Slashdot Mirror
All Tesla Vehicles Being Produced Now Have Full Self-Driving Hardware (jalopnik.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Jalopnik: All current Tesla models that will be produced in its Fremont, California factory will come with self-driving hardware built-in capable of Level 5 autonomy, including the upcoming Tesla Model 3, the company announced tonight. According to the announcement, Tesla will manufacture all of its cars with the hardware necessary for Level 5 self-driving systems going forward, including the Model S, Model X and new Model 3. At the introduction of the Model 3, it wasn't clear whether or not every Model 3 package would come standard with the hardware and software to handle Autopilot and any other self-driving features. That's been cleared up now, but there's a kicker. Just like on current Model S and Model X models, you can purchase the cars with the self-driving hardware included. But, in order to activate the software and actually use the Autopilot or upcoming advanced self-driving safety features, you will have to option it when you order the car, or pay more for it later. Elon Musk stated that the new hardware in all of Tesla's cars going forward are Tesla's own vision software, with a Tesla-developed neural net. The new hardware and software capabilities still need to undergo all of the testing required by Tesla's own standards, as well as government approval before unleashing Level 5 autonomous cars onto the streets.
Been a long time since I've seen a story get onto Slashdot this quickly
Pain is merely failure leaving the body
The claim in the press release is "full class 5 driving", which means fully autonomous. I'll believe it when I see it. It seems like a strong claim to make that "we don't know how to do full class 5 driving yet, but we know this hardware is enough to meet the requirements of the thing we don't know".
"Comes with the hardware built in" doesn't mean its doing it right now
but its understandable there were no pictures in the summary to keep hold your attention
No, the law requires a human at the wheel.
The new hardware is for eventual full self-driving. Not autopilot. (Autopilot in airplanes is "assisted driving," too, but is still called autopilot... That's why Tesla chose "autopilot" instead of "self-driving" as the label for their first-generation capability.)
And yeah, there is a warning that goes off if the driver takes their hands of the wheel.
Posters better learn to actually do research before posting. Oh wait, this is the Internet, that'll never happen. :P
"self driving" should not require a human at wheel. tesla requires one"
This announcement is about the hardware necessary for autonomous driving but there's a huge amount of testing & programming to get the software up to that level. And I'm reasonably certain legislators or insurers will still insist on a human behind the wheel for years after the cars are good enough.
"how about an alarm to warn driver that he has been away from wheel after a few seconds"
I believe that was implemented in a recent update & Autopilot will be disabled if the driver ignores too many warnings
"musk and tesla better learn that false advertising will get them in trouble as crashes pile up"
I think they are learning that lesson but should have been more cautious from the very beginning
Pain is merely failure leaving the body
"To make sense of all of this data, a new onboard computer with more than 40 times the computing power of the previous generation runs the new Tesla-developed neural net for vision, sonar and radar processing software."
https://www.tesla.com/blog/all...
So what you're saying is... the cpu is a neural net processor, a learning computer.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
I'll believe it when I see it. It seems like a strong claim to make that "we don't know how to do full class 5 driving yet, but we know this hardware is enough to meet the requirements of the thing we don't know".
Just because something isn't done yet doesn't mean they don't know how to do it. Tesla has self-driving software under test, that mostly works with their current cars. It is not yet ready for the public, but that isn't because of any deficiencies in the sensors.
One seriously genuine question to Tesla corp, will they be producing models sans auto-crap, having no desire to be BSODed off a cliff, or into a bus going in the opposite direction or into a train, keep in mind purposeful hacks. That manual switch better guarantee 100% manual operation, pretty much kill the computer and allow complete manual control. Not being opposed to automated transport but I prefer star trek turbolift style auto transport, an enclosed, monitored and controlled transport route, no cliffs, no buses and no trains. Like quality broad band, you do want that connection right to your home, just call the lift, get in and tell it where to go.
Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
ultrasonic radar
Don't they mean ultrasonic sonar?
Looks like my next car will be a Leaf.
"Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
"I'm sorry Dave. I'm afraid I can't drive you where you'd like to go. I'm feeling... lazy."
And yeah, there is a warning that goes off if the driver takes their hands of the wheel.
There is now. But originally, there was no warning. Tesla added the warning via a software update, because too many drivers were taking naps or watching movies.
They have a warning that triggers when the driver takes their hands off the wheel. Repeated ignored warnings disengage the auto-pilot system. It will then lock out the feature until you stop the car.
