• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Ed Self-Driving Cars: Pros, Cons, and Predictions

Evaluate Self-Driving Cars on a scale of 1-5 (1 = Terrible, 3 = Meh, 5 = Great)

  • 1

    Votes: 10 6.6%

  • 2

    Votes: 11 7.2%

  • 3

    Votes: 24 15.8%

  • 4

    Votes: 28 18.4%

  • 5

    Votes: 79 52.0%
  • Total voters
    152
  • Poll closed .
arthwollipot said:
What do London's black cab drivers think of that?
Click to expand...
From the article:

Cars with human safety drivers set to appear in 2026 but black-cab drivers dismiss service as ‘fairground ride’
Does anyone know if they are having trials in any other cities or towns in the UK? London is hardly representational of the country, or even cities in the country.
 
arthwollipot said:
What do London's black cab drivers think of that?
Click to expand...
If they read about the mega-detailed mapping Waymos need, plus the limited range of routes they ply then I'd guess the black cab drivers will just smile quietly to themselves.
 
It often seems to me that self-driving cars are trying to run before they can walk. But on the other hand maybe all this premature deployment is needed to be able to continue to advance the technology.
 
Rolfe said:
It often seems to me that self-driving cars are trying to run before they can walk. But on the other hand maybe all this premature deployment is needed to be able to continue to advance the technology.
Click to expand...
Not all self-driving cars are the same. A Waymo is clearly well beyond walking.
 
Puppycow said:
Not all self-driving cars are the same. A Waymo is clearly well beyond walking.
Click to expand...

True that, they've moved on to the 'causing traffic jams' stage of development.

I look forward to the videos of all the motionless Waymos causing issues in London.

Since they blow their horns at each other, why don't they communicate, i.e. "After you, robot123", "Oh no! After YOU, robot 989."

(Anyone who is now wondering if the robots are called "Claude" and "Percival" is officially old.)
 
I saw some stuff on Twitter today about the new autonomous Tesla thing, but I wasn't paying a lot of attention.
 
novaphile said:
True that, they've moved on to the 'causing traffic jams' stage of development.

I look forward to the videos of all the motionless Waymos causing issues in London.

Since they blow their horns at each other, why don't they communicate, i.e. "After you, robot123", "Oh no! After YOU, robot 989."

(Anyone who is now wondering if the robots are called "Claude" and "Percival" is officially old.)
Click to expand...
You mean they don't have a humanoid robot on board who can hop out and help push a failed vehicle out of the way to get traffic moving again?
 
Ivor the Engineer said:
You mean they don't have a humanoid robot on board who can hop out and help push a failed vehicle out of the way to get traffic moving again?
Click to expand...
But they do, they are called "safety monitors" in Tesla cars that are pretending to be autonomous cabs. Unfortunately at the moment these robots still need breaks, food and some sort of payment, but it won't be long before they can be replaced with mechanical and electronic humaniods and they can get rid of that disgusting meat version...
 
Darat said:
But they do, they are called "safety monitors" in Tesla cars that are pretending to be autonomous cabs. Unfortunately at the moment these robots still need breaks, food and some sort of payment, but it won't be long before they can be replaced with mechanical and electronic humaniods and they can get rid of that disgusting meat version...
Click to expand...

“Self-Driving” Cars Have a Dirty Secret
It’s only been relatively recently, following several high profile debacles in the autonomous driving industry, that industry leaders, like Waymo this May, have acknowledged the role of human technicians... And according to the NYT, none of these companies have shared just how many of these remote-technicians they employ, or how often they depend on them. In short, we don’t know how deep this practice goes... According to the NYT’s sources, Cruise staffed about 1.5 workers per vehicle, including remote assistant techs.
Click to expand...
The difference with Tesla's FSD is that we know it works without remote operators, because many Tesla owners are already using it (with zero or very few interventions). Each software version gets significantly better to the point where Tesla will eventually be able to remove the safety monitor from their robotaxis and not need many (or any) remote human operators.

Using remote operators gives the illusion of fully autonomous driving, but doesn't advance the technology to where it needs to be for actual fully autonomous operation. So it's not Tesla who are pretending, but the others.

It's even possible that Tesla may allow the passenger(s) to prompt the car when required (or desired) while it is still in control of the actual driving. This would effectively be what FSD is now, except without a steering wheel and pedals.
 
Roger Ramjets said:
“Self-Driving” Cars Have a Dirty Secret

The difference with Tesla's FSD is that we know it works without remote operators, because many Tesla owners are already using it (with zero or very few interventions). Each software version gets significantly better to the point where Tesla will eventually be able to remove the safety monitor from their robotaxis and not need many (or any) remote human operators.

Using remote operators gives the illusion of fully autonomous driving, but doesn't advance the technology to where it needs to be for actual fully autonomous operation. So it's not Tesla who are pretending, but the others.

It's even possible that Tesla may allow the passenger(s) to prompt the car when required (or desired) while it is still in control of the actual driving. This would effectively be what FSD is now, except without a steering wheel and pedals.
Click to expand...
Who said it was just Tesla? And we know Tesla's robotaxis also have folk back at base that can take over.

Ivor's point, that I made a joke about is that there are circumstances when having a driver of a cab can solve problems an entirely software driven cab physically can't, and that doesn't alter no matter how good the software gets at driving a car.

