-
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
Without maps you could only enter GPS coordinates for your destination and even if it did work it might take it a very long time of it driving around for it to find a path to your destination. (Some level of maps is essentially required for a viable autonomous vehicle.)
It says no HD maps, didn't say no navigation maps. There is no advantage to not using a standard navigation map given it's already built into every car.
I think that the USPS would be perfect for mapping areas that aren't on Google Maps and have no cell signals. These areas always get Mail. You could equip the Mail Carrier's vehicle with cameras to map the areas then that data could be uploaded into AV's. You wouldn't need to spend as much time mapping the areas for AVs to operate.
It seems it can barely drive on the highway at the moment. It seems to be a Comma-ai competitor. I doubt they have any realistic autonomy ambitions.
diplomat33
Average guy who loves autonomous vehicles
diplomat33
Average guy who loves autonomous vehicles
diplomat33
Average guy who loves autonomous vehicles
No, Zoox will likely be geofenced.
Right now, only Zoox employees are riding the vehicle on a 1 mile loop between their HQ. We don't know how a public service will work yet.
People fear change. Gonna take time for AVs and advanced ADAS like Beta to be accepted by the public.
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
I've never bought into this idea.
Instead it's gonna take time, a long-term-minded business plan, and significantly more capability for AVs to be broadly available or useful to the public.
Once they actually work great, in lots of places, in a way that's economically sustainable to operate instead of being a money furnace, folks will be lining up to use them.
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
I'm not wrong.I mean, sure... if you wanna be wrong by yourself go right ahead
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
I mean, you are though- people aren't, as you suggest, not using RTs widely due to "fear of change"
They're not using them because the tech largely isn't there yet, the business model is terrible for what little there is today, and they'd also go bankrupt trying to scale the business up to wide availability.
None of that is "fear" it's technology and economics.
Fix those and "the public" will be all over the place happily riding in the things.... ESPECIALLY when because fixing scaling means a ton of areas currently heavily underserved by human-driven rideshares now open up-- offering significantly better mobility to people who currently don't have access to it.
I fully agree. When this works as. reliable as a Lyft or Uber with a driver, everyone will prefer driverless.
It's looking pretty promising though:
diplomat33
Average guy who loves autonomous vehicles
I think you are both right. There certainly is some fear of change. The fact is that humans are always afraid of change. It's why we see certain political movements that push back against social change or why some people rail against self check-out at groceries stores. My mom won't even use the driver assist in her car and does not like riding in my Tesla if I use FSD Beta. She's said that "self-driving" makes her nervous. And we see in polls that show a majority of people say they would not ride in a "self-driving" car. I've also seen tweets from people who think all robotaxis are dangerous and out of control and will run over their kid. That's fear. It is fear of something they don't know because most people have never taken a ride in a robotaxi. If you talk to people who have taken a ride in a Waymo or Cruise, they are often very positive. In fact, I've seen many tweets from first-time riders who say something like "I was nervous at first but within five minutes, I was relaxed and felt very safe." So once people experience a good robotaxi ride, their fear goes away and they embrace the tech more.
But I think Knightshade also has a good point. Certainly, the tech is not commercially viable yet. But once the tech is more mature and more commercially viable, I am sure people will eventually embrace it. I would liken autonomous driving a bit to commercial flights. People were very afraid of flying at first. But now, most people fly without giving it a second thought. I think that's because commercial flights are so common now and statistically so safe, that people accept it. Likewise, when we get to the point when there are millions of robotaxis doing billions of miles per year with no fatalities, I think people will take them for granted just like we do now with flying.
I think autonomous driving will progress through stages. First, was the demo stage when the tech was primitive but it showed that self-driving was possible. I think we are now in an early scaling stage. The tech can do normal driving safely but sometimes struggle when drivable space is changed. So it is becoming "good enough" for somewhat bigger geofences but not ready yet for wide deployment everywhere. I am hopeful that the autonomous driving will get better over time and the "stall" incidents will be greatly reduced. And then we can move to more wide scale deployment. Eventually, I do think the tech will be super mature and will be everywhere. Then we will look back and laugh at how primitive autonomous driving used to be in 2023.
There is some element of fear, but by far it's not anywhere near the reason for little adoption. If for example the tech gets cheap/ready enough to be installed in every single car, the use would naturally skyrocket, even with a large portion of the population skeptical.
Right now AVs are similar to EVs in the compliance car era, where only a very limited amount of areas even get them, outside of those areas you can't even try the tech even if you wanted to.
I suspect some of the reluctance to use robotaxis stems from the lack of control that a passenger has. When using a human driven taxi, passengers have, at the least, an illusion of control in that they can talk to the driver. Perhaps, if RT companies provided some sort of interaction with the driving computer so if someone says, "watch out for that kid up there," the car could respond with, " I see the child, sir, I've determined that there is only a 12.79% chance of her running into the street in front of us, but I have my virtual foot on the brake pedal just in case." Or, it could even say things without prompting like, "Whoa! Did you see that idiot swerving in the lane? He must be drunk! I'll give him plenty of room while I livestream him to the nearest robocop."
Obviously, I'm being a bit facetious, but providing some interaction between the passenger and robodriver might be helpful.
Obviously, I'm being a bit facetious, but providing some interaction between the passenger and robodriver might be helpful.
Exactly. It's science - evolution and tribal/societal development that has been studied for generations. Can't really argue against science.
Just as I said - it will take time for people to embrace it, just as it does for most all political, social, and technological change. I didn't say it won't happen, it will just take time.
Similar threads
- Article