Seriously, did they found a solution for snow or literally anything that could cover up a road/block signs even slightly?
For truly autonomous cars to be around, cities/countries need to have a 100% up to date GPS system so that even in the worst possible weather, the car could still drive itself on where there should be a road.
"You've got a computer in your car."
"No, Julie, the computer is the car. KITT, introduce yourself to Julie Robinson."
"I'm pleased to meet you, Miss Robinson."
"A talking car. Well, now it's my turn to be impressed. KITT, is it? What an intriguing voice. A little too much gain in your tweeter, and a slight metallic tone to your bass."
"Do you really think so?"
Maybe you can explain how these work in snow when they still need to see clear lane markings.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
No it doesn't.
Find me a state that actually requires a human at the wheel. The law places conditions on a human who is at the wheel, but doesn't require one to be there.
Seriously it's fucked up that this even makes the front page on /. Most of us are out of work and fucked for life (health care, etc) yet you continue to post irrelevant stories about cars that no normal person can afford. I mean we can't even afford tinfoil Civics, let alone AI electric test-platforms. Fuck you!
i mean, with 18 cameras, the car has more sensors than a human, so I don't see really a specific issue. Sure, for a human, snow driving is really hard. For our computers, currently, probably even harder. But that's not the same as "you'll never be able to drive in snow with 18 cameras and 12 ultrasound sensors".
So I don't get what the point of it is then. From hearing people around who have used it, Autopilot disengages very easily and they are scared by it.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
I don't give a damn how many cameras it has. I could drive with six people in my car, but twelve eyes doesn't make the drive safer than two. This is all about whether those 18 cameras and 12 ultrasound sensors can keep a car in a lane that has six inches of snow covering it.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
There are a lot of people on Slashdot who don't believe L5 self-driving is possible, or that it's decades away.
I've been saying "within 5 years" for a while now, looks like not only were they wrong, I was too - it's coming sooner than that.
The point I was making, that if a human can interpret the visual information it's given, then a car with a bigger sensor set can in theory do it too. It's all about software at that point, but there's no limitation on hardware here that a human doesn't have.
What about this article makes you think that?
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
Level 5 means not having any controls that a human can use. So, unless their "future upgrade" includes ripping out the steering wheel and pedals, etc, then the car is only "level 4 ready".
Just because they ship with the HARDWARE they'd need for "full class 5 driving" doesn't mean they'll ever get the SOFTWARE needed to actually DO it.
I think you're mixing up Autopilot, which Tesla vehicles have been using for a couple of years, and today's announcement. Today's reveal is about 100% autonomous self driving cars.
Tesla won't require a human at the wheel for this. Local laws might, but I think for quite some time people will be just sitting in the driver seat doing absolutely nothing while they wait for the laws to catch up.
Worth noting that Autopilot was never advertised as 100% autonomous - this new system will be.
- Chuq
It's going to need a heat sensor if its going to differentiate between an animal crossing the road and a bag blowing across the road, unless they are really confident they can educate the car on tracking the motion of each and determining what it is as the car approaches.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
The same as a human? They use visual cues such as other vehicles? Or perhaps they use Tesla's fleet learning experience to see where other vehicles have travelled in the area previously?
- Chuq
I'm sure most require a person to be at the wheel. But when traffic laws was first written, maybe some didn't consider it necessary to specify that a person be controlling the car, as it was assumed. Perhaps in all the different jurisdictions around the world, there is one where the wording of the law accidentally permits a self driving car to legally operate.
- Chuq
I don't know if Tesla cars can understand the same visual cues as a human, that's why I'm asking. Using fleet learning would be very risky in the winter unless you teach it how to drive around stuck cars, snowbanks, snow clearing equipment, etc, real well.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
He has gotten people to not only believe in, but pay money for, something that doesn't and likely never will exist. He should consider becoming Pope! No, wait, the Pope actually has ethics.
