Thứ Tư, 28 tháng 12, 2016

Full Autonomy All But Confirmed for 3, "We're doing the obvious thing" part 2

  • Jun 8, 2016
    alseTrick
    That's not something I'd ever even considered with autonomous driving. So how would the system respond to that object in the road? That's the next question, especially if there is a vehicle in front of them obstructing their view of the object until it's much closer than 50m away.
    �
  • Jun 8, 2016
    Omer
    I searched your previous posts and found the video:



    great info and another MASSIVE piece to the puzzle. At 5:15 he indicates that Tesla is CURRENTLY using 5 EyeQ3's with 8 camera's, single radar and 4 ultrasonic's. That matches up perfectly with Amnon's presentation from CES posted by favo in relation to "full vision"

    View attachment 179742

    That would mean that all current Tesla's already have everything necessary for full autopilot, all they would need would be to switch out the processor. That's something Tesla could offer for a relatively low fee in the future.
    �
  • Jun 8, 2016
    favo
    I can't find a video of MobilEye CEO Ziv Aviram's presentation at Citi�s 2015 Global Technology Conference (9/8/2015), but here's an Electrek article covering it that quotes him.
    Another pertinent article on Electrek from 3/29/2016: Elon Musk reportedly visited Mobileye to test tech for next gen Tesla Autopilot
    �
  • Jun 9, 2016
    grommet
    The Tesla Model S & Model X Autopilot hardware sensors haven't been updated since first introduced. Sorry. A single front camera, front facing radar, and ultrasonic sensors around the car (that are limited to about 16 feet.) This is Autopilot 1.0, and it's nowhere near what's needed for full autonomy or significantly better semi-autonomy. Stay tuned for Autopilot 2.0 later this year, hopefully.
    �
  • Jun 9, 2016
    malcolm
  • Jun 9, 2016
    ecarfan
    I listened to that video and did not hear him use the word "Tesla". Obviously Tesla is not currently using 8 cameras.

    I believe that video is from 2015
    �
  • Jun 9, 2016
    JeffK
  • Jun 9, 2016
    Topher
    You are only saying that because it is so ubiquitous as to be invisible. In the US, 100 Million of us get behind the controls of a deadly weapon every day. We interact in often stressful ways with thousands of complete strangers, who are not in our family or tribe. A mere moments unconcern for all those fellow humans would result in an accident. For all that, surprisingly few accidents occur, around 20 deaths per Billion miles traveled (and that number has been dropping for the entire time we have had cars, if you think things are getting worse, that is perception, not reality). The number which involve actual mendacity is probably much lower. I can't remember the last murder by car I read about. That really is quite a remarkable feat. We are moral to a degree which is basically unexplainable.

    Thank you kindly.
    �
  • Jun 9, 2016
    ecarfan
    I think our survival instinct plays a larger role than morality in explaining the relatively low accident rate. That, and the cost of repairs.
    �
  • Jun 9, 2016
    Chewy3
    The main reason I refrain from ramming bad drivers/cyclists/pedestrians. :rolleyes:
    �
  • Jun 9, 2016
    Skotty
    In the latest shareholder meeting, Elon talked about not wanting to shove too much new technology into the 3 like they did with the X. At the same time, he talked about putting new technology in the S and X lines first (largely due to high cost on first iterations, though probably also so it can be tested on a smaller audience first, though they won't likely say that in public).

    So....if there is ever to be autonomous driving, I would expect to see it in the S and/or X first. And then maybe it will make it's way to the 3 a year or two after that. In other words, no autonomous driving for the 3. At least, not at first.

    You can read just about anything into the "doing the obvious thing" comment, as what Elon finds obvious, many others will not. I might think the obvious thing would be to drop the electric drive train for the 3 and use a gas engine. Obviously, I don't really think that. Or do I? You don't know!
    �
  • Jun 9, 2016
    Topher
    Really? How many times this week did you put poison in someone's coffee? No survival instinct or repair cost there.

