Sorry. Your Car Will Never Drive You Around.
Вставка
- Опубліковано 10 тра 2024
- A deep dive into autonomous vehicles, customizing your own, and everyone trying to run over both plastic and actual kids.
💗 Support this channel and join an amazing community: / bennjordan
👀 Stalk me on social media for more frequent updates: linktr.ee/BennJordan
🔴 Subscribe To My Streaming Channel. I stream weekly! • Lambient
⚡Those lovely custom acoustic panels in the background: psyacoustics.com
Elonstamps:
0:00 - Sup
1:17 - Stages of autonomy
3:20 - FSD Expectations
4:38 - FSD Reality
5:32 - Hitting Fake Children
7:45 - Hitting Real Children
9:19 - Ultrasonic Sensors
11:13 - Why I Care So Much
13:32 - Safety Tech That Works
14:12 - Tesla's Are More Dangerous
16:05 - Openpilot
17:37 - LOTS of Trial and Error
19:40 - Tesla Karen
21:17 - A Better Idea?
23:42 - Your Rights - Наука та технологія
Data sources on Elonworld: twitter.com/bennjordan/status/1744410056429388037
Intro track: "The Wave" by @Superlative
The $TSLA dudes coping in the comments is so rewarding.
Elon haters like this clown are 1,000 times worse than Elon dick riders. The dude is a leftwing zealot shilling for his cult masters.
Actually, I call them "Muskrats".
That track slaps.
why did you switch from FSD to regular autopilot meant for highways at 5:50? im not even mad, but your desperation for engagement is worse than the $TSLA guys
I really hope Elon reads this, bro.@@naahh
I wonder if Silicon Valley will ever finally arrive at trains? I would be willing to let them claim they had the brilliant idea all on their own, if it gets us to where they stop reinventing worse trains.
Collectivism and/or anything that is not profit driven is deemed "communism" to a capitalist, and against their goals of profiting from everything. These are the same people who can't wait until they can sell us air. They don't WANT trains, because they can't profit as much from that.
Silicon Valley only works when people invest absurd capital into a pipe dream, because pipe dreams get investors frisky. And they’re not frisky about the product, they’re frisky about the fact that the rest of the financial institution will also get frisky. Money begets money.
Trains are never going to do that. No one is getting 1000x return on a damn train line. That’s the domain of government, or old, established businesses.
Slap an AI controlled solar / wind powered vitamin B IV drip cart on the back and maybe you have a product. But the train is not the product, there is no product without hype. Because hype is the product.
The railroad industry is in dire need of disruption and recapitalisation
We’ve had autonomous trains since the 70s. Trains are the the crabification of transportation, doesn’t matter what you for short and medium distances trains are the ultimate form. For last mile transportation bikes, e-bikes, scooters, walking are the best. Car should be relegated to emergency services and delivery.
@Victor-kh5rh there is a role for cars for in-frequent and rural personal transportation. But most cities and suburbs should be built so most people don't need a car to get to work, school, and groceries.
ok, people who make excuses that "a cardboard cutout isn't a real human" need to have their heads examined. If your car drives over a huge object in the middle of the road, THAT'S A FUCKING PROBLEM. It's not like the car can tell what the object is made of, or what is BEHIND the cardboard cutout. For all you know it's a brick wall, or something worse. What if there actually IS a real child behind the cardboard ?? The fact that the car doesn't stop at the sight of any object in front of it is already a failure of massive proportions.
Exactly. It is irrelevant what the obstacle is made of. You're not supposed to run over obstacles.
Have you EVER driven over something on the road? Idiot statement.
You can’t see if the car is in ACTUALLY in self driving mode. Nor can you see if the person driving is pressing on the accelerator. Your brain is so easily manipulated, I have to question your IQ level. If you have the guts, I would like to invite you to take a ride with me sometime. So your brain has the opportunity to make an INFORMED decision.
@@B3BandDo humans run over objects on the road? Have you driven over objects on the road? If you haven’t, you must live in some utopian area where there are NEVER objects on the road.
@@bigdougscommentary5719 I'm in my 40s and have been driving since I was 16 and I have *never* run over a child-sized object in the road. WTF are you on about?
FSD already exists. My Dad used to work on the farm and go to the pub after. He'd pass out drunk but always found his way home. The horse would just go back in the barn and finish its hay.
That's probably safer than Musk's FSD.
public transportation is the closest we will EVER get to autonomous vehicles.
@@stretch654
Oh _certainly._
It is the horse taking itself to -water- hay, *_and_* making itself -drink- eat! All with the autonomy of nature!
I always thought if you could teach a crow to drive your car it would do a better job then Tesla FSD.
OMG.
You. Are. A. GENIUS!
First, when you buy a Tesla, you're given a horse. Maybe it goes in the trunk?
Then, when you're getting ready for FHD (full horse driving. um. that was probably obvious), just hookup the horse.
Or maybe Musk can put a horse's brain into the TSLA?
I had a coworker who complained constantly that the patrol car we both drove would constantly beep at him all night while he was driving it round. But it never beeped for me except occasionally on one specific section of road. Turns out he was such a terrible driver he was constantly tripping the lane deviation warning.
The fact that lane assist reduces crashes is a genuinely horrifying statistic and not talked enough about. Licenses need to be a recurring thing if this is legit.
I don't care if the child is real or fake I don't want my car ploughing into objects in the road.
Yeah they had a foot on the accelerator for that one.
We need faster children.
With that hat, we know you make terrible life decisions.
you fool, optimus will replace those weak flesh bag children with weak robot children..........that have limited warranties
@@PaleBlueDotCitizen Sad that so many Tesla owners and drivers tell matching lies about the work of Perfect Genius Messiah Elon Musk 😢
"It can tell a mannequin from a …". IT SHOULDN'T BE HITTING A MANNEQUIN!
Also pretty unrealistic to expect humans to be able to distinguish a mannequin from a human while driving, but at least the human will recognize an obstacle as such.
@@MicroMyco I mean, we could certainly tell outside of the worst lighting conditions. But we of course wouldn't condition our avoidance on the conscious detection of the difference between a mannequin and a person. We reflexively swerve.
Also, that was a Melon Husk lie to begin with..
@@television1088 Right! It's plain stupid to trust anything Musk says. "Oh, he lied all the other times, but this time, this time it's the truth". Like a cheated spouse who chooses to keep the blindfold on
The whole it can tell it's not a child is nonesense. So if it saw a boulder in the road it would drive into it? If the mannequin was filled with concrete, it would drive into it? Drivers defending this deserve whatever fate awaits them if they can't understand that the danger is not just to the hypothetical child, but to them as well.
I'm an engineer that works at a major engine manufacturer in north west Missouri with a name that starts with a 'K'. We use automation for stationary machines, and we have floor cleaners that are fully autonomous. The only reason these things function over time is because we have a dedicated maintenance budget and team full of people smarter than the middle of the IQ bell curve. Without this, we wouldn't make engines, as electrical components fail even in a clean and controlled environment.
The average American neglects maintenance on their vehicle simply due to cost or ignorance. Any electrical sensor component necessary for a self driving car to function can and will fail, and the owner can and will neglect maintenance past the point of failure. The wear and tear a vehicle sees is far and above what our machines see inside a plant. A lot of people will be driving heavily depreciated cars that USED to be able to drive themselves that are cost prohibitive to repair, much like the constant-on check engine light that many cars have for some superfluous sensor that nonetheless deactivates cruise control when it's malfunctioning.
Automation is no the solution to all our problems, and it shouldn't be our god.
Where is the Problem. If the Sensors are to dirty your Tesla informs you and FSD will Not Work 🤷
@@davids.6671 Exactly this. If there's a problem with late maintenance, just disable the car.
@@LLF1234if all cars were like this, congratulations you’ve just disabled a massive swath of cars on US roads.
@@davids.6671modules and inverter can and will fail, which will render any machine useless
i read this and am still confused
I Lost it at the “okay buddy, daddy is balls deep on a Tesla option ETF….”
I made $12,000 in 3 min. You will never have more than $200 in your checking. Keep coping poor
The man playing Russian roulette with the life of his child should be prosecuted for child endangerment.
"A decade ago... In 2014" My back started hurting instantly😂
My prostate increased in size just hearing that.
You think that's bad? I still think the 1980s was 20 years ago.
@@wolfshanze5980
What got me was turning on a classic rock station, and hearing Alanis Morissette.
When I was a kid, a classic movie from 20 y/o ago was Terminator. Now a classic movie from 20 y/ago is Shrek 2...
I remember playing 64 and being ecstatic to get a Gamecube for Christmas. Now Wii is a couple years away from being retro. _🙃_
It kills me when the car slows down and then, after some thought, proceeds to plow under the child.
"Damn kid had too slow reflexes. That's Darwin."
