Connected/Automated vehicles and infrastructure in Boston

jass said:
Interesting video of Tesla FSD in San Diego.


2:40 runs red light
3:22 runs over bollards
6:25 tries to drive on rail line
7:45 bollards again

he does this same loop every month, so another example of the AI failing to learn. The tracks arent moving, but it still doesnt understand.
Click to expand...
The video above is among those confirmed and reported by the Washington Post. In the WaPo article, other drivers do report that their car is learning from their driving:
Some drivers said they have run their own experiments to test and improve the software. Kevin Smith, who uses FSD on his Tesla Model Y in Murfreesboro, Tenn., said he identified 13 locations near his hometown that stumped his car and created a route that hit all of them. “Each time, it gets a little bit better,” he said.
Click to expand...

Full story in WaPo may require a subscription, but has the advantage that they sampled many youtube videos of crazy FSD, talked to the video's makers, and also had experts react frame by frame:

‘Full Self-Driving’ clips show Teslas on train tracks and fighting for control. Experts see deep flaws.
The Washington Post verified Full Self-Driving footage posted by beta testers and had it reviewed by a panel of experts
 
erom said:
Computers that can do the heavy inference work that benefits from very large training data sets are server farm sized, not car sized. Moore's law might change this someday, but you can't cheat physics with code, no matter how much machine learning you can leverage.
Click to expand...
Breaking out from Moore’s Law (or more specifically Dennard Scaling) will change this some day:
shameless plug for my company
 
Tesla gives driverless cars a bad name. There are many ways to really do what Tesla is saying it can do, with tech that Lord Musk has refused. LiDAR is one. Our problem is he has become something of a cult leader when he is in reality just another bro who made some good business decisions demanding fealty. Wall Street cannot question its golden calf. His blind disciples are no better than Appalachian snake dancers, but Muskovites dance with 3000 lb snakes on our roads. Someuns gonna git bit.
Good batteries in a cool car? Sure. Safe driving system? Sometimes… and that’s not good enough.

Yes, rockets and solar yaaaay. He’s still just a lucky Aspergian dreamer with a work ethic.
Don’t genuflect.
And don’t use his toddler-level self-drive.

Related side note: how many downtown Boston self driving videos are there? Why are the company test areas in optimal California neighborhoods with post-war street builds? Why is snow never factored in demo drives?
When the robo-car testers are getting perfect results in Lowell back alleys after a January Nor’easter, I’ll buy in. Until then, it’s all pump and dump wall street hype.
 
Our community rocks - - thank you, @fattony!

www.businesswire.com

Lightmatter, Harvard and Boston University Collaborate to Create Electro-Photonic Systems for Autonomous Vehicles Under New $4.8M IARPA Project

Intelligence Advanced Research Projects Activity (IARPA), known for investing in research that tackles some of the most difficult challenges in tech today, i...
www.businesswire.com

"...... In the past, compute performance improvements guaranteed by technology scaling, enabled incremental improvements of the computational capacity of transistor-based computers. However, a slowing of the rate of improvement based on technology scaling is creating a widening gap between compute performance and system need. This means that deploying advanced algorithms, such as deep learning in AVs, requires a new paradigm in computer design that exploits not only innovative architectures but also radically novel physics.

The team’s hybrid electro-photonic approach has been motivated by the development of photonic chips that compute using photons, not electrons, at speeds on the order of tera operations per second, while consuming much less energy. A critical competitive feature of the team’s approach is the ability to fabricate photonic chip based compute systems using standard semiconductor fabrication and OSAT processes within existing manufacturing facilities....... "

Open that door, let's go! (y)

1644593700548.png
 
Last edited:
shmessy said:
Our community rocks - - thank you, @fattony!

www.businesswire.com

Lightmatter, Harvard and Boston University Collaborate to Create Electro-Photonic Systems for Autonomous Vehicles Under New $4.8M IARPA Project

Intelligence Advanced Research Projects Activity (IARPA), known for investing in research that tackles some of the most difficult challenges in tech today, i...
www.businesswire.com

"...... In the past, compute performance improvements guaranteed by technology scaling, enabled incremental improvements of the computational capacity of transistor-based computers. However, a slowing of the rate of improvement based on technology scaling is creating a widening gap between compute performance and system need. This means that deploying advanced algorithms, such as deep learning in AVs, requires a new paradigm in computer design that exploits not only innovative architectures but also radically novel physics.

