• @RobotToaster@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1542 months ago

    That’s what happens when you have a reasonable sensor suite with LIDAR, instead of trying to rely entirely on cameras like Tesla does.

  • Curious Canid
    link
    fedilink
    English
    812 months ago

    This would be more impressive if Waymos were fully self-driving. They aren’t. They depend on remote “navigators” to make many of their most critical decisions. Those “navigators” may or may not be directly controlling the car, but things do not work without them.

    When we have automated cars that do not actually rely on human being we will have something to talk about.

    It’s also worth noting that the human “navigators” are almost always poorly paid workers in third-world countries. The system will only scale if there are enough desperate poor people. Otherwise it quickly become too expensive.

  • @Buffalox@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    59
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Because they are driving under near ideal conditions, in areas that are completely mapped out, and guided away from roadworks and avoiding “confusing” crosses, and other traffic situations like unmarked roads, that humans deal with routinely without problem.
    And in a situation they can’t handle, they just stop and call and wait for a human driver to get them going again, disregarding if they are blocking traffic.

    I’m not blaming Waymo for doing it as safe as they can, that’s great IMO.
    But don̈́t make it sound like they drive better than humans yet. There is still some ways to go.

    What’s really obnoxious is that Elon Musk claimed this would be 100% ready by 2017. Full self driving, across America, day and night, safer than a human. I have zero expectation that Tesla RoboTaxi will arrive this summer as promised.

    • Lovable Sidekick
      link
      fedilink
      English
      42 months ago

      I think “near ideal conditions” is a huge exaggeration. The situations Waymo avoids are a small fraction of the total mileage driven by Waymo vehicles or the humans they’re being compared with. It’s like you’re saying a football team’s stats are grossly wrong if they don’t include punt returns.

    • @notsoshaihulud@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      32 months ago

      I have zero expectation that Tesla RoboTaxi will arrive this summer as promised.

      RoboTaxis will also have to “navigate” the Fashla hate. Not many will be eager to risk their lives with them

  • @theluddite@lemmy.ml
    cake
    link
    fedilink
    English
    40
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    I am once again begging journalists to be more critical of tech companies.

    But as this happens, it’s crucial to keep the denominator in mind. Since 2020, Waymo has reported roughly 60 crashes serious enough to trigger an airbag or cause an injury. But those crashes occurred over more than 50 million miles of driverless operations. If you randomly selected 50 million miles of human driving—that’s roughly 70 lifetimes behind the wheel—you would likely see far more serious crashes than Waymo has experienced to date.

    […] Waymo knows exactly how many times its vehicles have crashed. What’s tricky is figuring out the appropriate human baseline, since human drivers don’t necessarily report every crash. Waymo has tried to address this by estimating human crash rates in its two biggest markets—Phoenix and San Francisco. Waymo’s analysis focused on the 44 million miles Waymo had driven in these cities through December, ignoring its smaller operations in Los Angeles and Austin.

    This is the wrong comparison. These are taxis, which means they’re driving taxi miles. They should be compared to taxis, not normal people who drive almost exclusively during their commutes (which is probably the most dangerous time to drive since it’s precisely when they’re all driving).

    We also need to know how often Waymo intervenes in the supposedly autonomous operations. The latest we have from this, which was leaked a while back, is that Cruise (different company) cars are actually less autonomous than taxis, and require >1 employee per car.

    edit: The leaked data on human interventions was from Cruise, not Waymo. I’m open to self-driving cars being safer than humans, but I don’t believe a fucking word from tech companies until there’s been an independent audit with full access to their facilities and data. So long as we rely on Waymo’s own publishing without knowing how the sausage is made, they can spin their data however they want.

    edit2: Updated to say that ournalists should be more critical in general, not just about tech companies.

    • @nondescripthandle@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      222 months ago

      Journalist aren’t even critical of police press releases anymore, most simply print whatever they’re told verbatim. It may as well just be advertisement.

      • @theluddite@lemmy.ml
        cake
        link
        fedilink
        English
        142 months ago

        I agree with you so strongly that I went ahead and updated my comment. The problem is general and out of control. Orwell said it best: “Journalism is printing something that someone does not want printed. Everything else is public relations.”

      • Komodo Rodeo
        link
        fedilink
        English
        52 months ago

        The meat of the true issue right here. Journalism and investigative journalism aren’t just dead, their corpses has been feeding a palm tree like a pod of beached whales for decades. It’s a bizarre state of affairs to read news coverage and come out the other side less informed, without reading literal disinformation. It somehow seems so much worse that they’re not just off-target, but that they don’t even understand why or how they’re fucking it up.

    • William
      link
      fedilink
      English
      102 months ago

      I was going to say they should only be comparing them under the same driving areas, since I know they aren’t allowed in many areas.

      But you’re right, it’s even tighter than that.