A child will die if hit by a car at 20 mph ... but if the kid is running away at 3 mph - when hit by the same car - the aggregate difference is that the kid will survive. ... " so if you are going to hit a kid - make sure they are running away - as it will cause LESS damage to the kid " ( Jimmy Carr - UK Comedian )
I agree, perhaps the machine is giving the human a chance to prove it's worth and it failed, but we keep looking at it from the human perspective...
I think its more like it saw the dummy, then stopped, but it is now obscured. So eventually it goes because it no longer sees it. It will be interesting if the new version does better at that or if it is a training issue they can fix with more training videos.
average New York driver 🤣
(yes I'm joking)
Autopilot was not engaged. You can see it because the steering wheel is gray on the screen. It is blue when AP is active. This guy did that on purpose lol
I finished my free month of FSD on my Tesla Model 3 and learned babysitting a computer is not my idea of fun. I enjoy driving cars and motorcycles. I hope completely autonomous vehicles are perfected in the future but there is a long way to go.
I have saved this video. It is in my list of videos to laugh at when technology surpasses the predicted NEVER limitation. 🙂🙂🙂
When an open source project says the Discord is the documentation, you know you're in for a GREAT time! A website that points you to the chat, but people in the chat saying "Read the post on the chat" and the post on the chat points to another post and...
I've been playing with FOSS stuff for 20+ years, and I've never run into anything as crappy as "Discord as Documentation"
Plus discord is known to shut down discords and all the chats are gone forever unless someone did a backup.
One user gets in, posts stuff against ToS and self reports, will get it shut down fast.
Yes. Documentation for users should be in a wiki. Documentation for contributors can be in either markdown files or a wiki. I'm sure there are other methods that work well enough, but trying to find them seems like a waste of time when we already have wiki.
It is the Linux issue. Its either "ask the community" or "look at this hyper detailed expose that throws around words a below average user will not understand".
As much as we hate big companies and their closed source applications... atleast they are extremely user friendly and most time even easy to learn.
@@KatojanaYeah, nah. If by 'user friendly' you mean 'least-experienced user-friendly', then I agree. And they are easy to learn, because 90% of complicated useful stuff has been locked behind a closed door. Systems should be easy to learn because they are logical and simply make sense, no because the developer was unable or unwilling for whatever reason to do the former and decided to strip the 90% of the interface which is a moronic bullcrap which cannot be understood, unless you are a developer yourself. ----END_RANT---
Lmao closed-source is extremely customer-friendly?? Actually curious, what software do you have in mind? You think Windows is actually easier to use than, say, Ubuntu? @@Katojana
I about died of laughter when the Tesla lightly bumped the dog and dog walker over and then was like GTFO of the way, i gotta go lolol
finally an AI that understands me
I drive my brother-in-law's FSD Tesla from time to time and i think it's safer but for the opposite reasons you'd expect. The fact that it can do ANYTHING at any time means I'm paying so much more attention than i am on a normal drive.
One video had a driver trying out the self-driving system and said that it was more mentally exhausting using it than driving normally because when driving normally you aren't worried about your arms suddenly deciding you should drive into a parked car or your foot deciding on its own to hit the brakes.
That guy who put his child at risk like that should be charged with child abuse and child endangerment.
Two issues with your "boids" tangent.
(1) A fully separate, self-driving lane (that would need a physical barrier to be meaningful) adds a TON of cost just to cater to what is currently a tiny segment of the population.
(2) There actually is a set of "roads" designed to carry almost-autonomous vehicles that communicate with each other through a central system and are designed for minimal human oversight with hardly any computer code at all. It is called TRAINS!
This comment needs more upvotes 😊
@@acondor They're called likes here you redditor smooth brain
Instead of metros, lets create roads underground so we can have traffic congestion in miles long narrow tunnels with no escape. - Elon Musk
Exactly! The ONLY advantage of self driving cars over trains and buses is that you do NOT need tons of additional infrastructure to make them useful, especially in countries like America that are just way too big to walk or use a bike.
I think it is the right idea for SOME areas where trains and buses are just not feasible; all we need are better AI systems to drive them.
I don't see why they will "never" work like it says in the title.
This video is so American
I live in a rural area (no sidewalks) so I always have to turn off my Lane assist, because if I steer to try and avoid pedestrians on the side of the road, the car will sense I'm getting too close to the centerline and actually attempt to steer me into the people I'm trying to avoid.
It also likes to see shadows as lane lines and will freak out sometimes on a specific patch of road thinking i'm actively driving myself into the ditch
Which car in model is that
Interesting. My son has a Tesla and his concierge service will not get with 4 feet of a post in front of it. You are overreacting and the car would center itself. Your brain is so slow to respond you are grabbing it at the deal of yourself and not the response of the computer
This is exactly why I dont want a car any newer than '04, and why I love my little shitbox Cherokee. No lane assist, no radars, no cameras. In fact the most advanced tech that thing has, is the CD changer in the trunk.
All the responsibility of driving is FULLY on me. So if I fuck up, its 100% on me. Which ends up making me a better driver, because I tend to be aware of my surroundings and drive much more carefully and defensively. (tho my experience as a truck driver probably also helps a bit)
@kitsunelegend7976 but what about other drivers who can kill you?
terrifying "technology"
The fact that my old 2001 mini van I drove for years had better sensing technology for it's backup warning system than a modern Tesla has for it's automatic breaking system is pretty good evidence cutting corners while charging the most is all this company cares about.
Even with all this taken into account, I still say "never say never". New technologies start out expensive and shitty, then a bit less expensive and a bit less shitty, but finally they become affordable and good
4:19 "Make big bucks letting your Tesla work as a robotaxi!"...until it rolls back into your driveway one Saturday morning full of puke, piss, spilled beer, cigarette burns and Lord only knows what else!
And covered in blood from accidents the manufacturer will deny liability for, while insurance denies your claim because you weren't in the vehicle, & yet you're liable as the registered "owner" of the car you're denied open access to the logs & software modules of.
@@prophetzarquon1922 That too!
Since when have taxi drivers been known for driving safely????? How do you know the man in that car has your best interests in mind?
@@davidlones365 Huh? What exactly does your reply have to do with what is being discussed here??
... and that's if you're lucky.
"a self-driving only lane" implies that your home, and everywhere else you want to go, is attached to a self-driving road. if you have two road networks, they have to be fully separated. they can't overlap and be separate at the same time, unless one lane is underground or flying.
also consider that most cities can't afford the maintenance on the roads they have already.
There would have to be shared, multi purpose roads at some points
No, it means they you'd transfer from autonomous to human driving.
Yes this video is largely excellent, but Ben's proposed future is a past we already tried and it sucked. In the 50s and 60s poor city districts were sliced and diced by big roads carrying richer people's cars, cutting through their communities to bring about a glorious future. It turned out there are a whole load of problems that come from building your city for cars rather than people.
The issue with Ben's proposal is that roads have huge land demands. Even in US cities this comes at huge cost, let alone elsewhere in more densely populated regions. I don't want a flyover built through my neighbourhood, blocking out the sun, to autonomously carry Tesla dicks to their city jobs.
@@murrayg His idea isn't novel, it's what essentially all experts agree the most likely future would be if self driving cars are to become successful. It's less about road real estate as you're claiming and more about car to car communication, which currently isn't feasible as all the manufacturers have proprietary, entirely different systems. A communication standard would need to be developed which manufacturers follow.
The program is just an example, it's not what people are projecting the future looks like. It's more like cars traveling in one lane bumper to bumper at 100mph and they can safely stop in the case of an emergency because the stopping is coordinates between the cars. Way more throughput on the lanes we already have and doesn't have all the stop and go delays that people introduce to bind up traffic.
That's like saying the interstate system isn't do-able because it implies your home and everywhere else are attached to the freeway.
No, it's like anything else, there are junctions between networks. There are on/off ramps on a highway..
There are already vehicles that can take you places without you having to pay attention to the road or even learning to drive. These are buses and trains and taxis.
Better public transportation solves many of the use cases for AVs for much cheaper and better for the environment. Full self driving is a pipedream and it will never happen unless all automotive infrastructure is changed to cater to AVs only.
Self driving car where you have to be in the driver's seat at all times ready to intervene at any given moment? Greatest thing since sliced bread if you still had to pry the pieces of bread apart with a knife.
Thats’s like most pre-sliced bagels
its good because it keeps you EXTRA alert. genius design
That's actually what I do, because I freeze my sliced bread and defrost slices as I need.
That's not the end state bubba. It ain't rocket science, you suck at driving, just accept it.
It's obviously a step in the process...
The people in the comments here are so short sighted it's amazing.
