ra7

24 ms·

391.
by ra7 3y ago
Waymo has millions of driverless miles at this point. Tesla has zero. I'm not sure how Waymo's safety driver miles is relevant here. > Except, you know, millions of miles per day of self-driving in situations that Waymo isn&
392.
by ra7 3y ago
> They wanted to data-max. They data-maxed. Now they have 300x the data collection rate of Waymo. Citation needed. What Tesla lacks is quality data, which Waymo has due to their high fidelity sensors. Tesla has been "collecting da
393.
by 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.
394.
by 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?
395.
by ra7 3y ago
It doesn't matter what other consumer vehicles or Waymo offers, or their financial state (which wasn't point of my comment). Tesla is the one who has continuously promised they'd be L5 and have robotaxis "by end of the y
396.
by ra7 3y ago
Who else has put more eggs in self driving than Waymo/Google? They have a fully autonomous service running in two cities running 24/7, with two more announced. 700,000+ trips in 2023 so far. They’ve spent tens of billions over the
397.
by ra7 3y ago
Tesla has been kept alive only because they are scared to even let drivers take their hands off the wheel. They have very low confidence in the system to allow for driver inattention, let alone completely remove the driver. Numerous softwar
398.
GM's Cruise robotaxi unit dismisses nine execs after safety probe(reuters.com)
7 points by ra7 3y ago|0 comments
399.
by ra7 3y ago
I’ve made a similar observation before. Most “negative” Tesla posts disappear quickly, even though they seemingly have enough votes and comments to stay up. Probably flagged to death.
400.
by ra7 3y ago
I just discovered this channel a few days ago and I’ve been hooked to it since then. Another channel I’ve been enjoying is https://youtube.com/@YouCanSeeATC
401.
by ra7 3y ago
~30 votes in the first hour definitely gets you to the front page. It's not nothing.
402.
by ra7 3y ago
This isn't the first time I've seen this either. It's definitely a pattern: new post generates a lot of discussion in a short time, but then disappears from the front pages. I hope dang can analyze past posts to see if manipu
403.
by ra7 3y ago
It's interesting the earlier post is flagged. This one sits in page 2 after receiving close to 30 votes in under an hour. Normally, this would be near the top of HN. Either the ranking algorithm works in even more mysterious ways or Te
404.
by ra7 3y ago
You’re just using it wrong. Dojo “supercomputer” specifically includes custom chips, which doesn’t exist yet.
405.
by ra7 3y ago
> I think the only comedy here is that Google looked at these old-school companies like Microsoft or IBM and figured they can be different just because they "get it." And then, over time, they rediscovered the reasons why old c
406.
by ra7 3y ago
Well, NATO conditions on paper are what kicked in post 9/11 for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Most NATO countries risked their troops because the US was attacked, even though their own military installations/deployments were n
407.
by ra7 3y ago
> When the “help develop systems” part is in effect, you’re as good as allies. Sure, I agree with that. But there are different degrees of being allies. "Help develop systems" is nowhere near "risk your own troops to defen
408.
by ra7 3y ago
I'm not kidding. But you're talking about something different. India and Soviet Union had a different kind of co-production deal. It has always been, even to this day with Russia, technology transfer and licensing i.e. you help de
409.
by ra7 3y ago
> The U.S. co-producing nuclear submarines with Australia isn’t a military commitment? I mean troop commitment. Will the US send a naval fleet to Australia if the latter is attacked?
410.
by ra7 3y ago
> Co-producing warplanes is as good as a treaty. Not really, no. One is a financial commitment, the other is a military commitment. They're very different. India never courted the West because Pakistan already had close relations wi
411.
by ra7 3y ago
Technology transfer and verbal support is nothing like coming to a country’s rescue during a war. An official treaty was only signed during the events of 1971 war. US-Pakistan mutual defense treaty dates back to 1954.
412.
by ra7 3y ago
> India openly allied with the Soviets, so we took the other side. I’m afraid you have it backwards. India and the Soviet Union signed a treaty only after the US sent its seventh fleet towards India during the 1971 India-Pakistan conflic
413.
by ra7 3y ago
It’s not quite the same thing though, is it? This is a person with a history of provocations making an indirect threat. I’m not saying he deserves punishment, but I can see why the Indian government would take his threat very seriously.
414.
by ra7 3y ago
Modi, for all his faults, has made a huge pivot towards America like no other PM before him. India and US are closer than ever before, even in the backdrop of India’s neutrality stance in Russia-Ukraine conflict. There are multiple defense
415.
by ra7 3y ago
An Air India flight was blown up in 1985 by Canadian Sikh terrorists killing 329 people. With that context, it’s easy to see how this would be considered a threat. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_India_Flight_182
416.
by ra7 3y ago
You are inflating cost of the car by at least 2x. GM had a plan to bring down the cost by manufacturing Origin, but recent events have put a stop to that.
417.
by ra7 3y ago
Apple typically doesn’t do large acquisitions though. It’s not clear they even take AVs seriously as their own in-house development has been so minimal and late.
418.
by ra7 3y ago
Oh yeah, they’re definitely guilty of trying to cover it up. But I suspect Cruise was already on CA DMV’s bad books after having so many publicized issues in SF and this was just the last straw.
419.
by ra7 3y ago
https://techcrunch.com/2023/10/24/dmv-immediately-suspends-c...
420.
by ra7 3y ago
To the surprise of no one. This is on the back of GM appointing a Chief Administrative Officer to “work with” the CEO after their recent controversies. One unfortunate accident (though Cruise was at fault for making it worse) has put the en

More ›