I find it very funny how easy some people think the software will be for these vehicles. Really, thinking you have all the hardware you need on the vehicle is not a very big deal. I could strap 22 cameras to my car and I wouldn't have much. So far it looks like Tesla has a start with Autopilot but the functionality is currently very lacking; people I have talked to says that it disengages frequently and still needs clear lane markings. So even if Tesla has the right hardware, the real question is how long will the *software* take to get from where it is to fully driving and that is currently unclear. Tesla has done the 80% easy part, but how long will the hard final 20% take? Elon Musk seems to make a lot of cheap comments like this, that get people exited and veil the real issues at hand.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
It will still be years before any driverless car (note that lvl 5 autonomous driving means "no driver needed", i.e. stuff like "summoning your empty car to wherever you are right now") can handle a situation like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?... - this is not just about detecting lanes and checking GPS data, the car would need to actually detect that there is a traffic cop actively regulating the traffic and then understand hand signs. Since it would be a bit silly to expect the car to be able to do that, we would need a completely new traffic control infrastructure (i.e. transmitters everywhere - and I mean everywhere, even non main roads) to send information to and from autonomous cars. Or what if this happens and the map data has not been updated yet, will all autonomous cars then drive right into whatever danger lies ahead? http://i.istockimg.com/file_th...
5 yrs seems too soon; my guess is more than 10. Cars will probably have fair-weather driving nailed within 5-10 yrs but the Northern Hemisphere gets all kinds of crazy weather and L5 cars will have to be able to cope reliably. Nine times out of 10 won't be good enough, it'll have to be more like 995 times out of 1000.
Pain is merely failure leaving the body
"Worth noting that Autopilot was never advertised as 100% autonomous - this new system will be"
In time, not today, not this year and not next year. But this & future generations of the hardware will be capable, just awaiting the software to catch up, which will take time. Another question is just how good the earlier & existing Autopilot cars can be since they simply don't have the hardware for L5 which Elon confirmed 2 years ago.
Pain is merely failure leaving the body
Why are you talking about breaking the law? Where I come from, they don't tell you not to come into work just because there is a snow storm. People MUST drive in these conditions.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
995 times out of 1000 won't be good enough. It will have to be an average of better than 99,970,000 out of 100,000,000 annually.
Maybe you can explain how these work in snow when they still need to see clear lane markings.
I have a Tesla. They work fine in the snow. In fact, Tesla specifically recommends engaging Autopilot on snowy roads because that is safer than driving yourself. Tesla Autopilot has driven several million miles on snowy and icy roads.
It is funny how people trying to point out weaknesses of SDCs, often focus on areas there they are particularly strong. On snowy roads, a human has only their eyes, so if they cannot see the lane markings, they have difficulty navigating. Tesla has cameras for vision, but also has GPS and radar, and can access a database of "landmarks" such as mileage markers, traffic signs, etc. that they can use as waypoints.
Ok well I recently saw a comment indicating that Autopilot would turn off if the lane markers were covered, so I found that confusing.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
They might need a neuromorphic processor in the future to satisfy some requirements. Unless they have done a formal proof of the necessary hardware requirements, I somehow too suspect the claim is little bit too strong. They should just ship every Tesla with the hardware in a test mode and compare the evaluated decisions with the decisions made by the human driver.
Until it's legal for me to set my destination and lay down in the back seat of the car and and enjoy some beer and television with a guaranteed safety record better than air travel - I don't want "self driving" cars around me.
Your mechanical failure can end my life.
That's just my opinion.
_ _ _ Go for the eyes Boo! GO FOR THE EYES!
Humans don't require that. In theory the only sensors a self driving car needs is two cameras at driver head height in the diver seat with the ability to swivel around. Everything else is 'just software'.
Even if you had a heat sensor you'd still have to educate the car. It could be a hot bag or cold animal. Sensors aren't the issue, you need EXCELLENT software.
When the existing hardware is shown to be inadequate, will the hardware upgrades be free? These are promised to be "self-driving" but this phrase will develop more precision and meaning as we learn what it really takes. When new hardware is REQUIRED in order to keep meeting the "self-driving" criteria, who's gonna pay for it?
Just because something isn't done yet doesn't mean they don't know how to do it. Tesla has self-driving software under test, that mostly works with their current cars. It is not yet ready for the public, but that isn't because of any deficiencies in the sensors.
They don't know that! thats why it's a joke to call them level 5 capable! A TOTAL FRAUD by your pal Musk. ..and really, didn't you learn anything from last 6 months? Teslas self driving autopilot they have released so far is basically just this: take lane assist and remove safeties and boom you have a lane follow "autopilot".
they don't know if they are level 5 capable sensors, because they have not made them capable of that. they don't know if they are good enough to spot pedestrians(probably know that they are not!!!!!!).
remember level 5 would mean that you could just leave it to drive alone by itself at night from vegas to downtown los angeles. they are just saying that in theory it's level 5 capable if someone figures out all the rest.. but in reality, they cannot really say if the sensors are good enough or not because they can only say that after they test their working level 5 implementation that doesn't kill people.
