Self driving buses, trains, trucks etc

magicbastarder · 18-02-2019 9:03am

cnocbui wrote: »

The person is a Professor of Medicine.

a fantastic expert to speak about self driving cars!

markodaly · 18-02-2019 11:50am

Self-driving cars won't be able to drive in all conditions or environments. Just like today, you can't drive a car up the Slieve Bloom mountains. However, the vast majority of driving can be automated. People drive to work/school/shops and home. This is easy to automate in the next 5-10 years.

AlmightyCushion · 18-02-2019 12:14pm

paleoperson wrote: »

No, they are clearly talking about conditions that are driveable in by humans but not by AI. They are not talking about conditions that are undriveable in by humans.

John Krafcik, the person quoted in the article, said after wards that was what he was talking about.

paleoperson wrote: »

Nobody suggested self driving cars could never be safer than human drivers in any specified conditions. I don't mean to come across as impolite but you're really not making any point here.

prinzeugen said it in the post I was quoting.

Exactly. All these claims that AI and self driving trains, cars etc would be safer is bollox.

cnocbui · 18-02-2019 2:39pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Self driving trains are real and there are several driverless rail networks around the world, in controlled environments where the "system" is separated from humans, autonomous systems are perfectly safe.

Flying is another form of transport that can be automated without too much difficulty, the pilot is totally dependent on the instruments anyway.

What a load of BS. Flying is another area where only general intelligence can possibly handle exceptions and malfunctions. You can't just apply the brake, pull over and turn on the hazards at 10,000m. The Lion Air disaster was caused by the automated system pushing the plane into the ground. People have been critical of the pilots for NOT turning the automated system off!

I have not the slightest fear of flying, I have flown planes, but even the prospect of an AI pilot terrifies me.

cnocbui · 18-02-2019 2:41pm

magicbastarder wrote: »

a fantastic expert to speak about self driving cars!

What do you mean?

paleoperson · 18-02-2019 2:43pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Classic Daily Mail type of story, all about the locals wanting to scupper the vehicles.

Bringing up something notable and interesting as a small point of the article?

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

John Krafcik, the person quoted in the article, said after wards that was what he was talking about.

Really, about conditions so bad humans wouldn't be able to drive either? Can you show me where he said that please?

You realize what the weather is like in Phoenix Arizona which he is the head of right? Not exactly what you see on Ice Truckers.

Clearly someone is getting the situation totally wrong here and stating that to others, either Daily Mail or you, who is full of ****. Maybe have a think about that when you realize the answer instead of going around saying things like "daily fail LOL".

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

prinzeugen said it in the post I was quoting.

I felt like he was saying it as a general rule but alright. I hope you notice also that the "AI" it takes to ride on the freeway is as simple as "if object in front of you going slower check if object near you in fast lane, change lanes if possible"... that type of thing - it can barely be termed "AI" at all. They also don't use optics or anything like that for the location of the vehicles, it's a glorified radar system.

magicbastarder · 18-02-2019 3:34pm

cnocbui wrote: »

What do you mean?

in that it didn't take a professor of medicine to cop that the tesla failed to detect a truck. i.e. his job doesn't add weight to that observation.

AlmightyCushion · 18-02-2019 3:38pm

paleoperson wrote: »

Bringing up something notable and interesting as a small point of the article?

Really, about conditions so bad humans wouldn't be able to drive either? Can you show me where he said that please?

You realize what the weather is like in Phoenix Arizona which he is the head of right? Not exactly what you see on Ice Truckers.

Clearly someone is getting the situation totally wrong here and stating that to others, either Daily Mail or you, who is full of ****. Maybe have a think about that when you realize the answer instead of going around saying things like "daily fail LOL".

I felt like he was saying it as a general rule but alright. I hope you notice also that the "AI" it takes to ride on the freeway is as simple as "if object in front of you going slower check if object near you in fast lane, change lanes if possible"... that type of thing - it can barely be termed "AI" at all. They also don't use optics or anything like that for the location of the vehicles, it's a glorified radar system.

Maybe you're thinking of someone else but I didn't say anything negative about the daily mail here.

https://twitter.com/johnkrafcik/status/1063281250088042496?s=21

Yeah some context missing here, but it did make for a fun headline. 🤪 (I said the same thing about my own driving.) The point is that autonomous driving, like human driving, will always have constraints.

