Hacker News Reader

prng2021

"Drivers can activate Mercedes’s technology, called Drive Pilot, when certain conditions are met, including in heavy traffic jams, during the daytime, on specific California and Nevada freeways, and when the car is traveling less than 40 mph."

This is not what people think of when they see a headline like this. It's just a bunch of PR bs.

View on HN

The key difference is that the driver is not required to watch the road - I.E. the liability is on Mercedes.

Exactly. As a mental exercise, people should consider how broad or narrow the functional domain needs to be for Level 3 (liability assumed by manufacturer) to be truly of note versus Level 2 (liability remains with owner).

Would a Level 3 system that only navigates parking lots at up to 5 MPH be notable versus a Level 2 system that drove everywhere? For me, a very narrow Level 3 system like Mercedes' is absolutely less interesting versus a very broad Level 2 system like Tesla's. The technical capability of Tesla's system is substantial. How important is taking liability, really, to the bigger picture of increasing the technical capability of autonomy? A narrow Level 3 system is not an entirely empty milestone, of course, but compared to the actual work of increasing driving capability, assuming liability seems like a game played primarily by deploying lawyers, not programmers.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com