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
We still don't even have Level 5 autonomy in elevators (they have a manual override for emergencies). Maybe Tesla should try designing some elevators first.
It doesn't need lane markings if it can has a good 3D representation of what's around it. If a human can do it, a car can do it better because it will have far more deep imaging, radars, GPS based spatial awareness, cameras etc to lean on. If the conditions are dangerous for a human. A human shouldn't be driving in it either.
Because now it's a matter of refining the software. Anyway, if it turns out they need a fancier radar or something I am sure they can swap one in. It's mostly well known what hardware and computing power is needed for self driving. We know how much CPU power is needed to render the 3D graphics of Avatar 2 but that doesn't mean the movie is completed. And like I said if someone invents a way to make it better then let the next generation cars have it.
Because you have a heat sensor, dipshit?
Why being unable to see the lane markings is considered "driving blind"?
Some streets in my city are not marked at all, some have double markings (the street was widened, new markings were put in place, but the old ones are still visible) or the markings may just be under a layer of snow, but I can perfectly see other cars and the sidewalk.
I do not think that my boss would let me work from home or take the day off just because there was 1cm layer of snow on the street.
Humans drive in difficult conditions all the time. Accidents do happen but life goes on. When these selfdriving cars have accidents because of not having been made good enough for some driving condition, or just because glitch, who's responsible?
Radar should easily be able to tell the difference between the two.
This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
> Tesla Autopilot has driven several million miles on snowy and icy roads.
Has this data ever been audited by anyone outside of Tesla?
The automotive industry is not exactly known to be completely honest about the safety of its products. Given that this company is run by an egomaniac, I think they should be held to even higher standards.
Tesla has self-driving software under test, that mostly works with their current cars.
We've had software that mostly work since the nineties. It's still at the "mostly works, in perfect conditions" stage that it's been in for almost two decades.
It is not yet ready for the public, but that isn't because of any deficiencies in the sensors.
We've had adequate sensors for far longer than we've had software that mostly works.
Hardware isn't the problem. Software is the problem, a problem that hasn't been solved since the nineties despite the huge amounts of money thrown at it.
I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
The same as a human? They use visual cues such as other vehicles?
Get ready to receive your Nobel Prize, Turing Award and Fields Medal... you've managed to create AI.
I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
you're forgetting one thing - they don't have the AI to do it. they may never have. the cars electronics might never be able to. a human that was watching all that sensor information might be able to drive with just them.
why Tesla would be so stupid to make this press release right now is seriously puzzling. why they would be so stupid as to sell a vaporware pre-order prodcut they probably cannot deliver is equally puzzling and stupid.
they don't know the requirements so how they can know they can deliver? and now they are further implying that autopilot is a term for a self driving! making their case of "it doesn't mean self driving" be even in worse place.
and please no comments that Musk knows what he is doing when the only thing he knew how to provably be involved in profitably was a bank that was not a bank.
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
And yeah, there is a warning that goes off if the driver takes their hands of the wheel.
that was a retrofit. and now they are saying that the HARDWARE is capable of autonomous driving. .. of course it's not, not in the sense any consumer thinks of it.
I'm seriously skeptical because the autopilot they have shipped is just the same as other manufacturers have shipped and indeed was based on off the shelf hw/sw solution ONLY WITH THE FUCKING SAFETIES DISABLED!!!!. that's not engineering - that's marketing and irresponsible product design.
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
When these selfdriving cars have accidents because of not having been made good enough for some driving condition, or just because glitch, who's responsible?
That has already been answered presented on every major news page, including Slashdot.
Spam, spam, spam and more spam.
Volvo is going to test 100 autonomous vehicles in Gothenburg next year.
Does that satisfy your crazy weather conditions?
There is no formal proof that your brakes won't evaporate the next time you use them or that the steering wheel will just randomly disattach.
Formal proof is something that seldom leaves academia.
where they recommend that? a link would be appreciated.
also, I find that strange, since snow conditions and friction changes on winter roads rather abruptly in a fashion that would be pretty damn hard for a computer vision/radar system to know. like having ice in a tight turn. ..or have you just been reading musks tweets rather than what he thinks as marketing?