And this video is aging like milk already, Tesla's FSD is learning at an exponential rate at the moment
Not just their own dedicated lanes. We could add rails to those lanes to provide guidance and power. We could add stopping places where unmanned vehicles could allow travelers to embark and disembark. We could even allow people without their own vehicle to buy tickets at those locations to hire a seat in a driverless vehicle that's going in the direction they require. Of course building such infrastructure takes time, so during the transition we could build vehicles with multiple seats, maybe as many as 50 or more, then it could become economically viable to add a human driver to ensure safety. I'm pretty sure something similar should already exist in some form.
Being able to travel WHEREVER you want to go, WHENEVER you want to go will always be superior to public transport.
@@GlitchXThat makes no sense. In many cities the ONLY way to travel WHENEVER and WHEREVER you want IS by public transport. I personally prefer to drive, but there's no way I could drive into London and find a place to park in rush hour. Where as the train is 15 mins.
@@GlitchXthing is, with good public transport, you _can_ go wherever and whenever you want to go
@@dantevito1193 However, and it is a big, "however", you have to have a minimum population density for that to be true. In suburbia, where ever neighborhood is bunch of dead end streets and never straight or in locations where houses sit on large tracts of land, it simply isn't feasible to implement public transportation in any sense of that phrase as we understand it today.
@@kcgunesqTrue, but part of the solution is to build better cities... Suburbia is just not great ... no matter your lifestyle
This is one of those topics where I was bullied for not believing the "experts" and remembering that rural areas exist. Even as a kid, I knew that at best, most self driving cars sold in my entire life would have to be able to be completely controlled manually, because many many vehicle owners don't live in a city, and don't even have cell service in their area. Are tens of millions of Americans expected to be forced to use 80+ year old cars near the end of my life? I was called stupid for ignoring the experts. Oh well.
How are you "bullied"...?
@@ylstorage7085 open a dictionary or use your favorite search engine (I don't know what compels people to take more time ask someone else to look up a definition than it takes to look it up themselves).
Wait what? Why would you need cell service to use an autonomous car?
@@financialliteracy8204 I can't tell if you're serious or not, considering how obvious the requirement for internet for a true self driving car is. How would it be able to obey speed limits or take detours without an internet connection?
@@ylstorage7085 it deleted my reply. Tldr: open a dictionary.
The worse issue than "detect a stop sign in the rain" is all the stuff that's intermittently on roads, much of which is not supposed to be there but also outside of human control. Not just pedestrians, but wildlife (esp. deer), downed trees or branches, downed *power lines*, other debris, road construction, etc. Cars and road signs are relatively easy to spot (which makes failure of a FSD system to do so an embarrassment), all that other stuff is gonna get much harder
its funny they say it can tell it's not a real child, because there's still something there and you shouldn't drive into it
I get pissed when I catch someone trying to prank me. Why should I expect a car to be any less spiteful?
HAL voice: I'm sorry Dave, I can't let you dunk on me like that. *Locks break pedal*
The object falls over, and is therefore no longer seen by the camera, which then proceeds to drive as if it's not there. It should absolutely turn off self-driving when that happens. Way back in the beginning of TACC, there were many cars that needed to have their gas pedal pressed to resume driving if they came to a complete stop for more than a couple seconds, because it couldn't reliably tell if someone had walked in front of you.
This was the point I wanted to make. The only time you wouldn't worry about an obstacle on the road if it was something like an empty plastic bag blowing across the road.
@@Caffin8tor My uncle, when young, used to put paper bags in the road with cinderblocks in them, just for people who figured they'd run over an empty paper bag. (He was a dick in many ways.)
Used to work for Cruise (and another AI company in SF). Yes, the cars are "driverless", but they have remote workers that help them through weird situations. I don't really get how companies can claim level 4 self-driving when they do all their janky driving behaviors and also use humans.
Ah so the typical tech fluff…fully automated…if you don’t consider wage slaves behind an API to be human.
Reminds me of that news story I saw around that Echo and Google Assistant have a lot of "operators" that are there for when the petition is not understood by the system... and it was most of the time.
So this AI thing is just "let's hide workers under the tech" scam.
They even have more employees per "Self-Driving" Car than... taxi-cab companies.
@@LeflairZone as long as they remove the awkwardness of interacting with another human being people will have no problem with it (not saying that's a good thing)
It was more a comment about how unprofitable it is as a business when it requires more "tech" workers than cab drivers to operate, nevermind the specialized hardware @@valdir7426
One should not talk in absolutes. Saying a car will "never" drive us around seems shortsighted. Maybe not in 2014, 2024, or 2030, but don't you think the tech will be there ever? 2050? 2100? 2200?... etc
6:18 The car wants to avoid the obstacle, but you don't.
You can even see it in the display...
Wait, don’t teslas steer by using the steering wheel?
(Also, isn’t cruise control just the “keep it at # speed” thing?)
I’m assuming it was a test for stopping in case there’s objects?
(Though it would probably react differently if it *actually* couldn’t turn due to cars blocking it on either side)
The Tesla relies on sensor fusion with manual override. He made use of the override
As a person with low vision who can't drive, I've hoped self-driving cars might one day give me the same freedom of mobility as actually being able to drive. A better scenario would be to just make public transit robust enough that no one would need/want a car outside of very specialized scenarios. (Yeah, I know: lol.)
In certain cities and locations, this is already the case. It’d be nice if it were much more common
@@threepe0 I'm in this situation where I need a car for specific things (tour; transporting heavy stuff) but most of the time it's collecting dust on a parking space. will probably switch to renting when this one is on its last breath.
It’s not really a joke; there are some places with great public transit where most people rarely need to drive.
Welcome to europe.
What would be super awesome is if there were public transit “trains” that consisted of independent cabins/cars that linked together for mutual distance travel but could also uncouple and take people the last leg of their journey to work/home since that would provide the privacy/space/convenience that people who drive their own cars crave or need.
Man, if only we had some sort of thing where there's like one person up at the front where the engine is. Maybe we could call them the "Engineer" , and then everyone else can just live, and sleep in the cars while they're moved around. Wait a minute..
Fucking exactly. The best form of transport, invented before the car and then ignored to make evil companies rich.
I am SO glad it only took me a little amount of scrolling to find a 'just use trains bro' comment. Why the fuck are we trying to automate cars when automating trains is 100, if not 1000 times easier?! A train can't exactly 'switch lanes' at will or hell, do anything. All it needs to know is the speed of the section of track it is driving on, and the status of the next signal. These can all be easily fed to the train.
@@PinataOblongata LOL it wasnt ignored. Nobody used them once cars were a thing. Because surprise - the train isnt flexible like a car.
@@roadtrain_ Because A) passenger trains dont go where you need them, when you need them, unless you reschedule your whole life around them. And B) safety issues. One radio fails and you have a 100 million ton runaway on your hands.
@Nick-ue7iw A) this is because public transit is chronically underfunded. Giving them more money to fix their shit would solve this. B ) That's just not fucking true trains are equipped with SEVERAL systems to ensure a runaway can't happen including dead man's switches and ATC. Trains are safer than self driving cars will ever be.
Well this video did not age well.
The latest version of Tesla's FSD just works.
Because you mentioned the boids: Fifteen years ago or something, I held a presentation at my university about certain update functions, implemented in very basic reactive AIs that create mathematically provable equilibriums. The example use case was a high number of autonomous cargo loaders navigating a hall full of boxes and narrow doors which worked flawlessly. And you can achieve that without the computational overhead and obscurity of neural networks.
The Tesla thought about it for a second and then said "I don't like this child!"
More like it said, in the Black Knight's voice "Just a traffic cone!"
If it was in my neighborhood I'd have to agree. 🙃
This clown has no clue, some half million cars are *already today* driving ppl around.
@@Mrbfgray oh wow, 500 thousand in a country with a population of 330+ million, and those cars are plagued with customer complaints and investigations from various state AND federal DoTs and DPSs, how amazing
@@fakename287 Are you familiar with any of those "investigations"? Hint: they are trivial. Consumer Reports recently rated cost of owning cars and despite them being supported by The Ford Foundation, Tesla came out on top, about $4k over 10 yrs. Toyota was next, no surprise.
There is no higher customer satisfaction, by a mile, than Tesla. So YEAH, Elon BAaaad, out of lockstep with the one true narrative. Propaganda works!
My favourite part was the claim about how the car can tell the difference between a real child and fake one... You know, because I make a habit of running over trash cans and traffic cones in my car every day. Haha... This shit is truly scary. Cheers!
I don't care about cars.
That father (and Tesla investor, video segment at 7:47 ) who forced his child to take part in an unauthorized experiment on humans ... should get a visit from CPS.
