Hacker News Reader

Comment by davewritescode | Hacker News Reader

The problem is autopilot actively engages you even less than highway driving. I argue this exacerbates some of the problems that cause humans to checkout.

I don't know what the answer is but it feels like GM's super cruise does a more adequate job of acknowledging the realistic limits of the technology and explicitly white lists roads where the technology is available for use.

I personally think that without some sort of sensors or beacons in the road, autonomous driving via camera and LIDAR sesnors is ever going to be good enough to achieve level 5 autonomous operation.

View on HN

I think the world modeling is the part that autonomous cars can obviously be better at. They have all sorts of advantages over humans; access to much more detailed maps than the average person can recall, multiple types of sensors pointed in multiple directions, a system designed to integrate all that information in a way that is advantageous for driving (we have a system evolved for whatever it evolved for) and so on.

It's the sophisticated behaviors necessary to safely drive through that world model that are the issue.

The success of emergency breaking systems (that aren't advertised as "driving" assist) are pretty good evidence that the sensors can serve well as input to safe behaviors.

If a human can navigate current roads, why shouldn't a computer be able to? We may need to develop a new types of sensors for vehicles, but that seems like a better/easier plan than installing beacons on every road, everywhere.

And what about beacon maintenance? Seems like most cities have a hard enough time keeping up with pot holes, lines, etc. as is.

If a human can write a novel, why shouldn’t a computer be able to?

I have no reason to believe a computer cannot write a novel.

They probably need to be able to reproduce before they can write a compelling novel.

Beacons is a great idea -- have some standardized beacon system, and a public map of autopilot-approved roads.

Following the beacons safely would be a vastly easier problem than trying to completely replace a human driver in all situations, but it would still give you about 90% of the benefits.

Lines fade away because there is little money for maintenance but beacons that cost multiples are the solution?

The first thing I thought when I read beacons: Hackers are going to have a field day with them. Add malicious beacons to streets and cars will drive off road at high speeds.

Well, look at cat’s eyes (sometimes called Botts’ dots in the US, I think?)

I assume they’re more expensive to install than just painting a few lines, but they’re very robust and long-lasting, and they’re fantastic for human drivers. It’s not a stretch to imagine something similarly useful for computerized cars, that links to a standard road database.

Hacking is a risk, sure. I envisage you’d lock it down by having a cryptographically signed master map; if the observed beacons diverge from the map, the autopilot system would refuse to proceed. (OK, I guess that allows a DoS attack at least.)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com