DanCar
Active Member
The fact that Waymo is not available to 99% of rides is precisely what makes Tesla the leader in driverless.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Autonomous Car Progress
- Thread starter stopcrazypp
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Autonomous Vehicles
diplomat33
Average guy who loves autonomous vehicles
Uh no. Tesla has no driverless. How can they be the leader in driverless when they don't have any driverless? That makes no sense. You can't say that Tesla has L2 everywhere therefore they are the leader in L4. LOL. That would be like me having the most oranges and saying I am the leader in apples.
EVNow
Well-Known Member
Waymo has no cars - forget driverless in 99% of US.
Why - they can't even service the busiest part of SF just 30 miles from their HQ that WholeMars keep driving without problems all the time. And they have been working on this for 10+ years.
DanCar
Active Member
Driverless = Car where I'm not driving, the car is driving.
Yae, tesla for the Win!
diplomat33
Average guy who loves autonomous vehicles
Driverless = Car where I'm not driving, the car is driving.
Yae, tesla for the Win!
It is easy to win when you make up your own definitions. Let's just make up that "driverless is the car drives everywhere with supervision" so that we can say that Tesla wins. LOL.
EVNow
Well-Known Member
Its so Bizarre - its part of US (and actually in most parts of the world) law.
A successful company (in one area) can essentially crowd out innovation and investment in any other area by illegally subsidizing operations in the new area indefinitely. That is why it is a well established anti-trust principle.
DanCar
Active Member
It is easy to win when you make up your own definitions. Let's just make up that Waymo is the leader because it can't drive 99% of people where they want to go.
Whassa? A driverless Waymo crosses his path @ 09:00 just before FSD executes a painful left turn lol
Maybe DanCar is correct in the definition here because driverless doesn’t mean drivernone
diplomat33
Average guy who loves autonomous vehicles
Whole Mars cherry picked videos do not provide that FSD Beta drives without any problems in SF. LOL. And if it did, then why has Tesla not removed driver supervision yet? FSD Beta definitely does not work without any problems in that part of SF. Waymo does driverless with employees in the busiest part of SF and will open it up to the public soon. FSD beta cannot do driverless in that part of SF.
Last edited:
diplomat33
Average guy who loves autonomous vehicles
You are focused on the tech being able to work everywhere which is fine. Tesla has L2 that works everywhere. Great. But it is not L4. We are talking about the leader in L4. If we talk about the leader in L2, it is Tesla. If we talk about the leader in L4, it is Waymo.
DanCar
Active Member
You are talking about L4, I'm talking about not having to drive. I'm also talking about the future. Who will be the first to drive lots of people all over the place without the need to supervise? My bet is on Tesla in the 5+ year time frame, 2 years for L3. I hope Waymo beats that, but I'm more optimistic about Tesla. If we look at a chart of Waymo driverless in the U.S. versus all driven miles, Waymo is still just a blip by the end of the decade.
I don't think that's a useful precedent here. Antitrust laws prohibit a company from using its monopoly in one market to improve its dominance in another, even if its only using tactics that would be perfectly legal for a non-monopoly.
For that to apply to Google/Waymo I think you'd have to show that it was using its dominance in search to improve its position in the autonomous driving market, and I don't think it's doing that. I don't believe there's any restriction on simply using funding from one area to start working in another.
Now, if Google started abusing their control of the search engine monopoly to ensure that people searching for autonomous transport were funnelled to Waymo over anyone else, that might qualify.
Microsoft got slapped for (among other things) using it's dominance in operating systems to try and secure control of the web browser market by giving away Internet Explorer (in an era where a web browser was a piece of software you would expect to pay for) and tightly weaving it in to Windows, pushing Netscape etc out.
diplomat33
Average guy who loves autonomous vehicles
It's the same thing. L4 means you are not driving. When you use FSD Beta, you are still driving even though you are not actively steering or braking, since you are still required to intervene in certain cases. When Tesla says that you no longer have to supervise, then you will not be driving anymore.
Well that is a different question. It's an interesting question. If Tesla is able to reduce driver interventions to the point where they can remove driver supervision then Tesla could win. The question is how long will it take for Tesla to reduce driver supervisions to the point of going "eyes off" and do it for all of the US? Driving is very different in the US. There are driving challenges in one place that don't exist in other places. So Tesla might achieve "eyes off" in one area and have edge cases that prevent "eyes off" in another place. Actually being able to do "eyes off" everywhere in the US and do it safely is a huge challenge. I think it will take Tesla many years before they can go "eyes off" everywhere. But I do think Tesla could be the first to do "eyes off" on all US highways and that would be a huge win IMO. Waymo has already achieved driverless. Waymo's question is how long will it take to scale that to more places. It is certainly possible that Waymo could take too long to scale and lose. But if Waymo can accelerate scaling then I think they can win. I personally think that Waymo should branch out and do "eyes off" on consumer cars as a way of scaling the tech faster. We shall see.
Waymo are never going to scale to the ‘100% of roads everywhere’ that is Tesla’s target, not unless they have a major shift in direction. If their objective is to make money on a robotaxi service they’re going to want high density environments.
Single passenger pickups in rural locations will be so far down the list of profitable locations to expand to they’re effectively never going to get there. It’d be a massive pile of work for a relatively small additional revenue.
Edit to add the standard disclaimer: I do not consider this to be a playground argument where one party has to be ‘the winner’. If Waymo achieve their goal that’s a win for everyone.
Last edited:
DanCar
Active Member
No, when I'm not steering, acelerating, braking, turn signals, then I'm not driving. The car is doing that. Having to take over when the car makes mistakes does not mean I'm driving all the time, just when the car does something I don't like. Which occurrence is getting less often with each release.
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
Except, of course, you are.
Because there is more than just those things that are legally and regulatoraly part of the entire dynamic driving task.
You are still driving, 100% of the time, with Teslas system.
Tesla themselves is SUPER CLEAR about this fact, repeatedly. You have to agree you understand it to even turn the system on.
This also squares with the SAE level definitions, for what it's worth. For anything less than L4, the driver is driving and being assisted by the automated system.
diplomat33
Average guy who loves autonomous vehicles
That might be your personal definition but that is not the SAE definition that the industry uses. The SAE says that if you are still doing part of the OEDR then you are still driving. The fact that Tesla classifies FSD Beta as L2 means that you are still driving.
DanCar
Active Member
Waymo is not driverless because it can't take me where I want to go. In other words Waymo is not driverless for 99%+ of the total driven miles. At least Tesla can take me where I want to go.
Similar threads
- Article