    Thank you kindly.
    �
  • Jun 9, 2016
    JeffK
    First, the actual cost of autopilot hardware is really low if you aren't doing lidar. The MobilEye chips are under $50 a piece and camera modules are a few dollars at most. Second in the news left and right companies are already starting to make commercial deals for developing autonomous vehicles. I'd say we'll see an advanced version of autopilot on Model 3 reveal 2 late this year. Shortly after this we'll see the hardware on Model S and X then around ~8 months later deliveries for Model 3 may start with the new hardware and the promise that Model S and X would get tech first would be kept.
    �
  • Jun 9, 2016
    Topher
    There are two parts to autonomous driving. Hardware and software. The hardware exists on S and X, and will be put on the ?. Will it be enough? No one knows. If Tesla figures out what IS enough in the next 18 months or so, will they put it on the S and X? Yes, as soon as possible. Will they wait to add it to the ?? No reason they would, that just increases their service load later to no good purpose. Once the hardware is complete, The software will be incrementally improved, again the S and X might get it slightly sooner, but there is some liability in leaving less functional safety software in cars, when you could just update them.

    Thank you kindly.
    �
  • Jun 9, 2016
    ohmman
    There's also nothing to gain but a lot to lose. There's a clear risk/reward trade off.

    This is also kind of interesting. I suggest listening to this Freakonomics episode for a slant on the subject.
    �
  • Jun 9, 2016
    EVNow
    And what it can do to insurance rates in the future.

    But - I've to say - when people start doing dangerous things very often, they get sort of numb to it. They start getting careless. Just look at all the texting and other stuff people do in cars - even people who are otherwise risk-averse.
    �
  • Jun 9, 2016
    ecarfan
    Hmmm...don't follow what that has to do with the point I made, which was that a major reason that human drivers avoid hitting other cars is they don't want to suffer injury or death. Also, being involved in an accident incurs financial costs and inconvenience. The moral reasons for avoiding accidents -- don't want to injure or kill another human -- is of course also a factor.

    Bottom line is, almost everyone wants to avoid pain. Avoiding car accidents therefore seems like a good idea.
    �
  • Jun 9, 2016
    Topher
    You said that survival instinct and repair cost played more of a role than morality. But given a situation without those elements, we don't see immoral behavior. So perhaps morality is the major influence, unpopular as it might be to think of people as moral.

    Thank you kindly.
    �
  • Jun 9, 2016
    ecarfan
    In "a situation" like driving on roads at speed with other cars, which is what we are talking about in this thread, the survival instinct is always present whether drivers consciously acknowledge it or not. That is the primary motivator that keeps us from randomly crashing into other vehicles: we don't want to get hurt.
    �
  • Jun 10, 2016
    gregincal
    Both are true. Will people try and avoid hitting a dog in a road? The damage to the car would be minimal. Some won't, but most would.

    However, I would argue that decisions about the proper behavior in cars is more driven by ethics than morals, and ethics is definitely something that can be programmed into a computer, probably with better results than the split second decisions mostly driven by instinct just before a crash (yes, it is better to damage the car than hit a person, but not to swerve wildly and flip the car, thus killing yourself as well as the person in question).
    �
  • Jun 10, 2016
    JeffK
    You can always do what Google patented and simply brake as much as possible then hit the person and have them stick on your car.

    [?IMG]
    �
  • Jun 10, 2016
    FirstSea
    I hope AP comes with Reckless Mode, which ensures the car drives away after hitting anything.
    �
  • Jun 10, 2016
    Afdyce
    I hate that idea, looks tacky
    �
  • Jun 10, 2016
    EVNow
    This is absolutely the case.

    Recently there was a terrible tragedy in Bellevue, WA. Someone tried to avoid getting hit by another car - swerved and hit a baby in a stroller on the sidewalk killing the baby instantly.

    Whenever I read anything about "ethical" choices and whether AI can be as good as humans, I'm reminded of this - and I hope AI is better.
    �
  • Jun 10, 2016
    TacC
    Agreed. There is probably too much optimism around the features and capabilities of the M3. We shouldn't conflate full autonomy with sustainable transport. An aspiration cannot get in the way of a mission.

