Autonomous Car Progress

[diplomat33]

Is there a reason why there's no examples from major OEMs? It's impossible to not notice the huge sensor on the roof of Waymo, Nuro, Cruise, ..etc... is missing from consumer vehicles.

Volvo has been around, but they're small, and got swallowed-up by Geely a while ago.
NIO probably has a bright-future, but do they even sell anything outside of China currently?

Not sure what you are asking. Some automakers, like Mercedes, are putting the lidar behind the front grill of their consumer cars. Other companies like Volvo and NIO opted to put the lidar in a small bump at the top of the windshield. Consumer cars only have 1-2 smaller solid state lidar. They are cheaper and more conspicuous. The emphasis is on cost and style. But the lidar on consumer cars is only used for L2 driver assist. Robotaxi companies like Waymo Cruise opt for the roof lidar and more sensors because they want the car to have more perception in order to handle L4 or L5 as reliably as possible. Cost and style are less of an option. The emphasis is more utilitarian, making sure the FSD works reliably.

 

[rxlawdude]

@daktari : That's exactly what happened here on the West Coast of the US, particularly in Los Angeles. Scooters from two companies all over the place, abandoned. In my visits to LA most recently, I did not see one scooter laying about.

 

[S4WRXTTCS]

I just don't buy the robotaxi replacing personally owned cars argument. I get the conveniences, and I get their value in a dense urban environment where car ownership is already a luxury and a hassle due to limited space for parking and higher costs of ownership. But, the huge thing being overlooked here is that you have to bring along everything you need at all times with you when using a robotaxi because you can never store things in one because it isn't yours.

For families with kids and/or pets, that already becomes a pretty terrible value. Lug around car seats and install them every time you get in a robotaxi. That's just never going to fly. I always have a dog crate in our minivan along with some hiking supplies, hiking sticks, etc, so that going on hikes on the weekend with my kids and dog is just a matter of getting all of us into our car and heading over to our favorite hiking spots. With a robotaxi, you gotta lug all that stuff along, get it into the taxi, then go wherever... and then what? You pay to have the car wait for you with your crate and car seats in the parking lot for several hours while you hike, then return home and remove all of that again?

I'm just not buying the argument that robotaxis will ever replace ownership of vehicles. It will make sense for a subset of society, but I just don't see anyway for it to be the only (or even dominant) mode of transportation.

My expectation is we'll see a variety of solutions.

Owned vehicles that are not capable of autonomous driving
Vehicle subscription model based solutions that are capable of autonomous driving. Where its targeted for people that need the convenience of having a car, and likely live in vehicle friendly areas like the suburbs.
Robotaxis competing with Uber/Lyft and other metro area transportation methods. They have the advantage in that they don't have to be designed as a car. They can be designed to maximize to make getting in easy, and to carry things on board.

What I don't see being viable within the next 10 years is actually owning a self-driving car for the majority of people. There is just too many things in flux, and the pace of development once L4 vehicles really start hitting the roads is going to be too fast for anyone to afford to keep upgrading.

Essentially a self driving car can be considered a living thing.

It has to evolve to new standards, and expectations to retain its "license".

 

[rxlawdude]

Essentially a self driving car can be considered a living thing.

It's a living thing? Cue Electric Light Orchestra. What a terrible thing to lose.

 

[orion2001]

I can see cheap and very abundant robotaxis pushing ownership to a subset of society. It'll help fill the void that poor public transportation has left in North America. I used to ride share with Uber/Lyft a lot even though taxis/buses/shuttles/trains have been around for years just because they were easily accessible and super convenient.

That said, I'll probably always own a vehicle. I'm all for better public transportation, pedestrian and cycling infrastructure so I don't have to drive.

Yeah, I completely agree. I can see families switching to single car families if robotaxis are convenient and cheap enough.

 

[Doggydogworld]

Is there a reason why there's no examples from major OEMs?

Audi, Lexus, Mercedes and Honda/Acura flagships have (optional?) lidar, but the units are hidden instead of being housed in visible roof bulges. The new Lexus LS has 4 lidars, in fact. Honda Legend (aka Acura RL in the US) has two, I think.

Audi, Honda and Mercedes claim Level 3 this year during traffic jams on controlled access highways. Audi actually claimed it a couple years ago then had to walk it back. Honda is only providing it on 100 leased cars in Japan. We'll see.

 

[mark95476]

I did a bit of checking and vehicles with LIDAR are still rare.

