I know that the Master Plan part one was in a lot of ways technically easier and more feasible than part deux, but still. I can't help but let my imagination run wild -- and I can't wait for 5 or 8 or 10 years from now. 6 billion miles / 3 million miles = 2000 days or 5.5 years before 6 bil miles is reached (that's assuming that no additional cars are deployed, which is unlikely, though it's also assuming that the 6 billion miles figure is a valid figure... and who knows how long the regulatory challenges will take). kleinbl00, I recall you taking some umbrage with Tesla's adding the beta tag to Autopilot -- it's, among other things, a way for them to avoid legal liability, right? While that's true, does this argument that Musk et al make carry any legitimacy for you? Or is this just more defensive marketing/obfuscation?We expect that worldwide regulatory approval will require something on the order of 6 billion miles (10 billion km). Current fleet learning is happening at just over 3 million miles (5 million km) per day.
It is also important to explain why we refer to Autopilot as "beta". This is not beta software in any normal sense of the word. Every release goes through extensive internal validation before it reaches any customers. It is called beta in order to decrease complacency and indicate that it will continue to improve (Autopilot is always off by default). Once we get to the point where Autopilot is approximately 10 times safer than the US vehicle average, the beta label will be removed.
I don't think they're calling it "beta" to avoid legal liability. I think they're calling it "beta" to avoid culpability. LOOK - Elon Musk doesn't give the first fuck about Autonomous Vehicles (AVs). I'd go as far as to say he doesn't give the first fuck about cars. The Tesla Roadster was someone else's car with his money. The Model S is a battery with gewgaws on it, and Musk doesn't like developing gewgaws. SpaceX uses largely off-the-shelf components for their rockets; they aren't trying to emulate the ULA, they're trying to emulate Makeyev. SolarCity isn't a separate company because of an accident of history or whatever. They're a separate company because of deliberate machinations by VC funds. Even now, SC isn't a solar panel company. They're a subprime lender that arbitrages utlity vs. end user energy recoup prices. Which, okay, is pretty much what it takes in These United States to get solar penetration up, considering the Republicans. But they put up a bunch of Chinese panels, a bunch of Canadian panels, a bunch of Japanese panels and then get paid like an end user while being a utility because being shady capitalists is A-OK but giving money to Solyndra is a congressional hearing. Musk wants solar power, and he wants to go to Mars. Everything else is lateral. Tesla has "self-driving technology" because the Model S and Model X are drive-by-wire with a shit-ton of telemetry and because Musk asked if it could be done. Tesla's a cult stock so this is the sort of shit you need to do to keep the Kool-Aid fresh. But we're talking about a guy who used his Paypal money to buy a McLaren F1 to buy groceries with. We're talking about a guy who very carefully isn't saying fuckall about the sweetheart deal he got on the Gigafactory or the fact that he's building new Teslas at a used Toyota factory. Right now, self-driving accidents are all anyone wants to talk about. So that's what he's talking about. Five years from now when he releases Part III (which will likely be just as passive-aggressive) if he says fuckall about self-driving technology it won't fucking matter. Let's be honest: he could annouce a partnership with Google and put LIDAR on the Model 3 tomorrow and nobody would call him on it. Because in the end, Tesla is paying lip service to self-driving cars using an extraordinarily difficult approach. Google is putting in the silent, tedious work to build self-driving cars using the easiest approach. Google is building a map of the Alps and refining their stopwatch. Tesla is pretending that eventually they'll be able to AI their way to driving better than you. The former is a well-defined problem. The latter is an open-ended clusterfuck. And I honestly don't think Tesla is serious about it.
It is perfectly possible to make an autonomous robot without having a built-in map. Stanley did it, and Google's self driving car project is mostly guys from SAIL who worked on that or related projects. You can do it, it's just not nearly reliable enough to actually do on the highway at high speed with squishy people inside and all around yet. It's not out of the question that someone will make it work eventually, but I don't think that someone will be working at Tesla either.Google is building a map of the Alps and refining their stopwatch. Tesla is pretending that eventually they'll be able to AI their way to driving better than you. The former is a well-defined problem. The latter is an open-ended clusterfuck.
Your perspective is appreciated. Am I completely off base in characterizing this as "GIS from hell" vs. "The Bicentennial Man?" 'cuz google's approach seems to be a definable amount of data while Tesla's seems to be a whistling-in-the-dark systems approach.
If you don't have a premade map you have to generate the map while you figure out where in the map you are. This is called, creatively, simultaneous localization and mapping, and abbreviated SLAM because DARPA likes cute acronyms. Doing that requires the robot to explore a bit, essentially learning what Google tells its cars while trying to drive. I think you've mentioned playing with a Roomba before. You know how it just kind of zips around randomly at first? That's what it's doing. Now imagine it weighing N tons. Roomba isn't the smartest robot in the world, but all I'm aware of are closer to Roomba than something you want on the road.
I am surprised there was no mention of developing a hyperloop, with talk of self driving semis it seems obvious they would be dropped off by the loop and distribute out from there. Safe to say the next five years will be awesome, the next ten: Unimaginable.
Good theory, the goals aren't mutually exclusive though, but I would love to see a mag launch system -- considering they've directed so much effort to controlled landing rockets I can totally see a maglev launched rocket being returned with only a small amount of fuel ever needed.
Wouldn't self-driving, self-charging cars of all stripes address long-term long-distance travel? It seems like the hyperloop would make it considerably faster, but not in and of itself solve long-distance travel--a Tesla could travel cross-country. But the development of the hyperloop could represent a huge diversion from Tesla's (and Solar City's) development
For years I have dreamt of the streets being reclaimed from traffic, limited to just pedestrians, bicycles and perhaps trams/buses; my idea being that commuter and leisure traffic could be carried out underground or on a separate "layer". I know it's bit of a pipe dream, and certainly not unique to me, but maybe things like the htperloop could help realise this dream.
levels, service area size, vehicle relocation strategies, and fleet size. Preliminary results indicate that each SAV can replace around eleven conventional vehicles, but adds up to 10% more travel distance than comparable non-SAV trips, resulting in overall beneficial emissions impacts, once fleet-efficiency changes and embodied versus in-use emissions are assessed. Fagnant & Kockelman, 2009 &Case studies vary trip generation rates, trip distribution patterns, network congestion
TaxiBots combined with high-capacity public transport could remove 9 out of every 10 cars in a mid-sized European city. Even in the scenario that least reduces the number of cars (AutoVots without high-capacity public transport), nearly eight out of ten cars could be removed. UITP, 2015
I'm looking forward to seeing cities reclaimed from car parking. While roads may still be clogged with traffic, I look forward to the day when those cars drive off after dropping their passengers to go recharge or get another passenger. Just clearing roads of parked cars and reducing the need for parking structures will go a long way to opening up the city centers.