Anyways, I wish you fun with your trash can hobby, ST!:)
P.S.: Garbage trucks have special rights in daily road traffic by the law, such as driving against the direction of travel on one-way streets or, for example, briefly driving or stopping on the other side of the road, that the men or women can do their business effectively. So these situations are “rare” exceptions. Some of the average driver alone can't handle such situations as we see in practice, but Teslas and other "would-be smart" vehicles pose a mortal danger to garbage collectors. There is NO effective detection for blue or yellow warning lights. Just think about your fellow drivers, those sleepyheads that regularly overlook emergency services and don't make room for them. This failure is powered by a massive parallel computer (our brain) that our technology will never be able to reach. Alone because of that self driving vehicles mostly ignore emergency services (under a 100% working system, there is no choice!), it shouldn't even a question that those BETA TESTS have to be banned from our streets. They actually end(UA-cam censors the k-word with the following "ill") more people by secondary dangers than by direct impact.
Have a good one! (cone), hehehe
and like, even if it could actually tell the difference it would only need to get it wrong once to cause a tragedy.
it is funny but its also really important to know the difference when choices have to be made to minimize bad outcomes, for instance in an emergency should a car run over a child or hit a tree if its unable to stop in time but can still steer? knowing that the child is actually something else, something less important in its priority list is a lot more impactfull.
I'm betting $250k (1,500 shares of TSLA) that your wrong. Lets come back in 5 years and see...
Your stock is worthless. Musk is in China begging for access to their market, which is currently rolling out their serious first gen EVs which connect to their newly installed MAN networks, which is the key ingredient Tesla will never, ever, ever, ever, ever have. Which is the magic sauce. Good luck in 5yrs as the world laughs.
Really good video, I appreciate your insights. Short term, I think your 100% right. Long term, it seems logical that the tech will exceed human capabilities. I named my Genesis G70 the Red Barchetta....
I went to Philly for my cousin's wedding and rented a car that (surprise) had lane assist. On the drive from Philly to Atlantic City I encountered toll booths (where 2-3 lanes suddenly became 7) unpainted lanes, and very narrow roads. The lane assist fought me, almost yeeted me into another car, and was a general pain in the butt. I didn't notice it on wider, well-maintained roads because presumably the car had a better idea of where the lane actually was and wasn't having a panic attack.
These systems clearly rely on very specific information and break down the nano-second that information isn't available.
My experience traveling in Waymo vehicles indicates that your opinion of them may be incorrect.
weve had lane assist in various cars freak out on FRESHY repaved and painted freeways! we need viable alternatives to cars not more self driving accidents waiting to happen
Like you would think people do. Quite a few people do get confused and that type of situation so I have accidents in those areas. Now I'm not going to try and compare present AI to a person but AI is evolving much faster than your average person is.
@@wadap0 he wasnt in a waymo vehicle though, it should be obvious that those waymo cars are absolutely LOADED with cameras and sensors that normal consumer vehicles do not have, its no wonder their capabilities are not the same.
@@user-gu6ps6ed6l I don't care, I'm not going to willingly give control of a 2ton hunk of metal to an AI.
I'm gonna wait until they get a spell checker that works before I start thinking about self driving cars.
Every year the spell checker loses more words it's 100% 1984.
Or an ai that can do closed captioning! The people that have to rely on closed captioning must think we're crazy talking the way we do!
@@steveolson69 Exists, look at Whisper. It's just cheaper to not bother running something that takes a few resources.
I'm gonna wait until UA-cam stops recommending videos about topics I've never heard of from channels with 3 subscribers.
@@steveolson69 AI can now do closed captioning almost as well as humans - for free, much faster
And Rockets will never land themselves and be reusable.
As a motorcycle rider.... these cars have been going wonky since they disabled the radar units and removed them from all the new ones. More than a statistical anomaly amount of motorcyclists because the vision system is far from perfect. It scares me worse now that the logic used in the car is to not FORCE the driver to take over when it doesn't know.
You drive with vision only. How?
It doesn't force takeovers?
@@danparish1344 by being smarter than most cars. The issue is that they are confusing motorcycles up close to cars at a distance from how it's been explained to me.
@@BenefitOfTheDoubtInquiry well, from what I've seen in this video and a couple of others, it encounters an issue and keeps in control until it can't see that issue anymore. I would much prefer the system to make the human take over. My car does that, but it appears that Tesla doesn't.
"Maybe they could have a lane specifically for the self driving cars so you could avoid human error."
Sounding suspiciously like a train at that point.
Not to pick on you or anything, but when was the last time you pulled your train out of your driveway? Trains are a solution to an entirely different problem than the one being discussed.
@@Tubeytime I wouldn't need a driveway if my city suburb had trams, light rail, and rail.
@@SALEENS7GTR5 But where would you park your car for when you want to go out of your city?
@@SALEENS7GTR5 That's fine if you want to live in a city, surrounded by people all the time. Not everyone wants your lifestyle though. I want peace and quiet, therefore I need personal transport.
@@Tubeytimethats cool but don‘t bring your noisy and big personal metal box into the city. I don‘t appreciate it at all, about as much as you would appreciate a highway going through your backyard.
Different modes of transportation for different sets of problems and large park+ride system so people can switch from one to the other.
And now link a bunch of autonomous vehicles together to save on fuel...
Oh and now that the paths they travel are more predictable, maybe build some overhead power lines there to allow for smaller batteries...
And we might as well also just put them on metal rails with metal wheels to lower friction and prevent the wheels from wearing out...
if we do that, we could call the new roads they ride on "rail" roads. the future is here!
Hey. General Motors needs to sell busses. Won't you PLEASE think of the huge failing corporation?
I lived in Boston as a poor college student. It had a reasonable subway system, commuter trains, and buses that got me to where I needed to go. And I absolutely loved it when I finally got a car.
@@chrimony because you live in america. I lived in Metropolitan area in western europe when I was younger and was everywhere in 5 minutes basically. Now I live in "the suburbs" for you yankees and have to go by car and everything takes ages longer
You mean that one day I might be able to travel the entire length of the Australian continent from Adelaide to Darwin without driving myself and risking kangaroo or Wolf Creek fatality?
What an age! What next? Private companies will finally work out how to land on the moon?
Tesla is so smart that it sees your silouette child and stopped, but then noticed that he's orange, and the AI determines that must be Donald Trump and proceeds to run him over..simple as that.
Teslainvestors in the comments would tell you that.
Elon Musk predicted self driving cars like doomsayers predicted the end of the world.
Anyone who believes blindly whatever Musk says, is kinda obtuse, to say the least.
@@jeminuz It must be tough on the actual scientists and engineers in his companies. "He said WHAT?!?!? OH MY GOD WHAT AN ABSOLUTE MORON!!" I suspect is often the conversation behind closed doors. "Cybertruck's windows can survive a thermo nuclear blast" ... for example .... "Hyperloop is as simple as an air hockey table" .... etc to infinity.
The idea with the boids does in the end hit the same limitations though. Traffic doesn't take place in a vacuum. One might have mechanical failure and stop abruptly, a child may run onto the street, or a cyclist. You cannot isolate whole traffic lanes to a point where they are completely undisturbed by any possible occurence. Do you want to build tunnels for them?
The problem with self driving cars is that there is an almost infinite amount of variables to process.
It's a good point. And humans have been evolving the sensors and object recognition "software" to correctly deal with that infinite possible variety of objects, for millions of years. Computers have only been working on that problem for, what, almost two decades? It's not unreasonable to think it will take a lot longer till they get good at it.
I mean, at that point I guess you might as well put the whole thing on rails and have larger, longer vehicles instead of a big group of them.
Why is this hard for you? Something causes a car to stop, all the other cars stop until the obstruction is cleared... they can react much faster than a human driver and prevent injury.
Unless we could figure out how to leverage actual birds brains, where they do that kind of thing day in and day out, and other amazing things like flying through chain-link fences and so on. There’s a functionality there we just don’t know how to tap it maybe what we need to do is figure out how to directly tap a bird brain. Crazy talk I know, but I’m a free thinker.
Not as many variables as the human body using blood flow to nourish the body. If the unconscious systems can manage that I’m sure intelligent people can manage to lie for money
"It can tell the difference between real and fake children"... I don't care if it can tell the difference. Don't hit it. Don't hit things on the road! Stop!
If the place that I live allows full self driving cars I will literally start a campaign to put things on the road that look like a "fake rock" but are in fact a car immobilising device. I will do this to save lives.
@@jamesrowlands8971 That makes no sense, if the rock looks fake then anyone would hit it.
@@jamesrowlands8971
@@supernus8684you would hit a “fake rock?” I wouldn’t hit a fake anything bc I prefer to not hit anything while I’m driving real or fake.
@@supernus8684 yeah, wtf guy. Stop driving for all of our sake.
Something that is very imortant to point out:
From a physics standpoint a real child and a cardboard child are veeeeeery different.
