top | item 39020742

GM to Shut Down Ultra Cruise

44 points| reteltech | 2 years ago |ojoyoshidareport.com

92 comments

order

thot_experiment|2 years ago

I gotta say, I was driven on residential streets/stroads from home to restaurant by a Tesla 3 (using vision alone I think? it was fairly recent) in absolutely POURING rain and I was blown away by how good it was. I think it's hard to get a handle on how good this stuff is because it's such a politically charged field now but I have a hard time believing the folks that say it's never gonna happen, or at least not soon, because of technical reasons.

Don't get me wrong, I'm on team ban cars and replace every stroad with a light rail corridor and bike paths, but I think self driving cars will be fine in some number of years once the haters calm down. Hard for me to believe we can't achieve better than the average shitty driver level of safety.

thumbsup-_-|2 years ago

It works most of the time but the issue is that "most of the time" is not good enough for these systems. Even if the failure rate is <1% that may end up being lots of accidents and deaths at scale.

People often make arguments that "oh it will still be less accidents than human drivers", which is true, but, the problem is that human accuracy is a very poor benchmark for autonomous systems. Autonomous systems need to be held to a higher bar, and it's better if that accountability and expectation is held from the beginning.

brucethemoose2|2 years ago

The thing about machine learning is that it can fail very suddenly, in a very unhuman way.

So even if self driving works most of the time, it takes a lot of work to address weird edge cases even the most inebriated human would not mess up, that other drivers/pedestrians would not anticipate.

gamblor956|2 years ago

And I was in a Tesla 3 in sunny weather about 2 months ago, and it nearly crashed into a tow truck and a cyclist that it didn't see. It's embarrassingly bad at handling basic use cases and it pretty much the poster boy for why vision alone won't work for actual self-driving.

chris-orgmenta|2 years ago

I am on the side of cars (long term), even though I hate cars, the inefficiency, the space issues, the anti-pedestrian externalities, etc.

Ultimately, to design a transport system that benefits all of society, it needs to go from point A to point B. Light rail / public transport will always need a +somethingelse, in order to do that. Or we end up expanding the rail infra so much that we have just reinvented roads, but a little more constrained. Or we end up with car shares. Either way is fine.

I just don't see how to cater for lots of different disabilities and needs without 'cars' being a (maybe small) part of it. Regardless of what path we take, I just see the evolution converging back on a car-like vehicle for a substantial portion of the freight/transport industry (albeit 'trains' of them, but not physically connected), even if it's mostly final mile. But people and things don't want to hop between transport modes. They want to step outside their door into a vehicle, then out again at the destination.

Anyway... Self driving vehicles could be worse than some drivers currently, but it sure is better than SOME drivers I have seen. For an industry that has only had 15yrs direct investment, it's already better than bad drivers from my view - So it's almost time to start making driving licenses slightly harder to get and keep, IMO (it's so easy to get a license. It's hard to take them away, unless it's after an incident. There are so many very unsafe drivers).

That's a long way of saying that I concur with your comment.

joshe|2 years ago

I'll second that for Waymo.

Just took a Waymo ride across San Francisco 3 nights ago in hard rain, at night. A hilly complex city with bike lanes, kinda oddball medians and bollards, many pedestrians, and homeless people wandering down the middle of streets. It did great.

I've taken 5 trips so far, and all have been great and better than the average uber driver.

I've had 3 sketchy Uber rides out of about 10 total in the last 3 months. One older woman was was peering over her steering wheel commenting that she really can't see that well at night, she'd kinda guess and head over to next lane, and had to abort once when she almost merged into another car. One plunged across 3 lanes of traffic without signaling while looking at the phone in her hand, twice! Another did a no look left turn while looking at the map and almost hit a pedestrian in the crosswalk. I said "stop!" and he did and looked up shocked. Slow enough that it would have only been a broken leg, but still...

hedgehog|2 years ago

One angle is to look at when we expect there to be data showing a new autopilot vehicle is at least equivalently safe to a new non-autopilot vehicle with modern ADAS. I don't think the performance is there yet, hard to tell when it will be.

bigtex|2 years ago

Did the windshield wipers actually work?

eruleman|2 years ago

This is not to be confused with Cruise the company.

