ra7

34 ms·

511.
by ra7 3y ago
> Richer data does not mean better data. It does not mean more actionable data either. How actionable you make it depends on how good your engineers are. Diverse input data is definitely more actionable than just RGB pixels from images.
512.
by ra7 3y ago
Sensor fusion has nothing to do with scale. They are merely algorithms that combine multiple real time inputs into a single low level representation. This process remains the same whether you operate in San Francisco or worldwide. How they
513.
by ra7 3y ago
Of course, they are linked. It doesn't mean you need to operate worldwide to prove sensor fusion is working. There is no scaling issue with it. Sensor fusion is already proven effective as companies using it are showing excellent safet
514.
by ra7 3y ago
Why are you equating sensor fusion with solving the entirety of autonomous driving? That’s disingenuous. You understand sub problems can be solved, right? Sensor fusion is just combining different sensor inputs so you have high confidence i
515.
by ra7 3y ago
High resolution maps are only one part of the equation. Everyone is working on a generic perception/prediction/planning stack that works everywhere. Only the map changes between different cities. This is how Waymo/Cruise have
516.
by ra7 3y ago
Lidar cost has already dropped a lot. Waymo’s lidar on their I-Pace is 90% cheaper than the previous gen. We’re also seeing car manufacturers (GM, Volvo/Polestar, Mercedes, Chinese OEMs) include inexpensive lidar units for driver assis
517.
by ra7 3y ago
> It's possible the lidar approach only really works with up to date high resolution maps and without that you end up in a local max you can't really escape with that approach. Sorry, but you’re just repeating Elon Musk’s buzzw
518.
by ra7 3y ago
That’s tangential to your original point of discussion which was sensor integration. Sensor fusion is absolutely a solved problem. Autonomous driving requires more than just sensor fusion though.
519.
by ra7 3y ago
I think the keyword you’re looking for is ‘sensor fusion’, which apparently is only a problem for Tesla because the others have figured it out years ago. Perhaps there is a talent gap at Tesla or an unwillingness to invest in it. They gener
520.
by ra7 3y ago
That's probably the hardest problem. But I think you severely underestimate just how hard getting it to work in a place like SF (in rain and fog) is. To get to where they are is a serious accomplishment.
521.
by ra7 3y ago
There seems to be a lot of misconception and misinformation about mapping. People (mostly influencers associated with Tesla) constantly cite it as a major bottleneck for scaling. And there are barely any technical details about the mapping
522.
by ra7 3y ago
Seems to be waitlist per city. But they only have a waitlist in SF currently. Phoenix is fully open to the public and LA is employee-only so far, so no waitlist open there yet.
523.
by ra7 3y ago
I’ve only taken a couple of Waymo rides when I went to Phoenix. I would take them over Uber/Lyft any day, if Waymo offered rides in my city because: * They are very safe and you’re not at the mercy of the Uber/Lyft driver’s drivin
524.
Waymo One doubles service area in Phoenix, continues growing in SF(blog.waymo.com)
306 points by ra7 3y ago|413 comments
525.
by ra7 3y ago
> In fact in the latest version I don’t think I’ve found a single example of it missing something clearly visible to a human. Is this from personal experience of using FSD Beta or are you relying purely on YouTube videos to assess its pe
526.
by ra7 3y ago
> If I attempt to drive my own car into a brick wall, the on-board computer will defy my instructions as best it can too. By your definition, I'm not in control of my car just like Waymo operators aren't. Terrible analogy. You
527.
by ra7 3y ago
Nope, that’s misleading. Still no “control” over the vehicle because the vehicle is executing the move or it can ignore the instructions. It’s assisting the vehicle. They don’t have the ability to joystick the car.
528.
by ra7 3y ago
> It's also not entirely accurate to describe Waymo cars as "fully driverless" as they have a team of human employees remotely monitoring the fleet and can remotely operate any vehicle. This is absolutely not true. Waymo r
529.
by ra7 3y ago
Only ones unbiased and unpaid are people who hold positive views on Tesla! Just like you. Or are you being paid to defend Tesla on HN?
530.
by ra7 3y ago
Can you expand why being part of Google X hinders a team? I believe Waymo "graduated" from Google X to its own entity.
531.
by ra7 3y ago
Sure. I guess your way of "criticizing" is to accuse the author of spreading FUD and shorting the stock, while questioning his credentials by calling him a "quasi expert shilling a point of view". Meanwhile, all your poi
532.
by ra7 3y ago
Huh, what? It's completely reasonable to question the methodology. That's not nitpicking. I get it. You want to take the data at face value without questioning anything.
533.
by ra7 3y ago
https://storage.googleapis.com/waymo-uploads/files/documents... https://storage.googleapis.com/waymo-uploads/files/documents... https://storage.googleapis.com/sdc-prod&#x
534.
by ra7 3y ago
"Our cars are safe" "Show us unbiased data proving it" "If it were unsafe, we would know" Sigh. I own a Tesla and use FSD, but thanks for assuming.
535.
by ra7 3y ago
> If he had wanted to write a neutral point of view article about how he would like to see the self driving industry report safely stats that would be worthwhile but this just seems to be ragging on what one company is doing when everyon
536.
by ra7 3y ago
> It's about nitpicking at the margins. The article is not nitpicking at the margins. It's showing how Tesla is making misleading claims out of their insufficient data by not accounting for operating conditions. That's lit
537.
by ra7 3y ago
Brad Templeton is a credible author in the self driving space. It seems like the Forbes concern is just a convenient excuse to dismiss content that doesn't agree with the GP's view points.
538.
by ra7 3y ago
Why don't you try addressing the content?
539.
by ra7 3y ago
It's not the same as repeatedly promising delivery of the feature — one of the hardest technological problems being worked on — year after year, while continuing to take money from customers for said feature. Not to mention gaining a t
540.
by ra7 3y ago
The difference is they didn’t take money from customers to deliver a promise at a future date.

More ›