The team’s hybrid electro-photonic approach has been motivated by the development of photonic chips that compute using photons, not electrons, at speeds on the order of tera operations per second, while consuming much less energy. A critical competitive feature of the team’s approach is the ability to fabricate photonic chip based compute systems using standard semiconductor fabrication and OSAT processes within existing manufacturing facilities....... "

Open that door, let's go! (y)

View attachment 21306
Click to expand...
Hell yes! And thanks for posting. I also Googled Lightmatter after your comment. Insanely cool. Represent, Boston!
Now let's build enough housing to keep the genius here instead of letting Palo Alto CONSTANTLY pick our pocket!
 
shmessy said:
Imagine the economic growth and human activity that will be unleashed around 2035 when the city might start banning individually owned and stored (on sides of roads) cars. The on-demand mobility should be available then.

That very street will look so different and alive with HUMANS (along with more restaurants, theatres, apartments, stores, etc.).
Click to expand...

Moving this here, but the thing I can't follow with this is: everybody that is currently out driving their car right now, filling streets and creating traffic, if they aren't going to switch to public transit, are going to still need to occupy a significant amount of street space, whether its in their personal vehicle they own, or a rideshare vehicle. The demand will be the same, so the amount of traffic will be the same.

While they have the potential to eliminate parking in areas, there will still be, as anti-car puts it, "chaos," perhaps a lot more of it, as self-driving vehicles will pull in and out of spots quite frequently if they are making these kinds of trips for riders, no?

If we can solve AV's to a point where nobody has to worry about them in the same space as pedestrians and other car/service drivers, I think where they can help best in cities is as a 4-6-8-person pod as an extension of public transit. The T stations directly outside of Downtown Boston, and each Regional Rail Stop should be individual network hubs for on-demand rideshare AV's for the last-mile inefficiencies public transit can't solve. Incentivize trips to/from transit stations, and price point-to-point travel across cities according to demand, much like a demand-based tolling system on a highway. You can also reallocate your local busses to serve longer/further reaching communities.
 
stefal said:
Moving this here, but the thing I can't follow with this is: everybody that is currently out driving their car right now, filling streets and creating traffic, if they aren't going to switch to public transit, are going to still need to occupy a significant amount of street space, whether its in their personal vehicle they own, or a rideshare vehicle. The demand will be the same, so the amount of traffic will be the same.

While they have the potential to eliminate parking in areas, there will still be, as anti-car puts it, "chaos," perhaps a lot more of it, as self-driving vehicles will pull in and out of spots quite frequently if they are making these kinds of trips for riders, no?

If we can solve AV's to a point where nobody has to worry about them in the same space as pedestrians and other car/service drivers, I think where they can help best in cities is as a 4-6-8-person pod as an extension of public transit. The T stations directly outside of Downtown Boston, and each Regional Rail Stop should be individual network hubs for on-demand rideshare AV's for the last-mile inefficiencies public transit can't solve. Incentivize trips to/from transit stations, and price point-to-point travel across cities according to demand, much like a demand-based tolling system on a highway. You can also reallocate your local busses to serve longer/further reaching communities.
Click to expand...

1) They won't be able to bring a 'vehicle they own' in to the city.

2) The AI pods operating within urban centers would be made out of heavy duty styrofoam (or another lightwight composite like it) and would be limited to no more than 20 mph..

3) Rideshare or better- mobility on demand (by 2035 kinks worked out on AI pods) means no need for storing these things on sides of streets. The "chaos" isn't caused so much by droppign off/picking ups - - it's caused by the ubiquitous space taken up by the sleeping cars on the sides......this would be more evident to the readers in this thread if you also moved the video along with my post. In that video, no more than 10% of the space on the sides (or middle) of those streets are being used for active pickup/dropoff.