      • @theluddite@lemmy.ml
        cake
        link
        fedilink
        English
        62 months ago

        These articles frustrate the shit out of me. They accept both the company’s own framing and its selectively-released data at face value. If you get to pick your own framing and selectively release the data that suits you, you can justify anything.

  • @Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    192 months ago

    No shit. The bar is low. Humans suck at driving. People love to throw FUD at automated driving, and it’s far from perfect, but the more we delay adoption the more lives are lost. Anti-automation on the roads is up there with anti-vaccine mentality in my mind. Fear and the incorrect assumption that “I’m not the problem, I’m a really good driver,” mentality will inevitably delay automation unnecessarily for years.

    • @Eczpurt@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      112 months ago

      It’d probably be better to put a lot of the R&D money into improving and reinforcing public transport systems. Taking cars off the road and separating cars from pedestrians makes a bigger difference than automating driving.

      • Final Remix
        link
        fedilink
        English
        22 months ago

        WVU has a tram system called the “PRT”. It’s semi-automated cars on a track around campus and downtown. It’s not great, but goddamn does it handle a large school population just fine. Very high throughput, and it keeps congestion down. … as down as you can be with such a high density town.

    • @Obi@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      62 months ago

      That, and the inevitable bureaucratic nightmare that awaits for standardising across makes and updating the infrastructure.

        • @Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          22 months ago

          Sure that’s great, but read the room. It’s like advocating for gun legislation in the US, it can only go so far realistically. The vast majority of US cities are built around automotive infrastructure and the culture is very much anti-public transport. That requires heavy government level buy in. Car automation can be driven primarily by industry. One can happen in a major way in a few years, the other will take decades if it happens at all. Personally I’m all for it, but it’s such a different discussion that it just comes across as distracting when talking about very real delays in car automation and it’s not a valid criticism of moving forward and promoting decreased barriers to fully automated vehicle infrastructure.

  • @kerrigan778@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    18
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Unprofessional human drivers (yes, even you) are unbelievably bad at driving, it’s only a matter of time, but call me when you can do it without just moving labor done by decently paid locals to labor done remotely in the third world.

    • @Buffalox@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      4
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Are you talking about remote controlling cars from India or something?
      That last sentence makes very little sense to me.

      How is that relevant? I’m pretty sure the latency would be too high, so it wouldn’t even work.

      Ah OK you are talking about the navigators, that “help” the car when it can’t figure out what to do.
      That’s a fair point.

      But still 1 navigator can probably handle many cars. So from the perspective of making a self driving taxi, it makes sense.

      • @Takumidesh@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        1
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        I find the scariest people on the road to be the arrogant ones that think they make no mistakes.

        I would t consider anyone who hasn’t done at least a dozen track days, experienced several different extreme scenarios (over/under steer, looping, wet grass at speed, airtime (or at least one or more wheels off the ground), high speed swerving, snap oversteer, losing systems, like brakes, engine, or the steering wheel lock engaging, etc) to be remotely prepared to handle a car going more than 25 or so mph. An extreme minority of drivers are actually prepared to handle an incoming collision in order to fully mitigate a situation. And that is only covering the mechanical skill of piloting the car, it doesn’t even touch in the theoretical and practical knowledge (rules of the road, including obscure and unenforced rules) and it definitely doesn’t even broach the discipline that is required to actually put it all together.

        If you a driver has never been trained, or even have an understanding of what will happen in an extreme scenario in a car, how could we consider them trained or sufficiently skilled.

        We don’t let pilots fly without spending time in a simulator, going over emergency scenarios and being prepared for when things go sideways. You can’t become an airline pilot if you don’t know what happens when you lose power.

        We let sub par people drive because restricting it too much would be seen as discrimination, but the overwhelming majority of people are ill equipped to actually drive.

        • @kameecoding@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -1
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          I hope this is a copy pasta lmao, if you actually go to a training course where you learn to handle oversteer, understeer and spin you out, they tell you that you have about a fuck all chance of recovering, even when there when you have warning and you know it’s coming and you have a fairly low speed you have very little chance of counter steering correctly.

          Here is what you actually have to do to drive safely:

          1, dont be a dumbass that thinks you need to go through 12 years of Formula 1 training to drive on the road, if anything the fact that you think training can make you prepared for extreme situations and that you can handle it is what’s arrogant and dangerous.

          2, dont be a dumbass and adjust your speed to driving conditions

          3 dont be a dumbass and don’t push the limits of your car on public roads

          4, defensive driving, assume people on the road are idiots and will fuck up and drive accordingly.

          5, learn how your car works, eg. just because you have an e-Handbrake you can still pull on it and it will stop the car

          6, and most important, because people don’t know how to do it, learn to emergency break, meaning your hazard lights come on.

          • @Takumidesh@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            0
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            I completely disagree.