Super cruise is a feature in GM cars.

dheera|2 years ago

Does this mean people who already have Super Cruise will have it no longer work?

If so I think it is unethical and false advertising to have a feature removed from something someone already owns.

yellow_postit|2 years ago

Self driving is going the way of fusion power. Always just a couple years away.

I still believe divided highway trucking between major cities with last mile handoff to humans has legs, but I wonder how much the Tesla claims have poisoned the proverbial well of a more constrained system for the foreseeable future.

jessriedel|2 years ago

1. Waymo works great. It's safer than humans within its operating regime, and that regime is more than enough to make a profitable taxi service. As they collect more data, the regime expands.

2. Cruise is in the corporate penalty box for being dishonest in withholding video data from the state of CA, but that was a stupid PR move. It doesn't tell us anything about the tech, which in fact is strong.

gertlex|2 years ago

Is that "same direction travel divided between autonomous trucks and all other traffic"? Or "only on highways where traffic directions are separated by a median"?

The former sounds like a massive (understating it probably) infrastructure investment. Trains sound better (as other comment while I was typing notes).

The latter doesn't solve the issues noted in the recent article here: https://kevinchen.co/blog/autonomous-trucking-harder-than-ri...

Am curious to hear more thoughts/insights.

dexwiz|2 years ago

Waymo appears to be the real deal. Last night I saw one navigate a situation with a hesitant pedestrian better than most human drivers. And before people chime in with "ideal conditions," it was at night in the rain.

I never trusted the Cruise cars, they would drive like a teenager that was afraid of the road. But Waymo seems a step up even from the Uber drivers.

atleastoptimal|2 years ago

I rode in a Waymo and it feels safer, easier, and was more enjoyable than Uber.

neaden|2 years ago

That just seems like a train to be honest, and runs into the same problems of who is going to pay for the infrastructure and handle priority.

avs733|2 years ago

There’s an entirely different way of looking at this that is perfectly in line with why self driving. Cars have failed several times before…

Who is liable?

That’s what largely killed prior attempts, especially those using custom built roads. If the car crashes who is liable - the manufacturer, the road builder, or the driver? I think it is telling that the pull back we’re seeing is correlated with early cases in this becoming more salient.

Why does this have to be a technical limitation/success (im not saying it is or isn’t) only?

LightBug1|2 years ago

Musk led these manufacturers down the garden path ...

Do what you do excellently. Learn. Don't follow.

ramesh31|2 years ago

Once again, George was right. Self driving will be solved with vision alone, or it will never be solved. And solving for vision means solving for AGI.

lorstic|2 years ago

Vision-only is very very very far behind other techniques. Cruise (the self driving company, not OP) was killed by an overzealous CEO, not by their chosen technique. Waymo drives great in SF.

Waterluvian|2 years ago

Vision is necessary but lidar and other sensor types are probably going to be a powerful supplement.

One can possibly compensate for an inferior “brain” by having more kinds of data to discern meaning from.

iknowstuff|2 years ago

Cue the Mercedes apologists pointing out their „L3” system that can be used on a handful of stretches of nevada freeways, below 30mph, only when there’s a car leading directly ahead, and only when there’s little road curvature. But hey bragging rights.

Good luck finding non-press videos of it in action

ra7|2 years ago

Must be why his Comma.ai product is still relegated to hands-free lane keeping.

gscho|2 years ago

Who is George?

adrr|2 years ago

Are there any vision only self driving cars on the road?

ado__dev|2 years ago

Not surprising at all. Self driving cars that can operate safely and make good decisions in almost any space has always been a pipe dream.

mustacheemperor|2 years ago

Except apparently in San Francisco, where I use one as my primary form of non-public transportation.