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
I think you are right. I admire Tesla for their can do attitude and having driven their products, I came away seriously impressed. I think they have jumped the shark on this one, though - it is not so much trying to run before you can walk, it is trying to run before you have evolved legs!
You could say that any car has the hardware necessary for autonomous motoring: they just need an intelligent robot to sit at the controls and drive you around...
As the saying goes, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence and at the moment, we seem to be hearing more about what their cars *cant* do than what they can...
The point I was making, that if a human can interpret the visual information it's given, then a car with a bigger sensor set can in theory do it too. It's all about software at that point, but there's no limitation on hardware here that a human doesn't have.
Yeah but... Tesla's claim is like saying the brain consumes about 20W, the car can deliver 20W so it's "ready to support an artifical brain". While that might be technically correct it is also grossly misleading, in that we don't have and don't really expect to have an AI working at all or so well and certainly not within the constraints of a human body in the foreseeable future. Same thing with cameras, I expect the first real SDCs to use optical and radar and lidar and every other trick in the book to overcome the shortcomings of the brain behind it. Same way some talk of trying to simulate the brain with >10 megawatt computers.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
According to The Register Tesla will not enable autopilot in new cars. The announcement states:
"Before activating the features enabled by the new hardware, we will further calibrate the system using millions of miles of real-world driving to ensure significant improvements to safety and convenience.
While this is occurring, Teslas with new hardware will temporarily lack certain features currently available on Teslas with first-generation Autopilot hardware, including some standard safety features such as automatic emergency breaking, collision warning, lane holding and active cruise control."
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/10/20/did_you_read_the_iwholei_announcement_teslas_pulling_autopilot/
you did watch the video in the announcement where they had a tesla self-driving in city traffic right?
that very much looked like 'selfdriving in the sense any consumer thinks of it' to me
I work as a software developer. Thus I'll never fully trust software. Too many things that can go wrong.
One day you will have a massive accident caused by a self-driving car. Investigation will reveal a management failing where some worker highlighted a fault and management failed to respond.
Take the VW crisis. Probably the case that hundreds knew what was going on. In reality a handful will take the blame.
That's exactly what they are doing. They call it "Fleet Learning". Even when driving manually, the system is constantly monitoring and learning from the experience. All this data is transmitted to Tesla and incorporated into future software updates.
I don't know how this learning process works technically, but with the old sensor package lots of Tesla drivers have confirmed that they have seen the system get better and better over time.
The new sensor package will initially lack a lot of features (even some features that were already working with the old sensors, like automatic braking). Those will already be working in test mode in the background just like you described, and be activated some time around the end of the year after gaining enough data to validate them. Full automomy would come around 2017, which is Tesla-speak for 2020.
The processor may not be exactly "neuromorphic" but it's certainly running a neural net using a massively parallel NVIDIA processor.
When specifying that you want "full self-driving capability" on the Tesla website, there is a disclaimer that you cannot use the car commercially for autonomous ride hailing. Tesla is planning a "Tesla Network", which is the only way that they will authorise commercial ride-sharing/hailing activities (details to be provided next year). I think that this is the first time that a car company has mentioned restrictions like this. They probably won't be the last.
From https://www.tesla.com/en_GB/bl... :
"Before activating the features enabled by the new hardware, we will further calibrate the system using millions of miles of real-world driving to ensure significant improvements to safety and convenience. While this is occurring, Teslas with new hardware will temporarily lack certain features currently available on Teslas with first-generation Autopilot hardware, including some standard safety features such as automatic emergency braking, collision warning, lane holding and active cruise control. "
So if I buy a Tesla tomorrow, it will come with less features than another one bought last month when it arrives? In fact, it will come with less features than a well-specified competitor (BMW, Mercedes, etc) and no idea when it will catch up.
I don't want to go backwards. I want to go forwards. I want the features now and more, not less features now.
I want a car that does the same things as earlier cars and more. I don't want to be funding Tesla's product development and then beta test their code when it's rolled out.
Why do customers tolerate this from Tesla?
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled"
How about this TED talk from over a year ago? https://youtu.be/tiwVMrTLUWg (15 minutes video)
Note that the "silly [thing] to expect a car to be able to do" is demonstrated at the 10th minute mark.
Heck I have a problem doing that..
Correct me if I'm wrong, but AFAIK, the Tesla car requires another vehicle in front of it or lane markers, preferably both to drive itself, doesn't it?