            You are using the hand brake as an example. 95 percent of people (including you, evidently) don’t even understand that the handbrake is not an emergency brake, they don’t get how the behavior works, or the fact that it’s meant to be used as a parking brake, I consistently see people slam their parking pawls verytime they get out of their car. (Not to mention that it doesn’t even work while you are driving on most modern cars and has no modulation, as it’s just a button)

            If not being an idiot was good enough to drive a car, then it wouldn’t be so deadly. It’s also possible to fly a plane with common sense, but you wouldn’t be happy if your pilot told you they don’t have training.

            Driving isn’t easy, it’s just that we accept an absolutely catastrophic amount of accidents as a cost of doing business.

            • @kameecoding@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              1
              edit-2
              2 months ago

              It is an emergency brake when your brake fails, you donut. Again, it’s part of safety driving courses, that you clearly didn’t take.

              I am also from Europe, drivers are much better here compared to the US, just because your country absolutely sucks at training it’s drivers despite being entirely reliant on them is not my fault

  • Lovable Sidekick
    link
    fedilink
    English
    172 months ago

    We always knew good quality self-driving tech would vastly outperform human skill. It’s nice to see some decent metrics!

    • @Critical_Thinker@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -22 months ago

      I hate felon musk but I honestly believe their self driving tech is safer than humans.

      Have you seen the average human? They’re beyond dumb. If they’re in cars it’s like the majority of htem are just staring at their cell phones.

      I don’t think self driving tech works in all circumstances, but I bet it is already much better than humans at most driving, especially highway driving.

      • @Buffalox@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        62 months ago

        I think the fair comparison would be humans that drive legally.
        Idiots that drive high or drunk or without prescription glasses or whatever, shouldn’t count as “normal” human driving.
        In the same way a self driving car can have issues that will make it illegal.

        The problem is that legal self driving Tesla is not as safe as a legal person. I sees poorly at night, it gets confused in situations people handle routinely. And Tesla is infamous for not stopping when the road is blocked from 1m and up, and for breaking without reason. I’ve seen videos where they demonstrated an unnecessary break every ½ hour!! Where a large part was the German Autobahn, which is probably some of the easiest driving in the world!!

        • @Critical_Thinker@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          22 months ago

          I think the fair comparison would be humans that drive legally.

          Humans don’t drive legally. I don’t believe for a second there is a human on this planet who has never violated a rule of the road. The easy default is that we all speed.

          Who hasn’t done a rolling stop at a stop sign? Taken a turn they legally shouldn’t have? (No U turns? lol) Taken a right on red when it says not to but there’s literally nobody around?

          Cell phones are mostly illegal everywhere while driving and if you look around almost everyone is staring at them.

          This mythical person who never, ever does anything against the rules is impossible.

      • kingthrillgore
        link
        fedilink
        English
        32 months ago

        Bro I saw a video of their car drive through a wall and hand the controls back to the driver. No, it absolutely is not.

        • @Critical_Thinker@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          1
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          When was the last time you saw a “wall” erected on a freeway that was perfectly painted to mimic the current time of day, road, weather, etc. I’m not talking about for that example, i’m talking about in the real world.

          The answer is never.

          Yes, the optical sensors are fooled by an elaborate ruse that doesn’t exist in real world operating conditions on a highway.

          I still argue that for most normal driving circumstances, it is massively safer than humans who malfunction constantly.

          I will never, ever buy a tesla so long as felon musk has any ownership in it whatsoever. The guy is irredeemable. Still have way more faith in self driving tech overall (industry wide) than human drivers though. That’s the work of engineers, not an asshole.

      • @cley_faye@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        12 months ago

        I honestly believe their self driving tech is safer than humans.

        That’s how it should be. Unfortunately, one of the main decision maker on tesla’s self driving software is doing their best to make it perform worse and worse every time it gets an update.

  • @AA5B@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    82 months ago

    As a techno-optimist, I always expected self-driving to quickly become safer than human, at least in relatively controlled situations. However I’m at least as much a pessimist of human nature and the legal system.

    Given self-driving vehicles demonstrably safer than human, but not perfect, how can we get beyond humans taking advantage, and massive liability for the remaining accidents?

  • @GamingChairModel@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    82 months ago

    What’s tricky is figuring out the appropriate human baseline, since human drivers don’t necessarily report every crash.

    Also, I think it’s worth discussing whether to include in the baseline certain driver assistance technologies, like automated braking, blind spot warnings, other warnings/visualizations of surrounding objects, cars, bikes, or pedestrians, etc. Throw in other things like traction control, antilock brakes, etc.

    There are ways to make human driving safer without fully automating the driving, so it may not be appropriate to compare fully automated driving with fully manual driving. Hybrid approaches might be safer today, but we don’t have the data to actually analyze that, as far as I can tell.