    Tesla's best move is to stick to the basics with the M3 and leave the experimentation to the S and X. There are 400,000 reservations with no promise of autonomy. Why raise the cost and difficulty of manufacturing?
    �
  • Jun 10, 2016
    Booga
    1) they could get cancellations
    2) they need to remain far ahead of the competition
    3) their brand image is all about technology and they need to maintain that
    �
  • Jun 10, 2016
    cronosx
    The CAR will probably see the baby ( unless it's obscured by something ) and the basic "hit a car, not a pedestrian" is of course a basic concept for everyone, i don't think anyone will have something to say about this.
    A person will probably not be able to see the baby and calculate that is better to hit a car, it has no time for this, else i think everyone will choose to hit the car, even if they don't have an ethic, killing a person is surely more costly ( jail / payment / etc ) than hit a car.

    The etic problem is when you have to choose from 2 type of "problem" with the same class.

    The choose are simple:
    - Class A: Hit nothing
    - Class B: Hit animated object
    - Class C: Hit car
    - Class D: Hit pedestrian

    When you have to choose from class B and class A, surely, class A
    B vs D? B, C vs B? B etc...

    The problem is C vs C, or D vs D, but in this case an human surely can't choose, it has no time, a computer on the other hand, probably can't choose from an element from the same class and will probably choose the less risky ( more breaking space or similar ), but as said, it's not an ethical decision, it's just tath you can't make a decision
    �
  • Jun 11, 2016
    zenmaster
    By the time AI is that advanced, the baby carriage will have evasive maneuver capability.
    �
  • Jun 11, 2016
    malcolm
    The AP can hunt down Boston Dynamics's Petman? That's awesome :)

    Now that's what I call a hood ornament!
    �
  • Jul 21, 2016
    grommet
    So, does anyone still believe Model 3 will be fully autonomous at launch now that Tesla's Master Plan, Pt. 2 is out... with it's more realistic statements about the path to full autonomy?
    �
  • Jul 21, 2016
    Booga
    I'm just hoping for cameras all the way around to support future software pushes and/or a relatively inexpensive upgrade path to whatever comes out.
    �
  • Jul 21, 2016
    vinnie97
    I'll just be thrilled if they give the option of adaptive CC option versus the full autonomous suite.
    �
  • Jul 21, 2016
    zenmaster
    There are apparently at least 103 forum members that have no clue what fully autonomous means.
    �
  • Jul 21, 2016
    Burnardr
    No but I never thought it would have it either. I like Elon's idea of sharing cars when you don't use them but I don't trust people and it doesn't solve the problem of commuting where everyone needs to be on the road at the same time.
    �
  • Jul 21, 2016
    jkk_
    Yup. If someone is willing to share their car then I think they should be allowed to (context: Uber is currently illegal here) but doesn't me I'm going to do it.
    �
  • Jul 21, 2016
    Chopr147
    Sharing would have the car itself doing the driving so at least you don't have to worry about drivers. But, have you ever seen the backseat of a NYC taxi? The interior would take a good hit.
    �
  • Jul 21, 2016
    Topher
    So you would mess up someone else's nice car that was giving you a ride, even though it would mean that it was the last ride you would ever get?

    Thank you kindly.
    �
  • Jul 21, 2016
    BluestarE3
    That would hold true if people were always civil, respectful of other people's property and sober. That's not always the case. Sure, he may never get to ride in your Tesla (or anybody else's rental Tesla) again, but there's still the matter of your having to clean out puke or super-sized slushy from your seats. All it takes is one jerk and one time. And the person may not even be a jerk normally.

    I'm sure a lot of people, especially millennials, would love the ability to share their underutilized vehicles with others and make some money in the process. That's great. However, there are many of us who have no desire to do so for the reasons presented.
    �
  • Jul 21, 2016
    Chopr147
    My point was as a Uber vehicle it would be subject to many people. Some considerate, some not so much. Food, drinks causing stains ,wrappers and garbage etc,,,,,,,,
    And I am much too OCD and clean for that :)
    �
  • Jul 21, 2016
    alseTrick
    I would LOVE that. I have next to no use for summon. I can live without the parking assist feature (especially since it still needs refining). And I don't need autosteering.

