Slashdot Mirror


Ford CEO Says the Company 'Overestimated' Self-Driving Cars (engadget.com)

Ford CEO Jim Hackett scaled back hopes about the company's plans for self-driving cars this week, admitting that the first vehicles will have limits. From a report: "We overestimated the arrival of autonomous vehicles," said Hackett, who once headed the company's autonomous vehicle division, at a Detroit Economic Club event on Tuesday. While Ford still plans on launching its self-driving car fleet in 2021, Hackett added that "its applications will be narrow, what we call geo-fenced, because the problem is so complex." Hackett's announcement comes nearly six months after its CEO of autonomous vehicles, Sherif Markaby, detailed plans for the company's self-driving car service in a Medium post. The company has invested over $4 billion in the technology's development through 2023, including over $1 billion in Argo AI, an artificial intelligence company that is creating a virtual driver system. Ford is currently testing its self-driving vehicles in Miami, Washington, D.C. and Detroit.

12 of 223 comments (clear)

  1. Who's overselling this technology?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Pretty sure the people creating the self driving technology are overselling its capabilities to car makers. Not to mention the real world accidents from Tesla's and the Uber incident has to place some fear of liability in car makers these days. Even with a human behind the steering wheel doesn't mean they can recover when the technology has a brain fart.

  2. Not surprised by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Many, including me, have said it is not going to be that easy to make a fully autimatic car. These dreams of most new sold cars being fully automatic within 5 or even 10 years etc. are not realistic.

    I really don't want to be babysitting some semi-automatic car, so i won't touch the tech until it is completely and fully automatic, so i can sleep in the car while it's driving.

  3. No Biggy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "We overestimated the arrival of autonomous vehicles"

    That's fine. We didn't believe you anyway.

  4. No kidding! by flippy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Is anyone besides the CEOs themselves surprised that the corporate-types vastly underestimated the complexity of a problem they didn't truly understand in the first place?

    1. Re:No kidding! by v1s10nary · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Obviously the first applications should be self driving Buses, Long Haul 18 wheelers, Garbage Trucks, etc. etc.

      Those would indeed be the most logical applications of self-driving vehicles... but they would also cause the biggest economic disruptions. Bus/truck drivers & garbage men are notorious for aggressive union activity; imagine the outcry if they feel like their professions will be threatened by autonomy?

      It would be the "NYC taxi drivers vs. Uber" situation on a much larger scale.

      --
      "The cause of fear is ignorance."
  5. Re:Like reusing rockets? by flippy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The complexity of autonomous vehicles is immense, especially since the general public and regulators are expecting them to be better at making decisions and safer than human drivers. I'd be willing to say that it's orders of magnitude bigger than the difference between reusable and non-reusable rockets.

  6. Tesla has oversold the autopilot and people died by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Tesla has oversold the autopilot and people died

  7. Re:Like reusing rockets? by byteherder · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The complexity of autonomous vehicles is immense, especially since the general public and regulators are expecting them to be better at making decisions and safer than human drivers. I'd be willing to say that it's orders of magnitude bigger than the difference between reusable and non-reusable rockets.

    The difference between reusable and non-reusable rockets is physics and engineering.

    The difference between human drivers and self-driving cars is hundreds of millions of lines of code that all have to work perfectly.

    Trust me, physics is easier.

  8. Expected by MBGMorden · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I've pretty much expected this for a while.

    Don't get me wrong the progress that has been made in this field is incredibly impressive, and I have no doubt that eventually we'll be there, but I've found it laughable when you have people with kids who are 8-9 years old stating that their kids won't have to learn how to drive.

    Autonomous driving is a VERY complex problem, and while it may be 90% solved, that last 10% will likely take us decades to perfect. I wouldn't expect fully autonomous cars to be the norm for probably 40-50 more years.

    Heck just look at the situation Boeing is in right now. Aviation is arguably a much easier task to automate, because there are fewer other vehicles around (and the ones that do typically have transponders announcing their location), and the environment is much more structured as to procedures, yet they've had multiple planes crash due to faulty sensors and autopilot related functions.

    Electric cars - sure, they'll be the norm in 10-15 years. Autonomous though? It'll be a while.

    --
    "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
  9. Told you so. :-) by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Invest billions in what execs think is 'Just another new product R&D cycle'
    Get sold the idea that 'deep learning algorithms' are enough, just keep throwing more and more data at it!
    Discover you can't get it over the finish line because NO ONE has any fucking idea how a brain 'thinks'
    Legal department's analysis shows the risk/benefit ratio is so high that you'd be nuts to actually launch this hot mess

    Like I've been saying all along.
    The approach of the current crop of so-called, inaccurately named 'AI' is all wrong. You need a fully thinking brain behind the wheel, not just some shitty half-assed 'learning algorithm' that doesn't know the difference between a living being and a lamppost, or a real stop-sign from one painted on the back of a T-shirt, or that just because a stop-sign has some graffiti or a sticker on it doesn't mean it's not a stop-sign anymore.
    If your so-called 'self driving car' needs to pull over in the middle of a trip and 'phone home' so a remote HUMAN operator can 'guide it through' whatever it is that's making it vapor-lock on you, then it's not suitable 'technology' for public roads. Period.

    1. Re:Told you so. :-) by irreverentdiscourse · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "You need a fully thinking brain behind the wheel" We don't even require this of humans.

  10. Re:Nice spin! by squiggleslash · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You don't get to blame the lack of "arrival" when you're at least partly responsible for that lack.

    What does Ford have to do with GM's failed efforts, Tesla's failed efforts, and Google's failed efforts?

    Ford may have done all the things you mention (except for being partly responsible for the failure of everyone else), but it's absolutely correct in arguing that it overestimated the arrival of autonomous vehicles. It did. It thought it was on the cusp of taking off, and in reality it's still years away from being practical.

    --
    You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.