A radar sensor will pick up the real child (due to being made of dense flesh), but will look right through a cardboard cutout (due to not being dense enough). That's just how radar works.
And if the cardboard is thin enough even an ultrasonic sensor could be unable to detect it.
What these cars currently rely on, is sensor fusion, that importantly still includes the driver. Our eyes and ears coupled with our brains are still much better than computers at certain pattern recognition, while they have been surpassed in other applications.
With good sensor fusion you have different sensors all increasing awareness, by being able to compensate for each others weak-spots:
- ultrasonic sensors, to detect close dense objects, that would be blocked from line of sight of other sensors. But they can't see very far.
- visual sensors to detect visual obstacles (our eyes and brains are yet to be even just closely matched by technology in that regard). But they can be obstructed by fog or smoke and will see right through glass.
- radar sensors to be able to look through visual obstructions like fog or rain. But they can't see cardboard or thin foil.
- thermal sensors to pick up on the deer ready to jump on the road from the bushes. But they can't see much contrast in thermally equal surroundings.
- audio sensors to pick up on auditory signals (that would be your ears, but could also be a microphone close to your motor). But they can't "see" silent things.
- Lidar sensors to be able to build very reliable 3D scans of the surroundings. But they will be blinded by rain and fog.
Judging the future based on the present is foolish
There is a very simple way to make self driving cars reliable quickly. Simply transfer the liability for the actions of a car in self-drive mode to the manufacturer, not the owner.
Sure, manufacturers would rush to disable self-driving, but they would also rush to improve their self-driving algorithms because they clearly want to sell the feature.
Unfortunately I think precedent was set by aviation that the burden is on the owner/operator.
@@12pentaborane Even without that precedent, I would fully believe companies would sooner spend their money on lobbying against making them liable, as opposed to quietly mumbling about it and putting that money toward improving the feature.
@@12pentaborane Aviation hardly even compares to on-road driving. For a human, flying is more difficult, but for an AI, flight is much closer to the closed systems that AIs are so good at. You don't have to fully stop and accelerate your aircraft every few minutes, you don't have to navigate around unpredictable objects, you don't have other aircraft going past you so close their wings could almost touch.
Also, air traffic is extremely heavily regulated and therefore much "cleaner" to program around.
On the other hand, any moron could walk into the middle of the road at any time, anywhere.
Even in a legal context, such large differences could be sufficient to warrant a change in legal responsibility if someone is bold enough to claim that THIS vehicle CAN navigate the 1000x complexity increase of on-road driving.
There's a reason why autopilots are only used for the simplest portions of the flight.
@@jabloko992 As a private pilot for 32 years, I can tell you that flying a private plane is BY FAR safer and easier than driving a car in traffic, and 100 times safer and easier than riding a motorcycle in traffic (I do both) I have NEVER used any kind of auto pilot. On the very first day of flight school, it was made clear that the primary responsibility of the pilot was to CONTROL THE AIRCRAFT.
This is why full self driving will become illegal before its implemented.
Insurance companies will never voluntarily accept having huge corporations as opponents rather than Joe Shmoe.
This is useless technology that solves nothing anyway
As a dude who has been in bands for 30+ years the part about driving 10-12 hours for a gig and ending up in a ditch hit home. We have a rule in our van 2 people stay awake at all times, DD is called at the dinner so everyone knows who is driving at night. I have to many friend who I have lost in van wrecks.
Having a self driving car that could drive all night is such a dream... as someone who toured before the internet was a big thing it will be as huge as Google Maps (if you toured before online Maps you know)
@@christophervan9634 i liked how it used to be a requirement for someone to know how to read a map to be able to tour. feel like the intelligence bar has been lowered for bands (if you deal with bands today, then you know).
That is one hell of an argument for revolutionizing the transportation of people the cheap and reliable way: public traffic.
Hillbilly Hick may need a car to the nearest station, but from there ...
@@madshorn5826 bands aint touring via city trolley. keep dreaming
@@madshorn5826 I agree with you for people that travel with only their person/minimal luggage, but I don't feel like the comment by @christophervan9634 is a good argument for it. Bands are going to be taking a lot of stuff with them. No matter how reliable and robust the theoretical public transit system will be, taking that much gear around would be much easier and doable with a personal vehicle. With the system you envision, the band would probably have to load/unload their gear multiple times when changing public transit vehicles. There would likely be much less hassle driving up to the music venue directly and only offloading/loading gear there.
Hey Benn, I work in the industry and agree with pretty much everything you're saying. One thing though - while the section on boids is neat, I don't think you have stumbled upon the solution to our problems. Boids are a solution in the domain of Motion Planning (i.e. algorithms to get around in a known environment, like the circle in the animation). Motion Planning is only part of the tech stack of an autonomous vehicle and I would argue it is the easy part, or at least it's the part that has many working solutions (boids for example, but do a quick search and you will find 1000's of papers with great algorithms with proven robustness).
The other big part of the stack is Perception or State Estimation (figuring out what my surroundings are and where I am positioned within them). This area has WAY more problems, and even if we put cars on closed, autonomous-only roads, the problems will exist - I assume pedestrians will still want to cross those roads so the car better be able to perceive the pedestrian properly.
I think his point here was that something like Boids works well because the system is simplified to play to the strengths of the algorithms, hence the suggestion of a self driving dedicated lane. If the future of driving is automation, then tailor the environment to assist in the automation, rather than expecting self driving algorithms to understand the roads in the ways a human does.
I think the issue with this is that its impossible to prevent the real world from impinging upon the simplified environment of a self driving lane. Try as you might a deer or child might leap into one, injecting a bunch of chaos into the simplified system, requiring something more like a human brain to make decisions rather than a straightforward algorithm.
The "stages" of autonomy isn't a good way to measure what level a car is at. It should be something like accidents per million miles vs an average for human drivers. If the first number is at or below the second then the car has objectively reached full self driving.
That guy who volunteered his child to stand in front of a charging car will regret it.
When he's in an old folks home don't be surprised when his child volunteers him to
be a participant in medical experiments.
Or more likely ignore and neglect them when they’re old.
You put my life on the line to protect your car’s reputation.
Why should I care more about your life ?
22:55 "Segregate human drivers and ... Autonomous vehicles ... Tightly networked with other vehicles ..."
I feel like we can just do this with trains.
All for the low low price of adding a massive infrastructure independently to every one of hundreds of major cities in the US as part of a culture many Americans don't prefer.
The best solutions aren't always the most pragmatic.
@estD16 cars also require a massive infrastructure. Supercharger stations cost anywhere from $60,000 to $350,000 a piece. And that's charging alone. In order to transition to EV, there will be an investment in the BILLIONS in the US in EV charging. Adding a single lane on a freeway can also cost BILLIONS. Not to mention the cost of parking, gas infrastructure, car maintenance services, DMV, and the list goes on.
@@MrSlowestD16Some of us would love more public transportation and would love at least the option.
@@sevargas1 Oh of course. It's just hard to do in the US because governments, both large and small, are absolutely terrible at spending money. They can't help themselves to not taking it and making themselves and their friends rich with it with all sorts of middle men and approval committees and everything else. So the same stuff isn't do-able in the US as other countries when it comes to spinning up new infrastructure.
@@alvadagansta Yeah but it's easier to phase into what we already have. Uses the same roads and driveways and what-not. People can also charge at home. I'm not saying it's perfect, or you're wrong, or anything else - and supercharger stations in particular have many issues (that cost estimate you gave btw, in terms of a commercial project is absurdly cheap, they'd be thrilled if they could put up a station for that much). Just saying that it builds on what we have already, where-as trains do not (at least local trains do not).
Never is a strong word. Never, as in the next 2 years, 5 years, 10 years? I'm no EV fan, ive never even sat in one. But I can see technology changes. A hundred years from now, I can guarantee we wont be driving F100s. Just like we dont ride horses anymore.
I just rented a tesla for the first time. I was told it didn't have self driving but found it I. The options and turned it on anyway. Having driven it about 350 miles so far it's awesome. Self driving cars are bit only the inevitable future, it will some day be illegal to drive your own vehicles on public roads. Sure that is around 100 years away realistically speaking but considering that point it will have been less than 200 years since before that for all of human history that the closest anyone got to self driving was a horse or camel.
Okay, Im just 9 minutes in, but as an actual dad, the "dad" putting his kid in front of a self driving vehicle to do a collision avoidance test is bloody infuriating to me.
Nobody cares.
@@spankyjeffro5320 found elon musk toe-licker
The father (Tad Park) should have been arrested for child endangerment. He literally risked his child's life so he could put out a Tesla hype video and see a profit on his investments. He should have been invested by child protective services upon posting evidence that he values his financial portfolio over his own child's immediate safety. If someone staked their child's life at the casino, we'd put them in prison. What he did was exactly the same.