    But if I could turn cruise control on and have the vehicle automatically slow down/speed up while I steer, OMG Becky.
    �
  • Jul 21, 2016
    Jayc
    I think there is a good chance all the hardware for full autonomy will be available with M3 but that on its own is meaningless because as Elon says, the software i.e. algorithms will take a much longer to reach levels of maturity required for full autonomy.
    �
  • Jul 21, 2016
    alseTrick
    Carpooling will have to increase. With more vehicles on the road offering ride-sharing and carpooling services via apps (or what have you), I do expect carpooling to be more widely used in the future. Though I think it would still only make up a small percentage of commuters. Even a 5-10% reduction in vehicles would likely improve traffic.
    �
  • Jul 21, 2016
    Booga
    This is not only a matter for the owner, but for riders. I anticipate it will require an internal camera to the car and a servicing center where it can be cleaned, charged, tire pressures adjusted, etc.

    We could dive into many logistical items related to making this work, but odds are that it's still 10 years out, and in my opinion, not going to happen with current model 3 orders and technology.
    �
  • Jul 21, 2016
    JeffK
    I'd just want to be sure that no one is still in the car when it arrives home...
    �
  • Jul 21, 2016
    vinnie97
    At this time, I don't see those bells and whistles as particularly valuable either. On the other hand, adaptive CC has been something I've wanted in my next vehicle for years now. That plus the safety features incorporated by default would do for me.
    �
  • Jul 22, 2016
    zenmaster
    How much of Tesla's autonomous driving tech is in-house vs Mobileye?
    �
  • Jul 22, 2016
    plankeye
    I had a similar question, but specifically about the software. Does Mobileye provide any software, or just hardware? It looks like they sell standalone systems, so they must do some of their own software, at least for those systems.

    Earlier, Elon put out a call for software developers, specifically for AP, so obviously Tesla is writing at least some of the software.
    �
  • Jul 22, 2016
    Chewy3
    Most likely: Mobileye provides the firmware for their sensors, maybe some basic software - but Tesla most likely handles a majority of the software. This is pretty normal for sensors that are fitting into larger systems, the manufacturer rarely does the integration coding (getting the mobileye sensors to coordinate with the vehicles controls). This is left to the customer (telsa) to program as they see fit.
    �
  • Jul 22, 2016
    plankeye
    So, is the Mobileye chip like a very custom CPU or GPU or something? What makes it so good/special?
    �
  • Jul 22, 2016
    JeffK
    Their website has always sucked donkey balls, but you can read about the older EyeQ2 here
    EyeQ2 - Mobileye

    first gen EyeQ� - Mobileye
    �
  • Jul 22, 2016
    plankeye
    Thanks, Jeff! I agree about their site. I think I could do better! :eek:
    �
  • Jul 22, 2016
    3Victoria
    I assume that MobilEye sensors do low level.processing and identify rectangular areas as cars, bikes, pedestrians, ... allowing higjer level intregration by Tesla chips. Tesla hired some chip designers, so integration may be underway.
    �
  • Jul 23, 2016
    zenmaster
    Why do you assume that?
    �
  • Jul 23, 2016
    3Victoria
    Because of the descriptions from the MobilEye website (see above).
    �
  • Jul 23, 2016
    zenmaster
    Their CTO's CES presentation earlier this year suggested a much higher level set of algorithms way beyond object identification. You might want to take a look at that. Mobileye is providing tech for calculating necessary changes to vehicle timing, course speed/direction when merging into crowded traffic circles, for example. I'm not sure we will ever know exactly how Tesla integrates the tech because this stuff is industry secret sauce.
    �
  • Jul 23, 2016
    3Victoria
    Yes, I had seen mention that Tesla has its own integration software. Still, from a design view-point having each sensor system doing some degree of local processing is attractive since it reduces message traffic among the processes. At some level the different sensor information has to be integrated. I suspect MobilEye is providing complete solutions to some manufactures, but Tesla wants to keep control of the higher level integration, perhaps for use of a HUD, say. The entry at Wikipedia is quite good. Mobileye - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    �
  • Jul 26, 2016
    zenmaster
    Looks like Tesla is ending it's partnership with Mobileye. Since they don't have sufficient expertise in autonomous driving, they may be switching to Nvidia. But Nvidia is behind Mobileye in the field, so don't know how this plays out for Tesla.
    �
  • Jul 26, 2016
    Booga
    Interesting... Mobileye Tanks After Partnership With Tesla Ends - Mobileye N.V. (NYSE:MBLY), Tesla Motors, Inc. (NASDAQ:TSLA)

    I thought Nvidia, at least for one of the chips, it utilizing Mobileye in their solution, right? The Mobileye chip is handling recognition/identification while Nvidia is able to handle a lot more processing needed.
    �
  • Jul 26, 2016
    JeffK
    Tesla hired a lot of people including chip developers in-house. Nvidia's CEO Jen-Hsun Huang is a big Tesla fan too. So anything could be happening.

