|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:That is not true though. NuTonomy is a commercial robot taxi that runs right now in singapore Main Paineframe posted:In any case, there's no way they're going to be economically viable as long as they're depending entirely on doing detailed LIDAR-mapping of every single road in advance. What Waymo has so far is just a PR stunt, not a viable product. quote:And even with all that, they're still using both in-person safety drivers and remote drivers.
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2018 14:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 23:54 |
|
|
Cicero posted:Debatable. That is certainly a high upfront cost (processing and polishing the maps, not just getting the raw LIDAR data), so any given market would only be able to support a few different players. It's the kind of thing that will probably eventually become unnecessary, but will also probably take a while. It's not just an upfront cost: it's an ongoing cost, since the maps also have to be constantly updated for every little change in the road. Ultimately, it's an approach that leads absolutely nowhere: it's just a stopgap to keep investor storytime going in the face of insufficient progress on truly autonomous driving. And if we want to talk about "economically viable", then they're not just competing against other self-driving car efforts: they also have to compete against existing taxi services, jitney services, and public transit. They'd pretty much have to run the operation at a loss. And even then, they'd still have a very hard time competing with Uber, which runs things at a loss while also externalizing almost all the costs. IMO, the only way self-driving taxis are going to be anywhere near economically workable in the next decade, even just on a very limited basis, is if they follow an Uber-style model of offloading the cost of the car onto gullible rubes.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2018 15:56
|
|
|
Weeeell...If SDCs don't need a driver's license, such that a blind guy like, say, me could operate one legally.... Externalize your costs onto me all ya like, guys, if I can more or less have my own goddamn car.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2018 16:36
|
|
|
Spacewolf posted:Weeeell...If SDCs don't need a driver's license, such that a blind guy like, say, me could operate one legally.... Hell, I'm not physically impaired at all and I can't wait for them. The end game of self driving cars isn't a few here and there running as niche taxis, it's every vehicle on the road being self driving except in rare cases. And as somebody who's been both a delivery driver and a taxi driver I can honestly say it can't come soon enough.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2018 17:22
|
|
|
ryonguy posted:The end game of self driving cars isn't a few here and there running as niche taxis, it's every vehicle on the road being self driving except in rare cases. this wont happen until 15+ years after the last manually operated car is sold
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2018 17:28
|
|
|
ryonguy posted:Hell, I'm not physically impaired at all and I can't wait for them. The end game of self driving cars isn't a few here and there running as niche taxis, it's every vehicle on the road being self driving except in rare cases. And as somebody who's been both a delivery driver and a taxi driver I can honestly say it can't come soon enough. Maybe, but the reason we're only talking about self-driving taxis is that the technology for truly autonomous self-driving cars is nowhere near being ready. And even after true self-driving cars are working, "every car on the road being self-driving" isn't going to happen for a long long time.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2018 17:28
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Maybe, but the reason we're only talking about self-driving taxis is that the technology for truly autonomous self-driving cars is nowhere near being ready. And even after true self-driving cars are working, "every car on the road being self-driving" isn't going to happen for a long long time. luxury handset posted:this wont happen until 15+ years after the last manually operated car is sold
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2018 18:06
|
|
|
ryonguy posted:It can be legislated a lot faster though, and should be because hanging onto manual operated vehicles for nostalgia's sake is stupid. -legislation generally tends towards what is safer, rather than what is not -it is widely assumed that self driving cars are safer but this hasn't been proven yet because self driving cars dont exist yet -there are also a shitload of niche applications which would have to be accounted for (farm and rural vehicles? off road vehicles? emergency vehicles? grandfathered vehicles? motorcycles and other small vehicles?) ryonguy posted:Humans are lovely drivers. In fact, humans are lovely at most repetitive tasks compared to a machine specifically design for it. humans are generally ok drivers. many people go years if not decades without an accident. a smaller number of people cause a larger number of fatal accidents - mostly young people, old people, and people with bad driving habits  (skewed because 85+ year olds generally dont drive as much) just because i know you're going to say "but these people would be helped with self driving cars!" that is not the point - self driving car advocates often say "people are bad drivers" about people, in general, as if everyone is a bad driver, as if safe driving is not a skill that can be learned ryonguy posted:the technology is completely feasible, and will be better than what we have now, especially out in non-urban centers where mass transit isn't realistic. you missed the point of my post. this future you imagine might be inevitable, all i'm saying it will happen so long from now if it does that it is basically a fantasy. we may as well be talking about flying cars in terms of what could have a positive impact today Mr. Fall Down Terror fucked around with this message at 18:21 on Aug 27, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2018 18:18
