenge being one of the previously most important benchmarks. I think you might just need a history lesson friend
        qsera 2mo ago
        Internet and the ad/marketing/propoganda/pr powers that comes with it..
jhanschoo 2mo ago
I'm not talking about the state of today's self-driving cars, I'm talking about how we got to here. Also don't forget the overarching claim regarding lack of sensor and actuator fidelity in the parent comment; self-driving cars in contrast have expensive LIDAR in them and we still don't think camera-based self-driving cars are safe enough.
- AndrewKemendo 2mo ago
  Yea we got here through recognizing the bitter lesson is a description of reality and adopting techniques that exploit it The entire history of this field is precisely that problem and repeatedly demonstrated
  - jhanschoo 2mo ago
    I don't know how you can read my comment, not respond to my comment saying that today's self-driving cars use LIDAR, and continue to reiterate your point. I don't think I was clear and explicit, it being tedious to write, and I apologize for that. I also apologize for shifting the goalposts as I had not written out my own position, which is not exactly in the "grandparent commenter"'s position (that I had not previously given enough attention understanding), but it is also not in agreement with yours. I don't mean to say that we are not presently in the "bitter lesson" (your idea of what the bitter lesson says) regime. I definitely think that a lot of progress can be done right now by emphasizing the humanoid robotics platform as a foundation. What I mean to say is that I don't know if that platform with the hardware we have today is sufficient for parity with human housekeeping tasks in the domains that we wish it to have parity. The bitter lesson itself (not your understanding of it) is in fact silent on this as it is in relation to feature engineering, where it is a clear point, but you seem to be adapting it uncritically wholesale to mean something more than what it is written about. My position is that, it is unclear whether today's sensor platform is sufficient for parity. It is less strong than the blog post author's "Why Today’s Humanoids Won’t Learn", it is a "We can't say whether or not today's humanoids will learn", but it is something that also contradicts a "the bitter lesson means today's humanoids will learn" thesis. The self-driving car supports my claim, because after so much investment in capital and time, we ended up with a car with comparatively expensive LIDAR sensors as our preferred platform.