    I was worried for a while because MobilEye timeframe for EyeQ4 2018 and EyeQ5 2020 are behind Tesla's ideal schedule for full autonomy.
    �
  • Jul 26, 2016
    zenmaster
    What I meant was that Mobileye is still ahead of everyone. So how can Nvidia (likely replacement), provide a faster track to full autonomy? This may be a good move for Tesla in the long run if Nvidia's tech can mature to suit requirements. But I can't imagine how this would get Tesla full autonomy any quicker. The move doesn't make sense for that purpose.
    �
  • Jul 26, 2016
    JeffK
    This is actually the easy part. Nvidia hardware can build DNNs faster. Tesla already has millions of miles of data and according to Tesla was using MobilEye for limited functionality and everything else was done by Tesla using other means.

    Using the data they already have, they can build better networks and hardware and test it out is a fast feedback loop.
    �
  • Jul 26, 2016
    flamingoezz
    maybe tesla is working on their own chipset..

    they started with a lotus platform on the roadster before building their own. they started using other companies batteries before building gigafactory. would anyone be surprised given Elon's hints at autonomy before EyeQ4 is due to be ready, if Tesla was building their AP hardware/software 100% themselves?

    �
  • Jul 26, 2016
    JeffK
    I'm not going to lie, I am anxious as to if Elon is going to clarify what's going on... or maybe he'll wait until the second reveal ;)
    �
  • Jul 26, 2016
    ecarfan
    ...according to Mobileye. Others may disagree.
    �
  • Jul 26, 2016
    zenmaster
    If you bothered to point that out then it begs the question of why would they disagree? That's kind of the point, not that everyone thinks the same.
    �
  • Jul 26, 2016
    JeffK
    Consider that this demo from Bosch last year performs better that the most advanced MobilEye tech.
    �
  • Jul 26, 2016
    Vitold
    Isn't it obvious? Tesla AP is better than MobileyeQ3.
    �
  • Jul 26, 2016
    zenmaster
    Yes, well how so would be the question and what is their development strategy. "Tesla AP" is a set of technologies undergoing constant development. What parts of 'Tesla AP" actually belong to Tesla.
    �
  • Jul 26, 2016
    Vitold
    Everyone else has access to MobileyeQ3/Bosh/etc and cannot beat AP because Tesla's advantage is it's software and constant development/updates.
    �
  • Jul 26, 2016
    zenmaster
    What functionality of auto pilot is in Tesla's software?
    �
  • Jul 26, 2016
    Vitold
    Everything, Mobileeye3 system is used just like one of the sensors. AP does all decision-making and learning.
    �
  • Jul 26, 2016
    zenmaster
    Obviously the control logic (decision making) is in Tesla's software. But that is not remotely "all of it"!
    �
  • Jul 26, 2016
    alseTrick
    Hopefully this is a good sign for autopilot and autonomy and not a setback.
    �
  • Jul 27, 2016
    zenmaster
    Elon said full autonomy (driverless anywhere) in 2018, while Mobileye says 2021 with its EyeQ5 chip. To make good on Elon's timeline, Tesla would need other tech. It will be interesting to see if the problem can be solved so soon by either party.
    �
  • Jul 27, 2016
    KeRaSh
    I just hope the necessary hardware will be in the Model 3 on day one. I don't care if they need another 2 years after that to develop the software for it but I'd be a little bummed out if they start rolling out new models with upgraded hardware shortly after getting my Model 3.
    �
  • Jul 28, 2016
    zenmaster
    I think you can count on a constant improvement in hardware necessary to support autonomous driving with consequent obsolescence. So you'd have to buy a new car to get the latest tech. The next best thing would be some kind of modular design for the components which would allow some upgradability.

    But we don't really know what Musk means by "fully autonomous" for his 2018 goal and therefore what hardware requirements are necessary. His idea likely just means adding some degree of urban capability allowing for maybe full autonomy for 90% of time or distance from and back to your home parking spot.