4) There WILL still be "chaos" - (God bless chaos!!!) - but it will be much less harmful chaos - - more human dynamism and density and life - - not rusting hulls of vehicles at rest taking up space and choking the urban street like plaque in an artery.
 
Last edited:
www.bostonglobe.com

‘Drivers are people’: Boston City councilors want to delay the arrival of self-driving cars - The Boston Globe

At a City Hall hearing, councilors discussed how autonomous vehicles might add to congestion, create unsafe conditions, and displace ride-sharing drivers.
www.bostonglobe.com www.bostonglobe.com
A majority of Boston City councilors on Thursday raised concerns about allowing self-driving cars on local roads, worried that autonomous vehicles might add to congestion, create unsafe conditions, and displace ride-sharing drivers.
Dozens of ride-sharing drivers opposed to such vehicles packed the hearing room and held a rally in City Hall Plaza denouncing the technology.
After years of hype, there is finally some movement around regulating the tech locally. State legislators are considering a bill to establish rules for autonomous vehicles, and several city councilors said they were working on a potential ordinance to slow the arrival of such vehicles.
Click to expand...
 
themissinglink said:
www.bostonglobe.com

‘Drivers are people’: Boston City councilors want to delay the arrival of self-driving cars - The Boston Globe

At a City Hall hearing, councilors discussed how autonomous vehicles might add to congestion, create unsafe conditions, and displace ride-sharing drivers.
www.bostonglobe.com www.bostonglobe.com
Click to expand...
Whenever the topic of autonomous cars comes up, I’m reminded of this Veritasium video. Around the 2:41 mark, he draws a analogy between elevators and self-driving vehicles that really stuck with me. Worth noting; the video is sponsored by Waymo, so it's possible there's a touch of bias in the presentation—but it still offers valuable perspective.

 
themissinglink said:
www.bostonglobe.com

‘Drivers are people’: Boston City councilors want to delay the arrival of self-driving cars - The Boston Globe

At a City Hall hearing, councilors discussed how autonomous vehicles might add to congestion, create unsafe conditions, and displace ride-sharing drivers.
www.bostonglobe.com www.bostonglobe.com
Click to expand...
There will inevitably need to be statewide regulation on this, it will never work to have a patchwork of municipalities with their own autonomous vehicle regulations. The only question is how long it takes the legislature to act.
 
www.bostonglobe.com

Waymo is returning to Boston for testing, urges legislators to clear path for autonomous vehicles - The Boston Globe

As the robotaxi giant continues to train its cars on Boston's confounding roads, political and legal obstacles remain.
www.bostonglobe.com www.bostonglobe.com

I'm deeply skeptical of their widespread viability in complex urban environments, though people seem to like them in SF and Austin from the little I've looked into it. I just don't see how they can be both convenient AND safe.

That being said, I think autonomous vehicles/an autonomous mode in hybrid operated vehichles, could be a massive game changer for limited access highways.
 
Last edited:
I rode my first Waymo recently and I was radicalized. Like, the moment the ride started my mind was made up. It is the clear future of driving and is extremely impressive across the board. The one tradeoff I noticed is that in some very crowded areas the cars will drop you just outside the area, so imagine you wanted to go to Fenway Park, it might drop you at Kenmore Sq rather than get bogged down in a crowded and chaotic traffic area. They also don't go over 50 or 60 mph, which is perfect for Boston and Camberville, as you can avoid freeway speeds almost entirely.

These things are logging real miles and are, without any hint of doubt, much safer than human drivers. I really think we should allow for them here in Mass
 
Justbuildit said:
I rode my first Waymo recently and I was radicalized. Like, the moment the ride started my mind was made up. It is the clear future of driving and is extremely impressive across the board. The one tradeoff I noticed is that in some very crowded areas the cars will drop you just outside the area, so imagine you wanted to go to Fenway Park, it might drop you at Kenmore Sq rather than get bogged down in a crowded and chaotic traffic area. They also don't go over 50 or 60 mph, which is perfect for Boston and Camberville, as you can avoid freeway speeds almost entirely.

