Hiding a video from regulators has nothing to do with faking it til you make it
And then we had all the other leaks.
That they couldn't reliably distinguish children from adults, making them (even by their overly optimistic models) more dangerous to children than humans - which is why they started operating mostly at night, when there are few children.
And then it was reported they had 1.5 employees per car in operations, requiring support every 2-5 miles. Very surprising given that they've reported a disengagement every 95,000 miles last year.
Cruise was a company that could not withstand transparency.
If true that alone should have disqualified them from being street legal.
That's a utterly ridiculous statistic. If you need a human to monitor to prevent a bad result, it doesn't matter how often the human has to intervene.
For example: With Tesla Autopilot, the driver doesn't have to do anything the vast majority of the time. Still, your life expectancy will be measured in days if you don't monitor it.
Even if the vehicle makes completely random decisions when faced with a binary code, you could still say that 50% of the support events don't result in the remote operator doing anything.
A human driver can easily get away with the latter, and often do. A self-driving car can't, because people hold them to higher standards.
And they need all those people because their software cannot reliably handle it itself.
Otherwise they would not used so many people.
> A human driver can easily get away with the latter, and often do. A self-driving car can't, because people hold them to higher standards.
LOL. They've been blocking streets all over the place.
https://techcrunch.com/2022/06/30/cruise-robotaxis-blocked-t...
They're also overstaffed to deal with surges - I recommend you go read the (ex) CEO's response to these claims. As the number of cars on the road goes up, the number of employees required to deal with surges increases more slowly. At some point the ratio increases from 1:20, which is where it's already at.
Looks like they haven't increased the number of operators enough.
> They're also overstaffed to deal with surges
Are they? How are they going to handle the next bay area earthquake? Will they have enough operators for that, or are they going to block first responders all over the city?
Fortunately, this is a moot point, because it is doubtful whether they are going to survive.
> I recommend you go read the (ex) CEO's response to these claims. As the number of cars on the road goes up, the number of employees required to deal with surges increases more slowly. At some point the ratio increases from 1:20, which is where it's already at.
Nice theory. Note that the number of remote operators shocked everyone that was following Cruise. They were constantly asked about number of cars per operator, what exactly the duties of a remote operators were, etc. They always avoided these quetions, and for a good reason. It turns out this was far worse than anyone outside Cruise could have imagined.