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Maybe, but the reason we're only talking about self-driving taxis is that the technology for truly autonomous self-driving cars is nowhere near being ready. People only talk about taxis because they are the ultimate ultra level 5 do everything goal. In consumer cars there is all sorts going on in level 1/2/3/4 self driving cars but like, that is lesser than than a taxi so it's easier to dismiss as no big deal.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2018 18:19
|
|
|
ryonguy posted:It can be legislated a lot faster though, and should be because hanging onto manual operated vehicles for nostalgia's sake is stupid. People aren't going to be "hanging onto" manually-operated cars "for nostalgia's sake", they're going to be doing it because new cars are expensive and self-driving cars are going to be even more expensive. Not sure how you "legislate" that, outside of massive government handouts to car companies.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2018 20:35
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:People aren't going to be "hanging onto" manually-operated cars "for nostalgia's sake", they're going to be doing it because new cars are expensive and self-driving cars are going to be even more expensive. Not sure how you "legislate" that, outside of massive government handouts to car companies. the government has the ability to regulate cost-adding safety features and mandate their inclusion into new vehicles. think crash standards, air bags, etc. whether self driving technology ever gets to a point where it is measurably safer than a competent, aware human driver remains to be seen
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2018 20:41
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:outside of massive government handouts to car companies. You're right, this will never happen ever
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2018 20:53
|
|
|
luxury handset posted:the government has the ability to regulate cost-adding safety features and mandate their inclusion into new vehicles. think crash standards, air bags, etc. Notably those take effect for current or future model years and not past. Even if the government decreed that all cars MY 2025 or newer have to be fully automatic that means that you will have manual cars until at least 2039 and likely much longer than that as people hold onto cars already purchased for various reasons. Of course for the government to legislate that all cars need to have said feature requires that such feature actually exist.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2018 22:33
|
|
|
It's also important to remember that autonomous cars aren't an all or nothing thing and exist on a spectrum. We aren't going to jump one day from totally manual cars to totally self driving cars. Even right this second a brand new honda civic has a pretty long list of driver assist stuff that uses cameras and radar and stuff to assist drivers without being any sort of full self driving. Because of that it won't mean that everyone needs to necessarily buy a new car with every new breakthrough. Taking my 20 year old car and making it self driving would require a bunch of physical retrofits that are almost certainly near impossible, but if a cars going forward already have suites of sensors and computers and going from one generation of self driving to the next may very well just mean some replacement parts or even just a firmware update. It's going to be a spectrum of ability for cars, and the jump between the some steps certainly aren't going to require buying entire new cars. A car might become a platform for packages of equipment and like apple and google might release a new version every year where you can upgrade or not on your own timetable with people getting a new set every 1/2/3/5 years depending on their income and interest while some of the software filters down to even older stuff.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2018 23:26
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:People aren't going to be "hanging onto" manually-operated cars "for nostalgia's sake", they're going to be doing it because new cars are expensive and self-driving cars are going to be even more expensive. Not sure how you "legislate" that, outside of massive government handouts to car companies. It's been speculated that widespread autonomous taxi service could, if the price was right, render personal car ownership unnecessary for many people (such as the people clinging to 20 year old shitboxes because it's the only way they can get to work).