    That last 10% represents the inevitable, but much more difficult driving scenario problems to solve. 1% of that 10% could represent years of work and enable hundreds of new special environments and conditions. These extra scenarios will undoubtedly require more processing power and better sensors. You may think that 90% is good enough until new features provide much more convenience for your particular needs.
    �
  • Jul 28, 2016
    JeffK
    I don't know. I have two eyes and they haven't been upgraded since I got Lasik. Same brain... possibly degraded, over time.

    Once you can make an accurate 3D map to a sufficient resolution at a reasonable distance for expected speeds then besides processing speed, I'm not sure there's much else to upgrade hardware-wise (assuming sufficient redundant systems)... Everything else is software.
    �
  • Jul 28, 2016
    zenmaster
    You're always going to need faster processing hardware and better sensors.
    �
  • Jul 28, 2016
    JeffK
    What I'm saying is that I don't see why... there comes a point where the sensors will be able to provide all the necessary information and anything is useless. As for processing, once you achieve real-time or even just acceptable time (much faster than humans) then it'll allow fully autonomous driving. Once you have full autonomy then there's not really a need for better sensors or faster processing.

    There will still room for improvement on camera sensor sensitivity and dynamic range for the next few years though.
    �
  • Jul 28, 2016
    Topher
    Some fully autonomous humans are better drivers than other fully autonomous humans. There will always be edge cases where drivers (human or AI) can get better, or need to know more.

    Thank you kindly.
    �
  • Jul 28, 2016
    ohmman
    There's always an opportunity for improvement. Maybe the first autonomous sensor suite can see as much as humans can. But there's a case to be made that we've got a pretty limited view. Sensors that have better light sensitivity could improve on our vision. Being able to improve on seeing through dense fog or snow would also help. Analyzing the roadway for upcoming ice, nails, etc.

    Full autonomy can mean "drive like a human" but it can also mean "drive a hell of a lot better than a human." I think we're shooting for the latter, and that's a moving target.
    �
  • Jul 28, 2016
    Topher
    Even ten times fewer traffic fatalities is 3,300 dead every year.

    Thank you kindly.
    �
  • Jul 28, 2016
    zenmaster
    That mythical point will always be on the horizon as far as the expectations for this tech. Until then, there will be many paradigm shifts which will change the context of the discussion.
    The curve to true driverless autonomy processing is going to be asymptotic as it approaches actual full 100% go-anywhere capabilities. You'll see a fairly rapid advance to that easy 90% which is what Musk is likely trying to achieve in the short term. However, the remaining capabilities will take decades of research and people will always want more.
    Not "a few years". Try decades. For example, drivers often have to rely on only their hearing to time exits from fairly dangerous blind driveways, where current radar tech would not even get a bounce. Dirt roads - new dirt roads. No visible driveway due to leaves. Single lane bridge with two way fast traffic - apparently these exist in England. Suffice to say there is a lot of processing heavy AI involved - whole environment recognition not just simple object recognition will be required.
    �
  • Aug 4, 2016
    Umair Siddiqii
  • Aug 4, 2016
    alseTrick
    Electrek is getting ahead of itself there.

    Tesla is a long way from full autonomy. They will implement features like full on-ramp to off-ramp highway driving and the ability to stop at traffic lights and stop signs first (and many other various features are required, too). They are NOT going to jump straight from the current Autopilot into full autonomy. No way.
    �
  • Aug 4, 2016
    JeffK
    Judging by some of the demos on youtube from even over a year ago and judging from how Google is doing, I'd say we're extremely close to full autonomy.

    In the call he practically guaranteed that the hardware will be there, so all we need to do is wait for the software updates.

    Keep in mind Tesla can test out DNN models any time using data already collected. There's nothing stopping them from moving full force.
    �
  • Aug 4, 2016
    3Victoria
    Agree, I think we will be surprised.
    �
  • Aug 4, 2016
    JeffK
    ... but by Elon's admission it'll be the obvious thing.

