Zo posted:

they never mentioned how that discredits NASA's investigation which included actual tests on real vehicles, because it doesn't, but keep obsessing over that little "gotcha"

must be nice when life is so simple lol

quote:

To make sense of all of this data, a new onboard computer with over 40 times the computing power of the previous generation runs the new Tesla-developed neural net for vision, sonar and radar processing software. Together, this system provides a view of the world that a driver alone cannot access, seeing in every direction simultaneously, and on wavelengths that go far beyond the human senses.

theperminator posted:

First of all NASA said that even though they didn't reproduce it, they were unable to rule out the ECU as the cause and points out that they were unaware that the RAM is non-ECC and incapable of detecting memory errors let alone correct them. they also didn't investigate all of the software.
Any engineer looking at the list of poo poo there will tell you it's a timebomb and I guess it helps to understand the implications of global variables and stack overflows.
Relying on standard SRAM for life critical systems is inexcusable, stack overflows are inexcusable, your ECU having to kill tasks to free up CPU time is inexcusable.

It's nice to be someone who actually knows what they're talking about.

quote:

The results of NHTSA’s field inspections of vehicles involved in alleged UA incidents during
2010 supported this analysis. Those vehicle inspections, which included objective evidence from
event data recorders, indicated that drivers were applying the accelerator and not applying the
brake (or not applying it until the last second or so), except for one instance involving pedal
entrapment​

Streak posted:

i think theyre called helicopters

Zo posted:

well, i'm glad you're falling back to the "electronic gremlin" theory, because that's at least possible, in the exceedingly unlikely sense

let's not forget that while NASA played with the ecu, the nhtsa was doing the legwork examining the actual cars that allegedly accelerated unironically. the results are as lol as you expect

theperminator posted:

The same throttle position sensor supplying the main processor is what supplies the black box if I am understanding correctly. And while there are apparently two different sensors they run through the same input block on the same chip.

quote:

Incidents initiating at low speeds (i.e., from a stationary position or at a speed less than 15 MPH)
in scenarios where the driver was applying the brakes constitute by far the largest overall share
of complaints and crashes. Complaints throughout this category imply or explicitly state that the
vehicle accelerated immediately after the brake was applied and generally describe an incident
that runs its course in seconds and spanned very short distances.

quote:

NHTSA believes that these incidents are very likely the result of pedal misapplication. This
conclusion is based on the fact that application of the brake alone cannot cause acceleration and
that there is generally no evidence of a vehicle-based cause of the acceleration or of brake failure
in these incidents. Properly functioning brakes will provide enough force to overcome engine
torque, even at full throttle, and the conditions that can lead to loss of brake effectiveness (brake
fade and loss of vacuum) are not relevant to these types of incidents. Moreover, NASA indicates
in its report that it did not identify any failures in the Toyota ETC system that impacted the
braking system. Therefore, even if (as appears extremely unlikely), some type of flaw in that
system caused a UA incident, such a flaw would not be induced by applying the brake or inhibit
braking. The complainant’s apparently good faith assertion about having applied the brake is
contradicted by the absence of braking effectiveness, but strongly suggests that the driver was in
fact applying force to a pedal.

Zzulu posted:

MY question to all these loving trucker companies is why they don't just come up with flying autonomous transports instead. Like drones hauling cargo containers around? They could just go straight from point A to point B without having to deal with roads and other drivers

Like this thing, except 100x larger

berth ell pup posted:

Zzulu posted:

self driving helicopters though??

Someone do this and become a trillionaire

Serak posted:

Because it'd make every item you buy at least twice as expensive compared to ground transport
Also only huge heavy-lift helicopters are able to lift a loaded shipping container

Oh, and helicopters have a habit of falling out of the sky on the regular.

unpacked robinhood posted:

Who will ban normal cars first, insanely gay europe or gently caress retarded usa ??

Former DILF posted:

I want a self-driving motorhome. Oh gosh, I guess I'll just go to sleep and WAKE UP IN A COOL NEW PLACE

E: gently caress, we're still in corn country? gently caress the midwest

Smythe posted:

Did someone mention the Wrong RAM?

Inescapable Duck posted:

Then what happens when it snows?

Self-driving car AI isn't going to have to be just adequate. It's going to have to be really, incredibly good, able to function in any and all conditions, deal with emergencies and unexpected obstacles, and handle every piece of public road in the country.

Significant Ant posted:

I work in the field of controls engineering and am somewhat familiar with their self driving car system

The basic gist of it is that Tesla made the mistake of hiring computer scientists to do a controls engineers job

This seems to be a recurring problem (Google fired all of the control engineers and replaced them with CS fucktards too) in SV these days

Streak posted:

even with everything humans have been able to accomplish, there's just no way they could get vehicles to navigate themselves in less than ideal conditions. it's just not possible. a loving pipe dream i tell you.

hackbunny posted:

a self driving car is like the Terminator, can't be bargained with, can't be reasoned with, doesn't feel pity or remorse etc. except it's not a cold blooded killer but a terminal fucktard. think every time a computer or app has given you trouble, now make it a dozen thousand times heavier (extremely flammable lithium battery included), put yourself and your family inside it, and launch it to 80 mph on an extremely poorly maintained road. these things will hard reboot at highway speeds at best, at worst they'll get hacked the whole loving time because their "intelligence" is fake and they're tethered 24/7 to remote systems

computers are a stupefyingly bad technology and as a programmer I'm baffled at their deification. they're fancy calculators. they don't actually "think". a self driving car is not "aware" in any way form or shape of what's happening around it and it can't make "choices"

...and the pitch! posted:

It can't be done today so it will never be possible.

Computers can fly to Mars and drive around there but it's impossible on Earth.

Those egghead computer jockeys probably never even heard of weather. The whole thing is absurd.

...and the pitch! posted:

It can't be done today so it will never be possible.

Computers can fly to Mars and drive around there but it's impossible on Earth.

Those egghead computer jockeys probably never even heard of weather. The whole thing is absurd.

...and the pitch! posted:

If we can get the control program to recognize that you shouldn't try to win a race against a train at a crossing it's already better than a lot of human drivers.