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2018 00:51
|
|
|
Cockmaster posted:It's been speculated that widespread autonomous taxi service could, if the price was right, render personal car ownership unnecessary for many people (such as the people clinging to 20 year old shitboxes because it's the only way they can get to work). This is speculated by the kind of people who do unironic "What could a banana cost, $10?" questions.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2018 00:59
|
|
|
Cockmaster posted:It's been speculated that widespread autonomous taxi service could, if the price was right, render personal car ownership unnecessary for many people (such as the people clinging to 20 year old shitboxes because it's the only way they can get to work). The going argument against this idea is that it's too expensive and if people didn't want to own a car they'd use a bus, I think car2go has proven that there's a market for single use personal vehicles. Especially considering most poor families I grew up with in the Phoenix ghetto would do things like rent a lovely car a few times a month to do things like grocery shop on the weekend. Car rentals were approx. 20-50 bucks a day at that time, a quick google shows that it's about the same price today. If a Waymo costs 10 bucks each way it seems like a great option.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2018 01:05
|
|
|
Edit; Whoops, wrong thread.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2018 01:07
|
|
|
Cockmaster posted:It's been speculated that widespread autonomous taxi service could, if the price was right, render personal car ownership unnecessary for many people (such as the people clinging to 20 year old shitboxes because it's the only way they can get to work). even if so, that would be toward the latter end of the adoption curve, not the first half.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2018 01:18
|
|
|
Cockmaster posted:It's been speculated that widespread autonomous taxi service could, if the price was right, render personal car ownership unnecessary for many people (such as the people clinging to 20 year old shitboxes because it's the only way they can get to work). given the economics involved (humans are diurnal, peak travel times are a thing that will never leave us) people will be swapping out their old rust bucket commuter vehicles for bronze tier fleet vehicle access that guarantees no better than a 60 minute wait for your cloud summoned vehicle to arrive ElCondemn posted:Especially considering most poor families I grew up with in the Phoenix ghetto would do things like rent a lovely car a few times a month to do things like grocery shop on the weekend. the easier solution would be implementing mass transit and urban infill because we could do that negative fifty years ago instead of waiting for a day when the free market can rent seek off bad planning decisions i'm not yelling at you here. just stating the fact that a lot of people miss
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2018 01:22
|
|
|
luxury handset posted:the easier solution would be implementing mass transit and urban infill because we could do that negative fifty years ago instead of waiting for a day when the free market can rent seek off bad planning decisions Well sure, but that's not very helpful in predicting the future of US transportation, since free market rent seeking is a core economic goal atm.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2018 01:46
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Well sure, but that's not very helpful in predicting the future of US transportation, since free market rent seeking is a core economic goal atm. there's more local support behind mass transit than ever, if we get a sane federal policy in the next 10-20 years it would be a big help of course it is unlikely that mass transit will expand to the new suburban ghettos of the future but, its possible
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2018 01:49
|
|
|
Cockmaster posted:They'd have to stay on top of any road construction that goes on in the service area, but that shouldn't be too bad compared to the cost savings from not having human drivers. the Tesla would burn up with you inside it after you left the parking lot, and if it didn't you'd go to the wrong place Edit never mind the cost of that car making it inaccessible for most of the population and thus not a solution to jack poo poo BENGHAZI 2 fucked around with this message at 03:43 on Aug 28, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2018 03:40
|
|
|
ryonguy posted:It can be legislated a lot faster though, and should be because hanging onto manual operated vehicles for nostalgia's sake is stupid. And the technology isn't [arbitrary time period] away, it's here now, being worked on and finalized. There won't be a magical "It works perfectly and will never fail" point that naysayers demand. Humans are lovely drivers. In fact, humans are lovely at most repetitive tasks compared to a machine specifically design for it. It's the purpose of automation. Uber being a bunch of greedy assholes and Musk being a clueless jackass aside, the technology is completely feasible, and will be better than what we have now, especially out in non-urban centers where mass transit isn't realistic. Yes the only reason to hang on to a car that I'd manually operated is nostalgia and not the fact that self driving cars are going to be out of reach for most of America for a good while luxury handset posted:the government has the ability to regulate cost-adding safety features and mandate their inclusion into new vehicles. think crash standards, air bags, etc. The govt can't however force those cars to be affordable for everyone BENGHAZI 2 fucked around with this message at 03:49 on Aug 28, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2018 03:44
|
|
|
BENGHAZI 2 posted:The govt can't however force those cars to be affordable for everyone I mean they can, but they won't.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2018 03:52
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:It's not just an upfront cost: it's an ongoing cost, since the maps also have to be constantly updated for every little change in the road. Ultimately, it's an approach that leads absolutely nowhere: it's just a stopgap to keep investor storytime going in the face of insufficient progress on truly autonomous driving. Constantly needing to scan the road to drive properly is the way cars will be able to be fully autonomous anyway. "But we need to lidar scan the road all the time" isn't the problem, the problem is "make lidar (or whatever) better and cheaper so you can stick three of it on every $15k piece of poo poo car".