- Mercedes: Only available on the recently announced EQS?
- Audi eTrons had their LIDAR removed in the past year
- Porsche Taycan: No LIDAR?
- VW id.3/4: No LIDAR
- Ford Mustang MME: No LIDAR
- Volvo/Polestar: No LIDAR
- Lexus UX 300e: No LIDAR?
- Honda/Acura: RL is no longer available, no autopilot-like features with LIDAR on recent US models

Not sure what you are asking. Some automakers, like Mercedes, are putting the lidar behind the front grill of their consumer cars. Other companies like Volvo and NIO opted to put the lidar in a small bump at the top of the windshield. Consumer cars only have 1-2 smaller solid state lidar. They are cheaper and more conspicuous. The emphasis is on cost and style. But the lidar on consumer cars is only used for L2 driver assist. Robotaxi companies like Waymo Cruise opt for the roof lidar and more sensors because they want the car to have more perception in order to handle L4 or L5 as reliably as possible. Cost and style are less of an option. The emphasis is more utilitarian, making sure the FSD works reliably.

Audi, Lexus, Mercedes and Honda/Acura flagships have (optional?) lidar, but the units are hidden instead of being housed in visible roof bulges. The new Lexus LS has 4 lidars, in fact. Honda Legend (aka Acura RL in the US) has two, I think.

Audi, Honda and Mercedes claim Level 3 this year during traffic jams on controlled access highways. Audi actually claimed it a couple years ago then had to walk it back. Honda is only providing it on 100 leased cars in Japan. We'll see.

 

[gearchruncher]

- Mercedes: Only available on the recently announced EQS?
- Audi eTrons had their LIDAR removed in the past year
- Porsche Taycan: No LIDAR?
- VW id.3/4: No LIDAR
- Ford Mustang MME: No LIDAR
- Volvo/Polestar: No LIDAR
- Lexus UX 300e: No LIDAR?

I'm reminded about a conversation earlier about how the public has equated EV's and autonomy (mostly because of Tesla) even though they have no logical connection, and then I see a list like this where 8/9ths of the vehicles considered are EV's, and I can see it's a pretty prevalent industry thing.

 

[Soda Popinski]

Essentially a self driving car can be considered a living thing.

Might be getting ahead of ourselves.

 

[uujjj2]

The current laws in some states say that a self diving car must be insured, and any violations or liability are the responsibility of the registered owner of the vehicle. Who would want to own one with those rules? The algorithm designer uploads a change to your car and you're fully liable?

Does liability lie with the owner or the manufacturer? Doesn't matter anymore, either way it's covered by Tesla insurance. Done. Tesla insurance means liability will not be the barrier that stops autonomous cars, period, end of discussion.

 

[rxlawdude]

Does liability lie with the owner or the manufacturer? Doesn't matter anymore, either way it's covered by Tesla insurance. Done. Tesla insurance means liability will not be the barrier that stops autonomous cars, period, end of discussion.

From my understanding, Tesla basically contracts with an insurance company and badges it as their own. At least that was the case when it first became available.

Happy to be corrected if solely Tesla operates premium collection, claims and indemnification of its insureds. Is that the current state?

 

[gearchruncher]

Doesn't matter anymore, either way it's covered by Tesla insurance. Done. Tesla insurance means liability will not be the barrier that stops autonomous cars, period, end of discussion.

Except if you have a single supplier of insurance, then that supplier can charge you whatever they want, require additional things like data sharing (which Tesla insurance requires), or stop providing insurance. Which would make your vehicle worthless. Would you buy a car if you knew the only legal way to use it was via insurance provided by the manufacturer who could decide to terminate at any time? Or only sells insurance in some states (Tesla only does one right now). Sounds a lot like a lease in the end with monthly required payments to the manufacturer, but with less contracted stability...
Laterally nothing to stop Tesla from saying "oh, the hardware on your computer isn't compatible with the latest and safest software, your insurance is canceled."

 

[mikes_fsd]

From my understanding, Tesla basically contracts with an insurance company and badges it as their own. At least that was the case when it first became available.

That is how Tesla (Elon) does things.
They partner, learn the ropes of the market segment, and step out on their own.

Seats in Tesla's and Autopilot hardware, are a two examples.

 

[gearchruncher]

From my understanding, Tesla basically contracts with an insurance company and badges it as their own. At least that was the case when it first became available.