Considering the majority of roads in my country are not paved (Cite: http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/16-002-x/2009001/tbl/transpo/tbl001-eng.htm ) how am I going to get my Tesla to drive me anywhere if those same roads are, as usual, empty of traffic? I'm not even going to get into what happens when the roads are snowy because a dirt road is good enough due to the complete lack of road markers.
L5 driving needs to handle something as simple as driving straight without stops on MOST roads pretty well, IMHO.
I'd like to see the Tesla pull over if a police officer waves it over from the side of the road. L5 requires that.
I want to see the Tesla navigate construction cones when lanes are shut down. L5 requires that too.
I want to see the Tesla go through a red light when an Ambulance comes up behind it and there is no other way to get out of the way. L5 requires that too.
And there is probably hundreds of items like that L5 requires. So remains to be seen if they are really L5.
You have the ability to do "full class 5 driving." We're pretty familiar withe sensors included in homo sapiens sapiens, particularly those are are used while driving.
Apparently you haven't been to ND. They literally close the interstates down during severe weather, and it's a significant penalty to drive on them when closed.
Unfortunately, they are planning on using neural net software, which, while it may be Excellent at being a neural net, cannot be proven to be fool-proofed, as they relies on training in such a way that the actual calculations are not determined ahead of time.
Crazy that the Us Government is letting "auto-driving" features on the road in "beta", as if they were friggin' email solutions.
These things are on the road now, and they will be developing a way to distinguish between a semi blocking your path, and the actual horizon, "in the future".
I'm all for braking assistance and lane alerts, but fully autonomous is not what our analytics and god knows, our roads and road markings, are prepared for at this time, nor will be for years (software) and decades (roads).
The manual for the Model S and Model X both disagree with you. They explicitly state not to use autopilot in slippery conditions. Just like every other cruise control system on the market.
That said, we also know that this new hardware is NOT enough for full AP in inclement weather, or even a light drizzle of rain, because none of the rear cameras have wipers on them, and if you've ever tried to use the backup camera in the rain you'll see the problem.
Cameras are essential for forward vision to deal with lane markings and signage, however to see cars coming behind you, you need radar, and they still haven't included rear radar.
"Level 5 autonomy" in a car that can't drive in the rain is ridiculous.
L5 also requires driving in the rain. They added rear cameras, but no rear radar, and no way to clear those rear cameras off, as anyone who's ever tried using a backup camera in the rain or snow knows, after driving for a few minutes you can't see a thing through them.
Accidents do happen but life goes on.
Not for everyone, sometimes life doesn't go on following a collision. Which is why we need self-driving cars, to avoid deadly auto accidents.
Enigma
GPS.
That is EXACTLY what they are doing. This will be there proof of working to various regulatory groups.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Nope. It actually did give a warning before. But drivers would simply grab the wheel , trigger it off, and wait 5 minutes for the next warning.
Now, it constantly monitors, but it still had a warning from the git-go.
Could be easy enough: it stops.
A car that can reliably drive itself safely under 80% of road conditions, and can safely pull over the rest of the time and require a human to take over would be a wonderful advance. Especially for something like road-obscuring snow, which is something that only a small portion of the US population has to deal with more than a few handfuls of days out of the year.
Reliable, market-worthy fully autonomous self driving doesn't necessarily have to be able to drive through *everything* it might encounter, there's no shame in having it bail and say "I can't handle this", assuming it bails gracefully and safely. Plenty of humans refuse to drive in road-obscuring snow, or at night, or in fog, or, or, or, because they feel they're not capable of doing so safely. A virtual chauffer that does the same would still give you back hundreds of hours per year lost to commute time.
What's pointless is a "semi-autonomous" self driving car that demands you remain at attention and ready to take over at a moment's notice - you're time and attention must still remain dedicated to driving, all you're saving is the effort of actually steering, and with it the feedback loop that helps you actually keep your attention on the road. Not much of a benefit.
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
Unfortunately, they are planning on using neural net software
The NNs are for object recognition, like the proverbial "rock vs plastic bag". They aren't using NNs to control the brakes and steering.
a neural net, cannot be proven to be fool-proofed
There are NO systems that are "fool proof" at object recognition, including human brains.
So basically
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
So basically automated cars will suck. We will always need a steering wheel and be ready to take over. My biggest concern is that these things will creep along, stopping frequently, basically being frustating for human drivers. This will make traffic problems much worse. Stop and pull over to the side of the road in a snowstorm? Really? What if it is a major through fare with no parking lane, or on the highway and the shoulder on that section is not drivable?