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2018 11:51
|
|
I CANNOT EJACULATE WITHOUT SEEING NATIVE AMERICANS BRUTALISED!
|
Insurance costs will likely also be a big factor in hastening the changeover to self driving cars. If self driving cars are massively more safe than human drivers then we'll likely see a scenario where its €50-100 a year to insure your self driving car, but €1000 a year to insure yourself to drive. More in the case of young male drivers, who routinely pay €2000-3000 a year in Western Europe. That, plus significantly higher yearly taxes on human driven cars, could mean a running cost differential of a few thousand euros a year very easily. That will prompt all but the very poorest who can't get access to credit to changeover rapidly.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2018 13:53
|
|
|
Nothing says low insurance risk like a car that barely works in more conditions than the F35.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2018 14:15
|
|
|
Because how self-driving cars work in development right now is totally how they'll work forever.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2018 14:16
|
|
|
suck my woke dick posted:Constantly needing to scan the road to drive properly is the way cars will be able to be fully autonomous anyway. "But we need to lidar scan the road all the time" isn't the problem, the problem is "make lidar (or whatever) better and cheaper so you can stick three of it on every $15k piece of poo poo car". Yeah, but there's a difference between "every car using their own mapping equipment to read the road on the fly" and "special mapping cars with much higher-quality sensors and human drivers have to regularly travel every single road to generate hi-res maps that get looked over and adjusted by human technicians and uploaded to all the self-driving cars". The latter approach is just covering up the flaws of their current self-driving algorithms by throwing lots of money and man-hours at manually creating self-driving "rails" for the cars to follow. It's okay as a stop-gap until they can get their cars smart enough to actually figure out the roads without being spoon-fed. However, it's a gigantic dedication of resources to a technological dead-end that'll be rendered obsolete as soon as their self-driving cars can actually handle the roads on their own. Sure, some of the self-driving car makers do have the resources to brute-force self-driving in small areas like this, but why bother? It's a tremendous waste of resources if genuinely self-driving cars are right around the corner - and even if they aren't, it's still not really worthwhile as anything more than a limited PR stunt.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2018 14:54
|
|
|
I'm sure Waymo is working on automating more and more of the process as they go along, as their software gets more accurate at labeling/outlining features from raw data. The work human techs do now is creating reliable training/verification data.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2018 15:11
|
|
|
Oh man, I'm not getting involved in this debate yet again  One thing I will say though is that nobody's gonna take my manual miata, I'm gonna race it to the ground.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2018 15:39
|
|
|
mobby_6kl posted:Oh man, I'm not getting involved in this debate yet again my personal estimation is that car guys and other assorted stubborn holdouts are like 10-15% of the folks who will resist self driving cars in most situations
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2018 15:56
|
|
|
Obviously manual driving will be fine on private property, but on public roads, I'm afraid resistance is futile, comrade.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2018 16:29
|
|
|
Cicero posted:Obviously manual driving will be fine on private property, but on public roads, I'm afraid resistance is futile, comrade. *private land ownership will be abolished, all holdings are forfeited to the state
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2018 16:37
|
|
|
Cicero posted:Obviously manual driving will be fine on private property, but on public roads, I'm afraid resistance is futile, comrade. haha at use of 'comrade' in a society which still mandates private vehicle ownership to use public roadways
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2018 16:38
|
|
|
Cicero posted:Obviously manual driving will be fine on private property, but on public roads, I'm afraid resistance is futile, comrade. You should probably stop with talking like this until usable self driving cars exist and won't fall over in situations like "traffic" and "rain".
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2018 17:07
|
|
|
self driving cars better develop in a hurry because traffic congestion is only going to get worse and that is definitely going to be an oil/water scenario with automated vehicles that default for safety to driving like an old cautious grandpa
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2018 17:15
|
|
|
What's probably going to gently caress self driving cars the most is the reality that they will work exponentially better if each one can communicate its vector and a limited portion of its future route to every other nearby vehicle and vice versa, but we'll have to put up with the autonomous vehicle equivalent of VHS vs Beta either until the "best" system "wins", or the govn't tells them to shut the gently caress up and pick a standard.fishmech posted:You should probably stop with talking like this until usable self driving cars exist and won't fall over in situations like "traffic" and "rain". ryonguy fucked around with this message at 17:49 on Aug 28, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2018 17:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 23:54 |
|
|
ryonguy posted:
Humans successfully drive, actually. It's that simple, cars that fail way more often are not going to provide safety or other benefits. ryonguy posted:heavy traffic is the perfect situation for SDC because without a hundred different people with varying degrees of reflex reaction time you won't have bunching up and other traffic clots. Physics still exists dude, self driving cars (which don't exist) aren't going to be able to get rid of those things which have their causes in physical reality. No matter how much you believe Elon Musk, cars aren't going to have instant acceleration and instant braking.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2018 19:48
|
|