These things are logging real miles and are, without any hint of doubt, much safer than human drivers. I really think we should allow for them here in Mass
Click to expand...
Just want to comment I have had the drop (and pick up) outside the crowded zone happen a number of times in San Francisco. Sometimes it is not bad. Sometimes it is super annoying as in dropping you with a hefty walk up hill in the rain; or making it really hard to find your ride when it won't get closer. I mean seriously, sometimes why you pay for a taxi/ride share is you don't want to walk in the rain and get soaked (I can have that experience using transit).
 
Justbuildit said:
The one tradeoff I noticed is that in some very crowded areas the cars will drop you just outside the area, so imagine you wanted to go to Fenway Park, it might drop you at Kenmore Sq rather than get bogged down in a crowded and chaotic traffic area.
Click to expand...
We should be making non-autonomous taxis do this anyway and iirc Kenmore was the exact neighborhood Boston ran a successful pilot of that with (or, it was a designated drop off area within Kenmore rather than outside of it, but similar in concept).

Edit: one thing I want to dive deeper on is the interaction with pedestrian behavior. The bay area and Boston are total opposites in regards to jaywalking. Can a waymo be both safe and convenient without strictly regulating ped behavior?
 
I agree we should have more pedestrian-only, or generally car-reduced areas of the city, especially around big events. People would lose their minds at not having door-to-door Uber service, but that's another conversation...

For Waymo, they're very cautious and their sensors really do give a 360 medium-range awareness including pedestrians entering crosswalks from blind spots. The rider can see all of this live on the main infotainment system similar to what Teslas show today. But the decision making is cautious and defers to peds and cyclists. I'm sure there are videos with reviews, but really next time you're in a Waymo zone just download the app and take a ride. It's the closest I've felt to "The Future" since I held my first iPhone.
 
KCasiglio said:
That being said, I think autonomous vehicles/an autonomous mode in hybrid operated vehichles, could be a massive game changer for limited access highways.
Click to expand...

That reminds me of when I heard of plans to make I-495 compatible for autonomous cars. That was back around 1960 when I-495 was starting up. Amazing what things we remember from our childhood. Nothing came of it, of course, but do remember seeing an article in the newspaper about Mass DPW (precursor to MassDOT) considering it.
 
Justbuildit said:
I agree we should have more pedestrian-only, or generally car-reduced areas of the city, especially around big events. People would lose their minds at not having door-to-door Uber service, but that's another conversation...

For Waymo, they're very cautious and their sensors really do give a 360 medium-range awareness including pedestrians entering crosswalks from blind spots. The rider can see all of this live on the main infotainment system similar to what Teslas show today. But the decision making is cautious and defers to peds and cyclists. I'm sure there are videos with reviews, but really next time you're in a Waymo zone just download the app and take a ride. It's the closest I've felt to "The Future" since I held my first iPhone.
Click to expand...
Lots of busy ride share areas have designated pick-up/drop zones -- reasonably close to the destination so it makes sense. And you know where it is when you book so you plan accordingly.

Waymo's in SF are dynamic. So you set up a pickup and before the taxi arrives, it decides it is only coming within 2 blocks of the designated pickup. That is not great. They sometime leave before you get to the new pickup because it took you too long.
 
I use waymos in preference to human driven ubers when I'm in SF - for the most part, they're pretty good about the limitations of curb access - youre requesting a ride from a spot we can't stop - go here to get your waymo. It actually usually wouldn't let me select my location, and it would usally give me a selection of nearest pickup points where it judges it can safely stop in downtownier bits of SF. Same thing with dropoffs - it consistently will pick the nearest intersection.

Theres a few situations where they struggle - they're risk adverse, and in certain situations can't make the decisions a human driver would in a crowded pickup situation. I will say I never felt unsafe as a human around them, nor as a passenger in them.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top