@@spankyjeffro5320yes we do, “spanky”
Especially since it was an unnecessary test. Use a realistic mannequin instead, the car should not hit something that even slightly resembles a person. Or any obstacle for that matter.
I just took a highly automated vehicle operating in a dedicated right of way last night, didn't even touch the steering wheel or look out the window. In fact I spent some of the time taking a dump. It's called metrolink.
I think the reality of fully autonomous vehicles is that they either need to be on rails, or not at all. I would love to see a future where the same amount of vehicles we're driving today can be driven autonomously, however the sheer amount of infrastructure and cooperation involved to make this happen would be absurd. I would love for someone to counter this argument I have, but so far no one has.
@@flamegod7 TBH, most of the reason why these vehicles are going to take so many more decades is that they are having to integrate with human drivers and pedestrians. They could make the process a lot easier by doing things such as putting up walls along the roads, switching from lane markers to center of lane lines and changing the paint to encode information to help the cars move through the city. Then just have most of the cars load themselves onto trains for city to city travel.
It's still a big challenge, but doing things like that would likely move the timetables up consistently as that would be a much simpler environment for the cars to need to navigate.
@@flamegod7 The subway in my city had been wired for unmanned operation for at least forty years. It's very simple... on paper. Accelerate, decelerate, brake at stop marker, open doors for twenty seconds, accelerate again. In real life, trains still need human operators to manage the human stampede trying to get inside in the said twenty seconds...
@@flamegod7 Never seen a train crash but heard one 5 miles away.
@@flamegod7all we need is a more intelligent and capable population. Let’s keep bringing in Mexican drug dealers they can give our engineers coke and we’ll get it done.
The problem is by the time you take over you are already out of the safe driving envelope. In other words "there's a child and my car is not slowing down” is far worse than "saw child and i braked without even thinking about it".
FSD v12 for the win.
Public transit will be more important than self-driving cars in the foreseeable future, and it's old tried-and-true tech. Ideally, city centers would be car free, and outside the city you don't need fancy self-driving to solve non-existent traffic. Though, it wouldn't surprise me if we'll see some car pool coop type of thing to be the norm for self-driving vehicles once those reach level 4 or 5.
I've been trying to make this in Cities Skylines 2 since it came out and haven't gotten it to work yet. 😅
public transit that departs the station so frequently that you don't have to look at a schedule for most stops, electrified trains, pedestrianized streets, lot's of bike lanes, multi modal transportation infrastructure.. but america is totally car brained.
@@BennJordansuuurely stream/show us your attempts? Or at least pics of the city?
@@BennJordan
I've grown up in Switzerland, where public transport is quite advanced. I pay about 240$ a month for unlimited travel on any bus,tram,train,boat,cable car, ...
Here is the list of things I can do without a car, and without inconvenience:
- commute to work. I get to sit in a train for 40 minutes with my computer and wifi. I decided to live in another smaller city because I like it there.
- go hiking/climbing/skiing during weekends (because we have public transport to most of the Alps)
- go out / to the restaurant / cinema / ... On the weekend I have night trains and night buses
- make concerts all over the country. I play the violin and I sing, I have the advantage of not needing to carry a lot of gear
- just go visit any of the nice places in the country
Here are the list of things I can't do without a car without inconvenience:
- visit my parents that live in a very rural place (I can, but no public transport on the weekend. There are about 50 people that live there. )
- some very specific hikes
My point is, even though Switzerland is quite small, you don't need crazy high densities for public transport to work. Almost any place with more than 1000 people will have regular (every 30 minutes) all day service. Every city with more than 20'000 peoples will have night buses on the weekends for people going out.
People in Switzerland own cars not because it is always the most convenient way of transport, but more because people have a lot of money and like to buy nice things. I know plenty of people who a car, but regularly use public transport because of the convenience of it.
I still believe that autonomous driving is the future, but the US has a very car-centric mindset, and you tend to see the solution to transportation problem through this lens (your last section on boids illustrates this). Cars will always be needed in truly rural areas, but there are many last mile solutions other than cars.
Just imagine if large businesses in the cities ran their own shuttles for employees - that alone would make a huge dent in traffic volume!
I was a truck driver for a year. The safety features could be terrifying and more dangerous. A truck I was driving slammed on the brakes going 65 mph with cars behind and next to me because it thought a crack was a reason to stop. I could have jacknifed into someone. Another time it died under an overpass because it thought there was a low bridge there it couldn't go under... so it was safer to be stopped in 55mph traffic because there was an imaginary low brige there. Tthe safety department would just blame the driver with the claim computers don't make errors humans do. Luckily I was never in an accident but the safety features sure tried to get me into one.
So the brakes slammed on with cars going 65 mph behind you and there was no accident? Okay. How far behind you were those cars? A mile?
@@gwarlow I always drive far from the bumpers of other people but cars can stop on a dime trucks slamming on brakes still take a few football fields to stop.... the cars probably just had to slow down gently behind me but hitting the braked is very dangerous in a truck because the load can shift the trailer is dangerous especially if it were to swing into a lane next to me. People in cars are at a lot of danger around trucks, slamming on brakes is never a good thing.
@@mysurfing3550 yeah that's fair, guessing it depends on what the truck is carrying too?
Computers may not make errors humans do, but on the other hand, humans don't make errors computers do. My "driver assist" consistently mistakes pedestrians on the sidewalk for pedestrians in the street. I get a lovely flashing, startling red alert every time.
I have the same problem you had. Sometimes it'll track a car that's gotten off at an exit and lock the brakes on the interstate when there's nothing in front of me. So why is this a problem?
Understand for a car, standing on the brakes fixes everything. But when you're manuvering a 40 ton semi hauling hazmat tanker, it's often the worst thing you can do.
Trains. It’s literally all we need in our damn cities to decrease our dependence on oil and gas.
Also need to change our zoning laws. They’re incredibly outdated and stupid.
I rode in a Waymo a few months ago. It blew my mind, and the wild situations it handled really improved my hopes that this will get figured out in my lifetime.
Unless you’re dying in the next 5 years, it’ll happen.
Small nitpick: Mercedes offers stage 3 limited to "major freeways in California and parts of Nevada". Unlike Tesla, they also agreed to be on the hook for any damages their cars cause while self-driving. Admittedly it's extremely limited, but not totally nonexistent in the US. They call it "DRIVE PILOT".
The technology they are using is a. a dead end b. theres no update path c. Its only working in optimal condition and needs a car that is driving in front of you… i mean how autonomous can it be if there literally must be a human driving in front
@@SeeNAVMthey don't need it in a technical sense, they need it because any self driving car that causes 1 accident will blow up in the media and everywhere while 90 year old half blind half braindeads are free to do whatever.
The dream at the end is just trains but for antisocial people who really want to make stops to charge every few hours.
oh this train stuff needs to stop, trains are trains, tracks are not roads
@@geekswithfeet9137 Train is a better solution to the problem at hand. You cant fit an extra lane into every small street, so autonomous cars would have to be limited to main roads. At that point, just build a track instead. Even then, there is more than enough roads already as it is. Reducing cars is a beneficial in every way.
@@captainmorgan2530 do you realise the insanity of the amount of tracks would need to be installed? Trains serve a purpose for central hubs and long distance. But I don’t know if you’ve noticed, but they don’t have steering and can’t go off road very well
@@geekswithfeet9137 Wow it's almost like public transport systems are actually SYSTEMS and thus any good train system is interlinked with a good tram, bus, bike infrastructure, and walkable housing systems
@@geekswithfeet9137 I think @grinffi pretty much said what I would. Its not just about spamming bunch of trains. Its about an interlinked system where trains connect cities and towns, within those trams, buses, and metro systems allow you to get pretty much anywhere. On top of that, a good bike and pedestrian infrastructure can ease accessing them, or replace them for shorter distances. Its not about removing the car completely, just giving people other means of transport, so they dont have to solely rely on this inefficient, expensive system that also destroys our cities and enviroment in its current state.
To everyone going: trains!!! Two problems:
Trains don’t solve the last mile problem. Essentially the last mile problem states that with public transportation, the first and last mile of a journey takes almost as much time to complete as the rest of it. Cars solve this problem by taking you directly from destination to destination and part of the reason why nothing has supplanted them is because nothing else can offer this advantage- especially in America where everything is super far apart.
The second reason is, put simply, crime. New York has a subway, but no one likes to ride on it because it’s full of crazy people and drug addicts. In someplace like Korea or Japan where crime rates are low this is much less of an issue, but considering that most big cities, again especially in America, are riddled with crime, nobody wants to use something that exposes them to that crime, quite understandably. So to all the Europeans and sheltered Americans commenting “omg why don’t they just use trains!!!” Why don’t you try riding a train in a major American city and tell me?