Tesla's first Insurance was a partnership with Liberty Mutual. Now they only cover in CA, but do run it themselves, although with a huge reinsurer behind them:

Tesla and insurance - Everything you need to know

A step by step guide into Tesla’s foray into auto insurance

www.insurancebusinessmag.com

 

[gearchruncher]

That is how Tesla (Elon) does things.

This is how most companies do things, it has nothing to do with Tesla or Elon, and it's not some magic sauce nor is there data that Telsa is particularly good at it. When other companies do it, we often complain they are being monopolistic or anti-competitive. Look at all the stories of how Amazon supposedly uses their data from 3rd parties to decide what products to do internally and how much the media vilifies that behavior.

Tesla told us they would re-create Mobileye's AP1 in 6 months and it took about 3 years to reach parity (possibly 5 if you count being able to read a speed limit sign). Tesla's been running insurance for 4 years now and can only provide it in CA. Not exactly showing they are crushing that old, stagnant, easy to beat historical insurance world that was ripe for innovation.

 

[stopcrazypp]

This is how most companies do things, it has nothing to do with Tesla or Elon, and it's not some magic sauce nor is there data that Telsa is particularly good at it. When other companies do it, we often complain they are being monopolistic or anti-competitive. Look at all the stories of how Amazon supposedly uses their data from 3rd parties to decide what products to do internally and how much the media vilifies that behavior.

Tesla told us they would re-create Mobileye's AP1 in 6 months and it took about 3 years to reach parity (possibly 5 if you count being able to read a speed limit sign). Tesla's been running insurance for 4 years now and can only provide it in CA. Not exactly showing they are crushing that old, stagnant, easy to beat historical insurance world that was ripe for innovation.

On the topic of the speed limit sign recognition, I remember the previous discussion was Mobileye had a patent on that, so it'll be very hard to work around that. It's not that Tesla can't replicate it, it's a different story to do the same feature in a way that doesn't violate the patent. For other players in other countries with different patent laws, I imagine it's not that hard to replicate technically.

 

[gearchruncher]

On the topic of the speed limit sign recognition, I remember the previous discussion was Mobileye had a patent on that, so it'll be very hard to work around that. It's not that Tesla can't replicate it, it's a different story to do the same feature in a way that doesn't violate the patent. For other players in other countries with different patent laws, I imagine it's not that hard to replicate technically.

The patent applies to all traffic signs, and was filed in 2007, issued in 2011. Some people that have read it claim it doesn't even pertain.

Tesla knew about this in 2016 when they showed off the self driving video that clearly detected signs. Heck, they advertised "will read the parking sign and decide if it can park there." They should not have been advertising this if they did not have a clear path through patents. Tesla should have a patent portfolio in autonomy plenty deep to protect against something as simple as reading a sign if they are truly a leader in this space, and Elon doesn't seem like someone who really cares about patents if it's in the way of his "mission." There's likely hundreds of patents that are technically being broken by any autonomous system out there.

And now, Teslas do detect speed limit signs, and stop signs only 5 years after Tesla first showed it off. Yet the patent is still active. Lots of other companies have speed limit sign detection, and it's going to be required in the EU starting next year. A 2019 Corolla could detect stop signs and speed limits before a AP2 Tesla could. It really doesn't look like the patent is stopping anyone.

There's always some excuse with Tesla, when the most logical reason is that they just didn't have the tech working well enough for years.

 

[Dan D.]

There's always some excuse with Tesla, when the most logical reason is that they just didn't have the tech working well enough for years.

Thankfully this deceptive behavior is mainly an Elon thing. I can't even name another person who boasts, exaggerates, and misleads so much in the North American market.

Can you imagine if every company did this? You'd never trust anything. I wonder if Tesla would continue to mislead to this degree if Elon left. I tend to think they wouldn't. Why is it tolerated?

 

[gearchruncher]

I wonder if Tesla would continue to mislead to this degree if Elon left. I tend to think they wouldn't.

It would be really interesting to find out if this is just him or if the whole company culture is this way now. The FSD video is still on Tesla's website, and the website said "coming this year" in 2019/2020 for city streets, and manuals are often way out of date for software. I fear it's a bit built in now.

 

[uujjj2]

It's well known that whenever Elon gives a timeline it's going to run late. When Elon sez such and such will be ready by time T, you can assume that it will be ready some time between T + 6 months and T + 5 years, depending on how ambitious it was. (Full self driving is pretty dang ambitious.)

BTW it's not Elon specific. All tech companies (except Apple) are like this with their internal timelines. The only Elon difference is he announces the ridiculously optimistic internal timeline to the world.