That tweet was actually in response to a cnet article where the headline was:

It'll be decades before autonomous cars are widespread on the roads -- and even then, they won't be able to drive themselves in certain conditions - John Krafcik CEO of Waymo

cnocbui · 18-02-2019 3:48pm

magicbastarder wrote: »

in that it didn't take a professor of medicine to cop that the tesla failed to detect a truck. i.e. his job doesn't add weight to that observation.

It was his car that was totalled, I thought it added a bit of credibility in case anyone were to suggest the reported incident was fake.

paleoperson · 18-02-2019 3:57pm

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

https://twitter.com/johnkrafcik/status/1063281250088042496?s=21

That tweet was actually in response to a cnet article where the headline was:

It'll be decades before autonomous cars are widespread on the roads -- and even then, they won't be able to drive themselves in certain conditions - John Krafcik CEO of Waymo

He seems to be trying to walk back his remarks a bit also. The point remains that in his original comment he stated they won't be able to drive themselves in certain conditions. Now I'm sure he didn't mean extreme weather conditions where the car is physically unable to move, right? I think it's at least fair to say that AI will never be driving in icy weather.

AlmightyCushion · 18-02-2019 4:16pm

paleoperson wrote: »

He seems to be trying to walk back his remarks a bit also. The point remains that in his original comment he stated they won't be able to drive themselves in certain conditions. Now I'm sure he didn't mean extreme weather conditions where the car is physically unable to move, right? I think it's at least fair to say that AI will never be driving in icy weather.

We don't actually know what he was referring to as the comments were from a talk he gave which as far as I can see was never put up on line. So all we have to go with are short quotes in articles. From the Cnet article.

And he doesn't think the industry will ever be able to drive at any time of year in any weather and any condition, the highest driving rating. Driving in all conditions can be difficult for humans too, he noted.

"Autonomy always will have some constraints," he said.

That's pretty much what we're going on here. Note the first part, is not a direct quote of his. I can see how it can be interpreted both ways but seeing as he clarified after wards that it was taken out of context I think he was saying that AI will struggle driving under certain conditions just like humans do.

cnocbui · 18-02-2019 4:30pm

AI systems don't 'struggle', they fail. Not the same thing at all. One reason almost all the AI driving testing is being done in bone-dry places is because they don't handle wet roads, ice or snow, very well at all.

18-02-2019 4:39pm

magicbastarder wrote: »

a fantastic expert to speak about self driving cars!

As a motorist, his profession does not matter.

AlmightyCushion · 18-02-2019 4:46pm

cnocbui wrote: »

AI systems don't 'struggle', they fail. Not the same thing at all. One reason almost all the AI driving testing is being done in bone-dry places is because they don't handle wet roads, ice or snow, very well at all.

So, the technology will never improve? It's 100% static and what it can do now, is all it will ever be able to do in the future?

Computers used to lose a game of chess to even average players, they started beating the best in the world a long time ago. Computers used to lose games of Go to even average players, then a few years ago they started beating the best in the world. Voice recognition used to be absolutely rubbish, I remember people saying that it would never work and it wouldn't ever be able to deal with accents (especially Irish ones). Technology evolves and improves. Self driving cars might not be able to handle those conditions now but I don't think that will always be the case.

paleoperson · 18-02-2019 4:54pm

AlmightyCushion I don't know what you are trying to argue here.

He already confirmed that he said that by twitter, you posted it yourself - quite helpfully in fact. So why are you now going back and questioning whether he said it or not or trying to downplay it again? We're not playing a game. He confirmed a statement saying it will be decades before it will work fully and it will never work in certain conditions. I don't know why you are randomly going back to this earlier part of the conversation and suggesting I didn't get it.

I completely acknowledged that it might indeed be taken out of context but stated it's fair enough to say that it won't happen for a long time self-driving cars will be in Ireland and that we're unlikely to see it ever in icy conditions. As far as I'm concerned pretty much the conversation is done.

AlmightyCushion · 18-02-2019 5:08pm

paleoperson wrote: »

AlmightyCushion I don't know what you are trying to argue here.

He already confirmed that he said that by twitter, you posted it yourself - quite helpfully in fact. So why are you now going back and questioning whether he said it or not or trying to downplay it again? We're not playing a game. He confirmed a statement saying it will be decades before it will work fully and it will never work in certain conditions. I don't know why you are randomly going back to this earlier part of the conversation and suggesting I didn't get it.

Because he didn't confirm it would take decades before it would work fully. He said it would be decades before self driving cars would be widespread. If self driving cars were comparable in performance to human drivers and were available for sale tomorrow, then they still wouldn't be widespread for at least a decade. Look at electric cars, they have been available for years. Long range electric cars are available right now. However, electric cars still aren't widespread because of many other factors.

His statements are being taken out of context, he said it so himself.

paleoperson wrote: »

I completely acknowledged that it might indeed be taken out of context but stated it's fair enough to say that it won't happen for a long time self-driving cars will be in Ireland and that we're unlikely to see it ever in icy conditions. As far as I'm concerned that's pretty much the conversation is done.

And I agreed that his comments are open to interpretation both ways.

cnocbui · 18-02-2019 5:32pm

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

So, the technology will never improve? It's 100% static and what it can do now, is all it will ever be able to do in the future?

Computers used to lose a game of chess to even average players, they started beating the best in the world a long time ago. Computers used to lose games of Go to even average players, then a few years ago they started beating the best in the world. Voice recognition used to be absolutely rubbish, I remember people saying that it would never work and it wouldn't ever be able to deal with accents (especially Irish ones). Technology evolves and improves. Self driving cars might not be able to handle those conditions now but I don't think that will always be the case.

I have been reading about the imminent arrival of cheap, limitless energy from nuclear fusion since the 1970's, and it's still just 30 years away. How's that all encompassing cure for cancer coming? Of course technology improves and I fully expect AI driving to improve, but I don't expect it to ever match humans, because I don't believe general intelligence is a nut we will crack, any more than we will interstellar travel. Computer processor feature sizes are already at 7nm - for some features anyway, and 5nm is in the works, but less than 5 is really doubtful, and that's without even touching on what is Intelligence and how do you make it.

So some technology certainly does advance, while some problems are so big that technological advances barely make any headway on them, even on the scale of a human lifetime.

defrule · 19-02-2019 2:30am

I think it’s data problem, you give the neural network enough data and it will learn to drive in any condition.

But it’s the unexpected stuff that is interesting and you want the car to be able to handle. But the unexpected nature means it’s harder to simulate scenarios for the car to learn from.

markodaly · 19-02-2019 10:25am

https://medium.com/waymo/an-update-on-waymo-disengagements-in-california-d671fd31c3e2

Waymo disengagements dropped 50% in 2018 compared to 2017. The cars are learning all the time every second of every day.

paleoperson · 19-02-2019 4:26pm

markodaly wrote: »

https://medium.com/waymo/an-update-on-waymo-disengagements-in-california-d671fd31c3e2

Waymo disengagements dropped 50% in 2018 compared to 2017. The cars are learning all the time every second of every day.

Is that supposed to be impressive? You could also say they are learning to predict weather patterns "all the time every second of every day" by taking in new information but what good is that if it doesn't noticeably increase the skill?

You already heard it from Steve Wozniacki and others high up in the corporations, now you're hearing it straight from the horses mouth. What are you still with this blind faith in it for? Forget about self-driving cars, it's bogus.

cnocbui · 20-02-2019 2:15pm

Tesla CEO Elon Musk expects that the electric car maker will have the technology needed to essentially operate vehicles without drivers by the end of the year.

The entrepreneur made the comment on a podcast with Cathie Wood and Tasha Keeney of ARK Invest, a firm that owns shares in the company. Tesla's automated driver assistance system Autopilot has garnered both positive attention for the sophistication of its features and negative attention for its association with a number of high-profile accidents.

"I think we will be feature complete — full self-driving — this year," Musk said. "Meaning the car will be able to find you in a parking lot, pick you up and take you all the way to your destination without an intervention, this year. I would say I am of certain of that. That is not a question mark."

This is in line with previous comments Musk made on Tesla's fourth-quarter earnings call.

"However," he added, "people sometimes will extrapolate that to mean now it works with 100 percent certainty, requires no observation, perfectly. This is not the case."

In addition, the speed at which the technology makes it into the hands of customers depends on what regulators will allow, Musk added.

However within two years, the technology ought to be there for cars to operate without any help from a driver at all.

"My guess as to when we would think it is safe for somebody to essentially fall asleep and wake up at their destination? Probably towards the end of next year," he said. "That is when I think it would be safe enough for that."

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/02/19/elon-musk-tesla-will-have-all-its-self-driving-car-features-by-the-end-of-the-year.html

Elon Musk doing his best Trump impression. I think he's not just lying through his teeth but committing outright fraud here in order to up-sell the €5,200 add-on AI driving package.

The trouble is some people believe his hype and give it greater credence than what is actually written in fine print in the user manual. Tesla's are still running straight into large stationary objects at full speed, not perceiving them at all, but in a years time you will be able to sleep? Someone please lock him up.

This nonsense of just letting tech companies run amok and do whatever they like, as has happened with Uber and Airbnb, needs to stop, particularly where human lives are potentially at risk.

magicbastarder · 23-02-2019 11:06am

not quite at the level of self-driving cars:

https://twitter.com/trent_dan/status/1098921848400560129

cnocbui · 23-02-2019 12:03pm

magicbastarder wrote: »

not quite at the level of self-driving cars:

https://twitter.com/trent_dan/status/1098921848400560129

Not really a worry, it's only cyclists.

markodaly · 23-02-2019 2:32pm

paleoperson wrote: »

I Forget about self-driving cars, it's bogus.

Yawn.

People are contrarian for the sake of being contrarian.

In answer to your question, yes, lower disengagement means these cars can drive longer on its own, without any need for a manual override. They average about one disengagement per 1,000 miles driven and the number is increasing all the time.

markodaly · 23-02-2019 2:36pm

cnocbui wrote: »

Someone please lock him up.

If only this was a dictatorship.

This nonsense of just letting tech companies run amok and do whatever they like, as has happened with Uber and Airbnb, needs to stop, particularly where human lives are potentially at risk.

AirBnb put lives at risk?

markodaly · 23-02-2019 2:37pm

https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/waymo-self-driving-cars-police-officer-gestures/

Another day, another milestone.

cnocbui · 23-02-2019 4:42pm

markodaly wrote: »

If only this was a dictatorship.

AirBnb put lives at risk?

I don't get the dictatorship reference. If you take the fanboy blinkers off for a moment, you might see that I am not alone in the opinion I expressed:

Musk recently said he expects Tesla to have all the features needed for fully self-driving cars by the end of the year. That seems like an almost impossible goal, Cox Automotive executive publisher Karl Brauer said Wednesday on CNBC's "The Exchange." Other companies working on autonomous driving technology, such as Waymo, are not making such bold predictions.

"I think he is overpromising on autonomous vehicles in an almost unethical way," AutoNation CEO Mike Jackson said on "Squawk Box," referring to Musk.

Jackson has long been a Tesla critic and has accused Musk of using "bait-and-switch" tactics on consumers, making commitments he cannot keep

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/02/22/elon-musk-is-almost-unethical-says-outgoing-autonation-ceo.html

Musk is lying about Tesla's autonomous driving timelines - which I think may be totally unachievable -period - because they don't have LIDAR - in order to try and con people into paying large sums of money for something that will not deliver on the promise in the timeframe Musk has stated. He is is utterly unethical.

28-02-2019 7:23pm

BBC News - Why are more and more car companies teaming up?

When BMW and Daimler announced a €1bn (£880m) partnership last week to develop a suite of "mobility services" together, it was a clear sign of how the auto industry had changed.

For one thing, the German giants - who plan to work on driverless vehicles, ride-hailing and pay-per-use cars together - are normally fierce rivals who would never dream of teaming up.

For another, their pact was just the latest in a growing line of partnerships between traditional carmakers who are preparing for an uncertain future, in which next-generation technology could upend the industry and Silicon Valley could hold more sway than Detroit or Wolfsburg.

Full article at http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47376677

cnocbui · 21-03-2019 11:53am

This is a Tesla model S self driving it's owner into their grave, in China. Musk's claim of fully autonomous by the end of the year is scary. Without Lidar, it is probably not possible, let alone safe, but that's Ok, we'll let the public find out by being beta testers.

Still, Tesla has nothing on Boeing, when it comes to killing people with sheer engineering arrogance in automation.

markodaly · 21-03-2019 12:22pm

cnocbui wrote: »

This is a Tesla model S self driving it's owner into their grave, in China. Musk's claim of fully autonomous by the end of the year is scary. Without Lidar, it is probably not possible, let alone safe, but that's Ok, we'll let the public find out by being beta testers.

That was almost 3 years ago. The tech has moved a bit since then.

Still, Tesla has nothing on Boeing, when it comes to killing people with sheer engineering arrogance in automation.

I hear the horse and carriage is quite a safe way to transport oneself.

Self driving buses, trains, trucks etc

Comments