More reasons than just those two. Third reason: Scheduling. Public transit will never match the on-demand flexibility of a privately owned vehicle, a disparity that's inversely proportional to population density. Fourth reason: Carrying capacity, door-to-door. Impractical or impossible to haul a load of mulch or even week's worth of groceries on foot or using any cart/bike/etc. that's allowed on a bus or train. Fifth reason: Weather. In a large part of the USA, the weather is too unpleasant and/or too unpredictable too much of the time for most people to consider traveling that last mile on foot or in/on anything that isn't rainproof & climate controlled. Sixth reason: Individual choice. Privately owned vehicles can be chosen to fit/express individual wants/needs.
Yeah, as good of an idea that trains are. The density of suburban America makes public infrastructure at scale somewhat unfeasible at current. To correct that that would require to uproot decades of house and roadplanning to densify everything and regulations make that INCREDIBLY hard.
But in denser environments, you usually have other services to carry you between different stations like buses, metros, or the use of a bike.
The crime problem though is just a completely different problem, not even related to this one. Public infrastructure is just more accessible to poor people and poor people will have to rely on crime more often. You solve poverty in America, also solve ALOT of crime. This part of the problem is mostly just economic and cultural and is by no means tied to trains except the disdain of its usage by the average person and id hardly say its enough of a reason against anything.
Scheduling isnt really a problem usually either most of the time, most travel trips are usually between work and home and shopping, that would probably easily be covered since those are usually the high demand routes that have trains scheduled more regularily.
Carry capacity is like the only genuine argument entirely against going to use a train in a system with functional public transport infrastructure, but that is a relatively rare case.
Weather can be covered by alternative transport measures like i mentioned before.
Lastly, individual choice is also not really a point worth addressing, it is a benefit but not really an argument against trains or more public infrastructure.
Also "Why dont you try riding a train in a major american city and tell me?" point, the whole problem is the whole system ISNT fleshed out enough to be feasible to use for an average person.
To be clear on my comment, all of this is completely based on incase the suburban environment in the US densifies and covers alot of its area with sufficient public infrastructure. It is a really demanding ideal but thats whats required to make it feasible. And that will take years, like it took for other countries.
Yes it would take years, but so would be to establish an isolated road specifically for self driving cars to drive at peak efficiency.
autonomous vehicles would work better isolated from humans. but if they're human transport vehicles, that's not possible. they will cross other vehicles and pedestrians at some point in their journey.
your dream you described at the end sounds like autonomous trains
I totally agree, we should put the autonomous vehicles on a separate track and allow communication between them on a network. And maybe we could add stations so people can get on and off whenever they want. And maybe we could chain a bunch of cars together so they can carry more people! Omg this sounds like a great idea, we should call it the TRansport Autonomous Independent Network or... TRAIN for short!
I think Track Running Autonomous Independent Network would work even better.
LOL good stuff
We could even put them on steel rails to lower rolling resistence
@@rlwelch there could even be an additional rail that supplied energy, so that charging stations would be unnecessary.
Okay...but what if people don't like riding on trains?
What if someone wants to be alone or with their family and not with 30 or so strangers?
What if you want to go somewhere that's no on the route everyone else wants to go to?
Trains are never going to be a workable solution until people start actually making them a better option than cars, and that means addressing the actual shortcomings. If you want people to ride trains, you need to ask why people don't like riding them now and find a way to fix that.
For example, what train lets you get on and off "Whenever you want" rather than on a tight and regular schedule of departure and arrival times in the best case scenario? Assuming it doesn't come late or get canceled or just not come? I've had trains cancelled on my in the Colorado Winter. It's not very fun.
What train accommodates all schedules? It's all well and good if you work a normal 9-to-5 but not everyone does. When I worked a job that got off at 10PM there was 1 rail going from the city center to my home. If something happened at work or I am running behind and miss the train? Well sucks to be me, the next one doesn't come till early next morning.
I don't even like driving, but after a year of dealing with the bus and train system, I caved and just bought a car. More comfortable, more convenient, more safe, more clean, and more flexible.
I just bought a 2024 Toyota Tundra Platinum. I am skeptical of ADAS, but so far I’m finding the system to be very useful when used as intended: meaning taking some of the workload off my plate while driving. As I type this, I just finished a 45 minute trip down a mountain. I had to take over steering twice around sharp turns, had to brake once manually, and had to apply gas to override the ADAS trying to stop in the middle of the road when another car turned. Modern ADAS is awesome, when used as an assistant, hands on the wheel, still paying attention to driving. Unlike Tesla, Toyota doesn’t call it autopilot and doesn’t say you can mentally check out with the ADAS. The ADAS is game changing. I also love that I can personalize the ADAS.
We demoed the model Y. Totally impressed. We went on 4 two hour trips. It was awesome. Latest version of 12. Barely drove 2 at all. It was the car from parking lot to destination with parking.
“More efficient infrastructure separate from human drivers”
My brother in Christ, you’ve reinvented railroads
No, a railroad is a fixed point-to-point link. A road network has many (sometimes infinite) overlapping inlets and outlets, so you can go to many places.
For instance, an HOV lane is not a railroad, and light rail doesn't do the same thing an HOV lane does.
@@louisvaught2495 Railroad is imo supposed to be a backbone for a finer net of bus or tram lines so that you can get in walking distance of your destination. HOV lanes are pretty static as well
@@creeper6530 HOV lanes are extremely flexible. It's just the cost of painting the markings and installing the signs.
@@louisvaught2495 Ah, got it. So, what is this Hyperloop thing?
Just kidding. Musk revealed that Hyperloop was just meant to kill rail traffic without ever actually getting implemented.
I guess Elon Musk talks about Spurbus (yes, that's German word), a concept he invented and implemented more than 80 years before he was born.
@@louisvaught2495 I visit Prague quite often. Now Prague isnt the pinackle of public transport, but its still arguebly faster to go to a nearest tram/metro/bus station and get to your destination that way, than if you had to get through traffic, and then find a parking spot. That is even considering, that the city is still overly car centric, and refuses to put a low speed limit for cars. Public transport (especially in US) doesnt get you where you want effectively, because it often operates on fraction of the budget that car infrastructure does. Also the cities are being designed in a way, that makes the car the only viable option in a lot of places, thanks to ineffective land use.
when they say "safer than humans" what they really mean is safer than drunk drivers or drivers who use their phone, or extremely bad drivers who shouldn't even have a driving license to begin with
That's not what they say they mean. That's what they SHOULD mean, but it's not the intention. Also I'm not sure that's true
You think it's not true that a good driver, aware of his surroundings, is going to be better on the road comapred to a self driving car? I think a good defensive driver would be better@@otakudjr
Computers attached to a fleet of sensors can perceive better and react faster than a sober human who is paying attention. Whether they do react is a different story.
The best human driver ever is the goal so it should technically be better than any single person since this would be an optimization of all the best drivers.
I drive and text all the time - no accidents since 2006 (before "modern" texting) - so it's not safer than a texting driver. A tesla would have amassed a pile of bodies by now.
Anyone volunteering their child to see if a car will hit it should not be a parent
Great video, well said. Still, having driven above 20.000 miles with Autopilot engaged (in Europe between the Mediterranean and Barents sea), I have noticed the subconscious effort of keeping the car between the lines and on the road is actually quite tiring, as I arrive much less tired when driving the Tesla (or rather, it drives me). In any complex traffic situations, Autopilot is off.
If you drive youself into the grand canyon, the most important thing is to have it on camera.
I felt the whole, "post on our discord or forums" part. Video games have done that for years to reduce complaints and let their toxic fanbase deal with people who have issues in the game. Depending on the community you might get an answer sandwiched between insults and trolls, and if it doesn't bug you, then more power to you, but it is definitely a system to reduce valid complaints, and manipulate people and outsourcing customer service cost.
and then there's developers that move their primary method of communication to a discord they control so that they can filter out all the negative discourse and act like their game has no issues.
well said.
there's no searchability of discord too, so people just ask the same questions.
if its on reddit atleast u can see similar posts
I still think that the best approach is to just invest in high quality public transports. It s cheaper, doesn t need new tech, it s way safer and it s electric without the need for batteries. Once you take 80% of the drivers out of the road, does that still have a need to drive will be way more safer without AI or anything of that sort. We can still have self autonomous driving cars (one day) but it s should be a low priority solution
To the EM fanboys saying this video hasn't aged well, here's a reality check: (4/26/24) "Tesla’s Autopilot and Full Self-Driving linked to hundreds of crashes, dozens of deaths... *NHTSA found that Tesla’s driver-assist features are insufficient at keeping drivers engaged in the task of driving,* which can often have fatal results."
"Tesla’s Autopilot and Full Self-Driving linked to hundreds of crashes, dozens of deaths" Human drivers linked to tens of thousands of deaths.
