hacker11235

To add substance:

From the nhsta site (https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.dot.gov/files/documents/12...)

Observations on various aspects:

* "Because the lower the flash point, the more hazardous the fire risk, flammable electrolyte solvents in Li-ion batteries are more or less as hazardous as conventional vehicular fuels."

* "Because the narrower the flammability range, the less hazardous the fire risk, flammable electrolytic solvents in Li-ion batteries are about as hazardous as conventional vehicular fuels, and certainly less hazardous than hydrogen."

* "Because the lower the minimum ignition temperature, the more hazardous the fire risk, flammable electrolytic solvents are not as hazardous as conventional vehicular fuels."

* "Because the lower the minimum spark energy, the more hazardous the fire risk, flammable electrolytic solvents are probably about as hazardous as conventional vehicular fuels."

* "Because the lower the maximum flame temperature the lower the exposure risk (skin burns) to fire, electrolytic solvents are expected to pose no more of a severe risk to burn injuries than conventional vehicular fuels, gasoline and diesel."

* "Because of the probable similarity in the magnitude of the maximum flame temperatures, if the combustion of the electrolytic solvents were confined, the resulting overpressure that could build up would maximize at about the same levels as for the other flammable fuels, meaning that the burst damage that would result from Li-ion explosions would also be comparable to that from conventional vehicular fuels."

* "The thermal energy expected to be released upon initiation and combustion of the electrolytic solvents would be less than that of gasoline and diesel fuel."

Speaking for Tesla and Uber, they use neural nets. Tesla has the most data which is what you're referring to above and they do exactly what you were stating. The software is/has always been shadowing human drivers, that is learning and comparing to the decisions it would make on its own. Uber is also most definitely using a similar set up. I think neural nets are a basic necessity in this field since there are an almost infinite number of scenarios.

Unfortunately comment sections usually don't work like that :(

Yes I totally agree, I think there should be some regulation regarding this area. At least in terms of being clear when advertising. I think it's ok to deploy such a system where in some/most cases the AI will help, but it needs to be made apparent that it can and will fail in some seemingly simple cases.

I'd say the monkey has most of the hardware but not the software, analogously. As for the phone, right I was assuming the cars have enough processing power and memory to do the necessary processing. But granted they haven't exemplified full self-driving on their current hardware, I will have to concede that we do not know how much processing and power are needed to be truly self-driving. For all we know, that last 10% of self-driving capability may require an exponential increase in the amount of processing required.

Good point, I'm assuming their Nvidia GPUs have enough power/memory to do the processing they want to do.

This is the part that can be emulated in software. All you have to prove is that what ever platform/language you're using for the programming is Turing Complete, which is the case for almost all of the most popular languages.

Sure, they have cameras to see and a computer to do rigorous processing. We can compare this to a human, who uses their vision to perceive the outside world while driving. (You could also argue humans use their hearing, well the Tesla's have mic's if they really wanted to use that).

While I don't necessarily agree with how they've advertised it I think they are legally safe. All Model 3's DO have the HARDWARE to support full-self driving, even if the software is not there. And regarding the software, it has been shown to be about 40% safer than humans where it is used, which is what they've claimed.

Right, inductive charging. From what I've read it doesn't seem like this was the method Tesla was researching for long range transmission was it?

Could you expand more on the prospects of wireless transmission of electricity. I've seen some stuff about this but have had a hard time finding sources talking about it, I'm quite intrigued.