Hacker News Reader

Comment by aditya-ramabadr | Hacker News Reader

Great point! Yeah latency was one of the biggest issues here. To cope with that (and for safety reasons) the cars are driving at extremely low speeds. They also get timestamps with every tool call output etc so they can, in theory, "in context learn" about their own latency and choose motion durations and control how fast their iteration loop is to some extent. But yeah, this is just sort of a fun benchmark to see how good frontier LLMs are out-of-the-box at driving a real car, and probably not actually practical any time soon.

-Aditya, Tobias, Simon

View on HN

To clarify my parent comment, I think it was an interesting experiment and seems like it was done well, and it may well be informative about what various frontier LLMs could do with recorded or world model footage.

My only point is to say this sort of experiment is where it ends. Neither Anthropic nor OpenAI will be coming out with a "drive your car from the cloud" subscription until we have FTL communication, meaning never.

Is it plausible they can use the large GPT model, to distill a smaller car driving model only from it and then run that onboard. Seems like that will solve all your issues.

I'd be very surprised if at the very least Tesla/xAI aren't actively investigating that already. The general purpose intelligence to deal with complex new situations will never fit into a pure driving model, because it will need to understand human behaviour on a level that goes way beyond what people do on a road. I'm pretty sure that an eventual level 5 system will look closer to GPT than any traditional driving model. The biggest issue is indeed latency and we probably won't see it in real cars until a multi-trillion parameter model like GPT-6 fits on a simple ASIC that can run in an affordable car. Right now a stack of B200s that can run a frontier intelligence model costs more than a car itself. But a GPT-8 running something like 20k tokens/s on a Taalas HC5 will almost certainly be able to drive a car under real conditions.

I imagine a mix of models would make sense - GPT controller to make overall decisions and override things (let’s avoid the dark alley it looks dangerous), driving model to handle what humans do when they are just driving and not thinking about it, maybe some other models too

This is what Tesla does. Elon Musk has been selling FSD for more than 10 years and a huge chunk of Teslas have computers too old to run the current best model, which IIRC is already transformer-based.

Because having to offer upgrades to so many cars is expensive, Tesla puts a distilled model on older cars that performs worse and has no redundancy.

Time will tell if he can get away with this (hopefully not) but you are describing a system that's near-L4 and already exists today.

What about Waymo's remote controlled cars? Why is this not an issue?

My understanding is that Waymo's remote driving is not direct control of the car, for exactly these reasons among others. So human operators don't have steering wheels or joysticks. Instead the humans can give something closer to advice (e.g., "pull to the right and stop") that the car can accept, modify, or reject.

The car always has to be capable of driving safely and avoiding collisions locally. The human operators are being asked occasionally to help with some higher level, longer term decisions. As a random example, if there's foreign objects blocking the road, the car has to be able to stop itself before hitting them, but it might phone-home to a human to decide if a u-turn is appropriate.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com