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
What we're not familiar with though, is the amount of computing power required to take that sensor input, and drive sane output.
They don't close the highways as soon as the lane markings are under snow. They close the highways when they are impassable by passenger vehicles.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
Because now it's a matter of refining the software.
The hardware is the easy part - we've had most of the hardware available for decades. The software is the really, really hard part.
The definition of "mostly" is "not fully". So, no, they are not there yet.
"The point I was making, that if a human can interpret the visual information it's given, then a car with a bigger sensor set can in theory do it too. It's all about software at that point, but there's no limitation on hardware here that a human doesn't have."
The second half of your last sentence is at odds with the first half. Either it is all about software or it is about the limited hardware. In reality, it can be about both but your statement precludes that as a possibility. You seem to be very conflicted internally. You are trying to make a point that the self-driving car is easy and here but then you admit that "in theory" something is possible.
So, each self-driving car just needs 16-18 years of training on how to determine how to interact with the world while moving around in it and then a few months of training on how to accelerate, brake, turn and when to activate the turn signals. A few lessons about what various signage means and a quick explanation about solid lines and dashed lines and the self-driving car will be good to go. I image that this 16-18 year production line will result in drastically reduced prices over what we have today and vastly improved safety.
Well, if you started saying "within 5 years" more than 5 years ago, then you are now a proven liar. Maybe you should use that as a learning experience about making idiotic prognostications in the future.
... "autopilot"?!
Well, the site only said that it would happen in 2017. Is it only during the 3 or 4 summer months? Is it all year long?
No, the site all by itself did not satisfactorily answer the question of whether crazy weather conditions would be tested.
On the other hand, global warming means that we won't have winters for much longer anywhere on the planet so I guess the manufacturers don't see the need to prepare for it.
There are already tons of teslas on the road none of which have caused any of those problems.
Nissan doesn't sell Leaf here in Brazil!
His point is perfectly clear and consistent. Are you even trying to understand it? Apparently you have the hardware to comprehend it, but your software needs an upgrade.
You have no idea how any of this stuff works, do you?
I don't think it's so easy to account: the "80%" is all we know for this specific case
Humans rely on training too.
You're confusing the existing autopilot feature with the new self-driving capable cars they're building now.
It's not the same thing.
I wasn't saying it more than 5 years ago. I was saying it last year, though.
I can't necessarily pick out snow conditions and friction changes, and a computer could be a lot faster at figuring out the right thing to do in the circumstances than I am.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Why would it be silly to expect a car to observe a police officer and hand signals?
Those aren't really just hand signals. They involve at least the forearm. They're designed to be visible, distinctive, and understandable. Once the car recognizes that there's an officer directing traffic, it's not going to be difficult to figure out the signals.
Maps aren't sufficient for not running into things in any case. A SDC has to have some sort of awareness of what's going on around it.no matter what, and therefore can tell when the map's leading it into immediate danger.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
From youtube videos of it, it takes about 4 minutes of hands-off driving for the warning to appear.
A fleet of self-driving cars will also recognize or remember the icy spots, transitions or generally unsafe stretches of road. It will also react to the other cars on the road far better, e.g. noticing that other cars ahead of it took that icy turn very slowly (or didn't and wiped out).
Not just that, but a well trained self-driving car will react much faster and be able to save itself, or at least minimize damage, far better than a good human driver, let alone the average schmuck driving in the snow.
I wonder how many of those actuators will be fault tolerant. I can't seem to find any information on the web, but if the auto industry is up to their usual tricks, they won't be. Not until a failed steering motor causes a massive fatal head-on on the Interstate.
They are probably still counting on the driver grabbing noticing there is a problem in 1/10th of a second, grabbing the steering wheel and fighting against a motor that is running at full torque because of the failure :-)
And we haven't even started talking about software bugs...
An engineer who ran for Congress. http://herbrobinson.us
We don't know yet how to create the infinite source of power. But once we'll figure out, I am pretty sure that this model will be able to use it.
We can't create the real artificial intelligence at the moment, but when we will, this wonderful computer will most certainly be able to host it!
We aren't really there yet to create the sort of coffee that would prolong your life, but as soon as we will - this wonderful coffee maker machine that you can buy today - will make you live longer!