    It's like knowing about your own surprise birthday party.... it's still pretty exciting! I can't wait to see how it performs.
    �
  • Aug 4, 2016
    TslaIsFuture
    We will have the hardware capable for full autonomy in the Model 3 but it will probably be a few years for the software to catch up and of course government slows everything to a snails pace so who knows when they will approve.
    �
  • Aug 4, 2016
    alseTrick
    Tesla is not going to jump straight from its current autopilot into full autonomy.
    �
  • Aug 4, 2016
    JeffK
    You'll see ;)
    �
  • Aug 4, 2016
    3Victoria
    it is possible that it will be 'full' autonomy where 'full' means we will need to be ready to take over while it learns in aggregate. They may need to be selective in who 'teaches'.
    �
  • Aug 4, 2016
    zenmaster
    "full autonomy" is such a BS word - it is meaningless.
    �
  • Aug 4, 2016
    zenmaster
    If you change the definition of "full autonomy" and change your expectation of what "close" means, then why yes, yes we are indeed. But what is that actually saying?
    �
  • Aug 4, 2016
    KeRaSh
    That's all I really want. I'll drive my Model 3 until the day it dies. Plenty of time for them to add the software as long as I have the hardware installed.
    �
  • Aug 4, 2016
    jdevo2004
    The day a fully autonomous vehicle even bumps a pedestrian is the day all the newscasters in the world will run a full week of headlines about the danger of autonomous cars and the fact that they are fallible. People will freak out and be suspicious of autonomous cars for a decade and will endlessly try to sue the pants off of autonomous vehicle manufacturers for running over their foot or something.
    �
  • Aug 4, 2016
    KeRaSh
    That's why I'm sure all autonomous cars will have cameras and advanced sensors on all sides to exactly log what happens in case of an accident.
    �
  • Aug 5, 2016
    ecarfan
    Breaking News, circa 1905:

    TERRIFYING "AUTO MOBILE" DEATH MACHINE KILLS INNOCENT BYSTANDER
    Mechanical Malfunction Causes Horrible Fatality: Are These New Contraptions Safe?
    Bystanders Are Shocked, Some Yell Out "Get a Horse!"
    �
  • Aug 5, 2016
    dsvick
    That's two words, which one don't you like? :)
    �
  • Aug 5, 2016
    ecarfan
    I find that phrase (it's two words, not one) quite clear: it means a vehicle that is capable of driving from start to destination, as determined by the human sitting in it, without any human input other then specifying the destination.

    That is what it means to me. What word(s) do you use to describe a vehicle with that capability?

    Google is operating cars that are capable of "full autonomy" right now, so it is not a theoretical concept.
    �
  • Aug 5, 2016
    jkk_
    Just to split hairs, wouldn't it actually mean that the car decides where it wants to go? :rolleyes: :D
    �
  • Aug 5, 2016
    zenmaster
    Ah but the tech is not yet available for a car to make all decisions from any two points under the normal conditions we face on the roadways. Therefore the idea of "full autonomy" being available is BS unless the phrase is redefined to mean partial autonomy.
    �
  • Aug 5, 2016
    alseTrick
    No, that would be self awareness, not autonomy.
    �
  • Aug 6, 2016
    ecarfan
    The Google cars that I have seen for years driving the freeways and surface streets of the SF Bay Area where I live are fully autonomous by the definition I gave in my post above.

    "Full autonomy" for cars does exist. It is not yet for sale to the consumer. But it is obviously not BS, and based on Google's data it is clearly safer than human drivers.
    �
  • Aug 6, 2016
    zenmaster
    If the conditions are restricted for "full autonomy" capabilities, when a human driver would not have same limitations then the phrase is obviously actually describing some level of limited "assisted driving".

    You must at least include the exception conditions in the definition of "fully autonomous" where a human would be required to operate the car.
    �
  • Aug 6, 2016
    Topher
    Remember Elon thought electric cars were the 'obvious thing' back in 2003, or actually way before. I don't think it means the same thing to most people as it does to him.

    Thank you kindly.
    �
  • Aug 6, 2016
    JeffK
    Everyone's expecting full autonomy and Elon said in the latest call that they are currently doing things [regarding autonomy] that impress even him so he feels that when the world see it they will be equally impressed.
    �
  • Aug 6, 2016
    Alketi
    • Người đăng: vào lúc

    Không có nhận xét nào:

    Đăng nhận xét

    Đăng ký: Đăng Nhận xét (Atom)