@@archvaldor Tesla’s Autopilot and Full Self-Driving = very tiny percentage of the vehicle miles driven by human drivers
I love it when my car's safety feature tech support responds to an inquiry with "lol. Lmao
They already do. Not Tesla but driverless taxi services are already operating in numerous countries, incl Russia and Israel and have been for a couple of yrs at least.
I'm so embarrassed I repeated Elon's nonsense in 2015. I told my niece that it could very well be optional by the time she was old enough to drive. 😒
I always thought he was a quack and a liar (he literally lied about autism and a million other things), but the credulous media coverage at the time gaslit the hell out of me. CNBC and other financial outlets tend to be a bit more reliable when it comes to claims, if only because they can't lie about what companies are saying on their conference calls (lying to customers is ok, but not to shareholders). 11:10 "They do, and nobody seems to give a sh*t."
It turns out they were all delusionally bought in. Fool me once...not gonna get fooled again.
I think the problem is that, at the end of the day, if you're trying to make dedicated lanes just for "self driving" vehicles, you've essentially built a Personal Rapid Transit system, except less efficient (and PRT systems are oft criticized for their lack of efficiency).
You're still going to have traffic because capacity limits are a thing, and unless you use some grade separation you're still going to deal with drivers in other vehicles making mistakes and pedestrians, et al.
Case in point: When have you not seen some jerk cross the double/triple yellow and swerve in and out of the carpool/commuter lanes. You can't stop assholes. God put them on Earth to keep things lively. If they make a self-driving-only lane, some pinhead doing 90mph will swerve into it and brake check the RoboCars and we'll see the most epic pile up in the history of mankind.
Yes, he spent a lot of time on his nonsense idea. It makes you wonder how much else was nonsense. But you know, triangles on a screen are exactly like cars! Autonomy solved!!!
Well that was a dumb remark@@dirkbester9050
I like the idea of separate lanes for autonomous vehicles. I can imagine cruising LA to PHX or LAS at 120+ mph because it's safe to do so, as all the cars are synced to travel at the same speed. That might work in the desert, but the big problem I see is real estate for these lanes in cities and suburbia. Good luck with that.
“Segregate the self driving cars to a separate lane”, and create new control mechanisms and communication in these lanes in order to not rely on human errors, and have it be a public system managed by the Department of Transportation?
Maybe you might as well link up these self driving cars into chains, since most people are going the same way anyway on these lanes, and since you’re not reliant on many drivers then you could fill up a lot more passengers in the cars, and have large hubs along these lanes that people can take a bus or something to i.. wait a minute… why do I feel like this already exists?
Try to not recreate trains take 3 let's go!
" Oh, that's my turn! Too bad I'm chained to the car in front and back of me. Oh Well! "
@@Awaken_To_0Segrehates means no "turning" into the common car road
Cars are pushing $40,000 now; the cost of a home only a few years ago. What we need is *affordable* cars, not cars that cost $100,000 because they can "sort of drive themselves."
FSD is in the late 90s internet phase. In 1999 everybody said the internet would shut down malls across America and when it didn't happen by 2009 everybody had a good laugh about their irrational exuberance. How are the malls doing now?
If you haven't noticed, they're dying. Because of online shopping.
@@shannon6876 people die of drunk driving. Are you a Prohibitionist?
Building a nice great train system fixes so many problems including the one where you have to actively drive your car, it's self driving technology at its finest... You can also sleep in it without worrying about dying
I’m one of those people that would hate the loss of vehicle ownership.
-I would loose the freedom to just go out to a remote field to fly my RC planes whenever I want (and loose the storage space to put all these battery chargers, planes, controllers without figuring out how to haul stuff without getting stared at). So many hobbies I have that a public transport won’t be able to just drop me off in a weird spot while I haul a 5ft wing.
-Not worry about routes and schedules, having the temperature and high quality music I want. I can do more leisure travel anyway and be able to make private phones calls.
-I’m in a clean environment that I know I cleaned and not sitting on cloth seat filled with dust (unless it was Japan, my experience there was excellent).
-I can just go to a random dark place after work and enjoy the sky away from civilization.
-During long trips, I’m not bound by the bus/train not being able to stop at a cool spot. With a car I can go enjoy a sunset overlooking a mountain.
If I became handicapped I could still do many things that public transportation just would not be able to provide that an owned self driving car could do. I can even send it off to park in a free spot after dropping me off.
Sometimes public transportation works and sometimes it doesn’t. Neither vehicle ownership or public transportation is an objectively good option for all.
Unless I was (unfortunately) in a city where public transportation is the only logical option, I would not even consider it in a typical American lifestyle if it were easily available where I live.
Many hobbies and enjoyments would literally be killed if I lived where little enjoyments just had to be left behind.
@@battery_wattage I'm not saying ban cars lol, but most people don't need them, realistically most of them are just going to the grocery store and to work... that can easily be accomplished by a train system... If you really want a road trip - rent a car, once or twice a year... Anyways, if it's someone like you who wants to drive to some field, no autonomous car nor train will do that while carrying equipment, so I can see a use for a car there, again - I'm not saying ban cars... but yes, ban them mostly... people who need them need them, you can never replace the need for a car
@@aquss33 Not even "easily accomplished" by a train system--in many ways, actively preferable. Although to get there, we would have to decentralize groceries, which are now absolutely dominated by major chains and supercenters. I would love to just hop on my bike for a half-mile jaunt to the local grocer. Exercise and an errand at the same time. Way more efficient!
move to Europe? we love trains.
@@richardsylvester6483 I'm in eastern Europe, so we do have a lot of trains, but they're from the 70s and 80s ans they're always late
I am continually surprised something is able to be named and sold as "full self driving" when you can't take your hands off the wheel or eyes off the road when you drive it.
thats why its called full self driving *beta*
it's 'in progress' self driving
@@anti-tryhardthe word beta there is being massively abused. a beta is a project which might not be in its final form but effectively has all of the main features.
Calling this "self-driving beta" is like calling the Wright Flyer the prototype for the F-22. This is not beta. this software is one step on a ladder of dozens of other steps that could, in theory, result in self-driving. In short, as is frequently the case, it's just deceptive marketing.
@@Laotzu.Goldbug It's really not, you can look up Tesla FSD V12.3 and half of the time it's actually safer than the people driving around it. of course it's going to end up in the wrong lane every once in a while, maybe drive a bit too slow here and there, but its not like it barely misses a pedestrian every 5 minutes. These are small mistakes, and if they are fixed (which they will) we'll have a self-driving car safer than 90% of human drivers.
Can we go after Red Delicious apples too please
@@freshtapcoke Red Delicious used to be worth of its name, but people started to breed trees to produce more good-looking fruits, which ruined taste.
Great video! Thank you. In fact, your video is so great that I really really hope that you survived your 10,000 mile trip! Thank you or at least thank your estate.
Never say Never.
I like this idea of segregated self-driving lanes. Can I suggest some improvements:
Instead of rubber tyres on a tarmac surface, have a pair of steel guiding rods on the ground that control the direction the vehicles take, and have steel wheels with a guiding protrusion on the inside edge. This will reduce rolling resistance and ensure that the vehicle absolutely follows the correct lane route.
Instead of batteries, have a power cable above head-height which the vehicles can pick up power from, with the steel guiding rods doing double-duty as the ground return path for electricity.
Instead of lots of small indpendent vehicles, chain them together in a snake-like fashion into big long vehicles.
Have pre-defined entry/exit points on the network where people can wait on a raised surface next to the running lane for the next vehicle to arrive.
Like seriously. The “future” he suggests at the end of his video is so insanely convoluted. It is crazy how car centric we’ve become that it’s hard to even imagine a different vehicle and system. I was one of them at one point tbh.
having to create steel guiding rods and not to mention power cables overhead? on literally every road in the united states? even all the governments of all the countries on earth dont have enough money to make that happen.
@@anti-tryhard He's being sarcastic and saying that we should just put more investment into public transport instead of some batshit crazy self driving car system
@@asparagus_syndrome I know and i'm being sarcastic by playing into his idea
Fantastic video. I burst out laughing about the boids paper. I spent a year in 1997 implementing that while working at Microsoft Research. It's a very simple algorithm supplanted many times over since then - I almost got fired over it! I'm also an enthusiast in this space and you really nailed it on so many aspects. If your road trip takes you to Seattle would love to show you a few things that aren't open to the public!
Now you got me all interested, how would that get you fired? Used to much server resouces?
Here’s the one thing you forgot to mention: *sitting in a “self driving” car is boring AF*
Never? That's a pretty strong claim! Not even in 1000 years? Waymo can drive you round aright now. There's no driver so it's definitely L5. You can try it out yourself.