    • @SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      22 months ago

      There’s a limit to what assist systems can do. Having the car and driver fighting for control actually makes everything far less safe.

  • @blazeknave@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    72 months ago

    I used to hate them for being slow and annoying. Now they drive like us and I hate them for being dicks. This morning, one of them made an insane move that only the worst Audi drivers in my area do, a massive left over a solid yellow across no stop sign with me coming right at it before it even began acceleration into the intersection.

    • @Jayk0b@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      32 months ago

      What’s more efficient?

      In terms of getting to an exact location.

      Public transportation only can get you near your target mostly. Not on point like a car, bike etc.

      • @WalnutLum@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        12 months ago

        In terms of getting to an exact location, the most efficient is no vehicle, walking.

        Cars are less efficient, followed by busses, then probably trains, then boats, then airplanes (unless you parachute).

        Cars are the least efficient in terms of moving large numbers of people from places they can then walk from.

        • Pennomi
          link
          fedilink
          English
          02 months ago

          The most efficient is obviously a combination of methods, using the fastest methods for each leg of the journey.

          In the US, right now, taking a car from point to point, then walking into your location is the fastest combination in most cases.

        • Amoxtli
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -4
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          It is hard to take you seriously. Open up Google Maps in the USA, and see how long it takes you to walk, and bike to a place. People buy the expense of a car for a reason; biking, and walking, is the least efficient. Transit systems do not work in the US, because everything has to be planned around them. They’re bureaucratic, and rote. City transit systems are the essence of this bureaucracy and rote. It does not serve people as they intend to live.

      • @Melonpoly@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        12 months ago

        Bicycles? ride/ walk to were you need to be? Why do you need to be driven to an exact point? All the space needed for parking is just wasted.

        You need to create a specific scenario in order to make cars seem more efficient than alternatives. They cause more accidents, take up more space while carrying fewer people at any given time while also causing more pollution than other modes of transport.

        • Amoxtli
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -1
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          Automated vehicles are GPS guided. The US is too big to be walking and biking. That is for an urban environment with proper zoning laws, proper planning, and serves what amounts to be an ethnic group who shouldn’t need cars. What makes automated vehicles more efficient is the removal of labor and lower operational costs. The specialization of transporting people to the exact GPS coordinates is much more convenient. The future is automated travel because vehicles can be used more productively on the margin than everybody having to own their own car. Fewer cars, higher use of the car, or less idling, means lower transportation costs throughout, which includes infrastructure itself; the less need for insurance, less pollution, etc. This technology can be used in bus transit but in a potentially dynamic way.

          • @Melonpoly@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -12 months ago

            The “US is too big” is such a bullshit excuse since cars are absolutely crap for long distances compared to trains people already walk and cycle in the US. And why is the richest and most powerful (for now at least) country in the world unable to fix it’s zoning laws? Especially since other countries seem to be able to do it.

            Yes, efficiency in reducing the amount of people with jobs but not by getting people from a to b. What is convenient is not having to own a car in the first place and be able to get around with ease because of proper urban planning.

            The future is automated travel because vehicles can be used more productively on the margin than everybody having to own their own car. Fewer cars, higher use of the car, or less idling, means lower transportation costs throughout, which includes infrastructure itself; the less need for insurance, less pollution, etc. This technology can be used in bus transit systems as well for a less marginal benefit.

            Sooo like a what’s already possible with trains and trams? And buses on dedicated lanes would be far easier to automate and be more efficient than cars.

            • Amoxtli
              link
              fedilink
              English
              -1
              edit-2
              2 months ago

              Trains are for long distances. Trams are for pure urban areas. Metros are for connecting cities within a metropolitan group. All those function within a well planned urban structure, not the suburbs, or exurbs. Cars are the most efficient in the US. That is why most Americans own a car. Without a car, you are asking for long walking distances, and long bike rides. City transit systems don’t work in the US, because too many criminals are out in public, people like their own space, and Americans like the convenience of going, and leaving at their own time. Americans like their own space. Again, you are talking about a specific type of living that most Americans don’t really gravitate to. Americans want a large house in a safe neighborhood in the suburbs, or live in the exurbs. They don’t want to live in crime-ridden urban areas, that is not the American dream.

      • @meco03211@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -5
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        If someone can’t walk a few blocks, that’s on them. Airplanes don’t get you exactly to the destination either. There’s a tradeoff.

        E: For all the “What about the elderly or disabled?” If they can’t walk a few blocks and also can’t afford a car or taxi/Uber, what should they do? Mobility devices exist. Handicap accessible buildings are federally required. Your argument is merely a thought terminating interruption. That problem can easily be addressed.

          • @gregs_gumption@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            42 months ago

            Public transportation and walkable cities are much better for the elderly and disabled who often can’t drive due to their age and disability?

            Taking a wheel chair or mobility scooter or be guided by your service dog are all subsets of “walk there”.