I would think that even when we do eventually move over to "completely" autonomous vehicles there will still be some human supervision, perhaps one human back office bod per hundred thousand vehicles that can step in for the 1 in hundred million event that stump the onboard systems. (Of course that does assume we don't have AIs that can run in the back office that aren't better than a human in all circumstances.)
 
Last edited:
Roger Ramjets said:
The difference with Tesla's FSD is that we know it works without remote operators, because many Tesla owners are already using it (with zero or very few interventions). Each software version gets significantly better to the point where Tesla will eventually be able to remove the safety monitor from their robotaxis and not need many (or any) remote human operators.
Click to expand...
This is just so backwards. "We know that they work without remote operators, because they require local operators!"

FSD has exactly zero miles of unsupervised driving under its belt. Waymo has somewhere around 100 million. Tesla is years behind.

And Tesla's robotaxis don't have "safety monitors". They're drivers. They have to be there, because Tesla hasn't even bothered to apply for Level 4 certification yet.

Using remote operators gives the illusion of fully autonomous driving, but doesn't advance the technology to where it needs to be for actual fully autonomous operation. So it's not Tesla who are pretending, but the others.
Click to expand...
Waymo doesn't have remote operators, which is good, because remote operation is unsafe and irresponsible. Their staff can set paths for a vehicle that's decided it can't safely move, but they can't operate a vehicle remotely.

And Waymo has clear incentives to minimize remote interventions. Tesla, on the other hand, has good reasons not to pursue Level 4 autonomy at all.
 
Last edited:
Roger Ramjets said:
The difference with Tesla's FSD is that we know it works without remote operators, because many Tesla owners are already using it (with zero or very few interventions).
Click to expand...
You mean because there's a human driver sitting there in the driver's seat? Why would you need a remote operator when there's a human driver right there ready to take over if necessary?
Roger Ramjets said:
Each software version gets significantly better to the point where Tesla will eventually be able to remove the safety monitor from their robotaxis and not need many (or any) remote human operators.

Using remote operators gives the illusion of fully autonomous driving, but doesn't advance the technology to where it needs to be for actual fully autonomous operation. So it's not Tesla who are pretending, but the others.

It's even possible that Tesla may allow the passenger(s) to prompt the car when required (or desired) while it is still in control of the actual driving. This would effectively be what FSD is now, except without a steering wheel and pedals.
Click to expand...
Right now this is nothing more than speculation and the same could easily be argued for the other companies and with as much evidence (or more). They are also continuously improving their software. For example, Waymo has 91% fewer crashes resulting in serious injuries than human drivers. (And most of the crashes that did occur were not caused by the Waymo Driver.)
 
Puppycow said:
You mean because there's a human driver sitting there in the driver's seat? Why would you need a remote operator when there's a human driver right there ready to take over if necessary?
Click to expand...
One reason is that it's a condition of licensure in some states. Not that Tesla actually has a license to operate autonomous vehicles in any state yet, but they presumably would like to at some point, and so it makes sense to build up the infrastructure and expertise to do remote support before that happens.

Tesla does, in fact, have remote operators, and seems to prefer to attempt remote intervention before having the driver take over, making Roger's contention that this is an impediment to progress even more dubious.
 
Rolfe said:
True dat.

Earlier this year I was on one of my car camping trips. These involve leaving the car switched on all night so I can sleep in it with the heating on. Snug as a bug in a rug. Just one teensy wee snag. The car has a software bug that keeps its sidelights on even when you activate the "lighting system off" switch. After various experiments with ways to cover the lights overnight, a bright spark (pun not really intended) on the MGEV forum discovered that pulling two fuses in the fuse box under the bonnet does the trick. There are even tweezers in the box to make this easier. Takes just over a minute, perfect solution (short of fixing the damn bug). The thing is, you have to remember to put them back before you move on, or you have no front lights.

So, I leave my camp site by the side of Loch Ness and proceed in the general direction of Fort Augustus, by way of the lochside Wade's road, which is single track much of the way. As I'm passing a long, unoccupied layby on my right, I see traffic trying to cram into a small passing place about 50 yards beyond this. I stop opposite the layby (where the road is effectively two-way) and attempt to flash my lights. Why is nobody moving on? Oops, I have no front lights. And this is actually illegal, because if your car has DRLs fitted you are not supposed to disable them.

Eventually the foremost of the oncoming vehicles realised, and moved forwards. The vehicle behind it was a cop car. Oops again, but fortunately he didn't put two and two together and realise that a car that should have been showing DRLs, and indeed flashing its lights, wasn't. I make a point of remembering to put the fuses back now.
Click to expand...

There's a guy in the next street on from my close who's obviously a taxi/Uber driver as he's usually sat in his car when I walk the dog at about 10:30pm (or maybe his family hate him), his driveway is perpendicular to the road and I'm amazed the occupants of the two houses opposite haven't murdered him yet as his headlights are full across the front of their houses. He actually shines on our bedroom window too due to a gap between the houses, but thanks to the street layout putting us quite a way away (and having a lamp post close enough to our window that we already had blackout curtains) it isn't a big problem for us. But those houses opposite must hate him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom