
New GM Cruise Self-Driving Video Shows More Mastery of SF Roads - wonderhowto
https://www.driverless.id/news/video-analysis-new-gm-cruise-self-driving-video-shows-more-mastery-sf-roads-0176178/
======
Fricken
That's pretty cool, it's great to see GM not sucking at bleeding edge
software. They're getting their money's worth out of that billion dollar
acquisition last March. I think Kyle Vogt is GM's MVP.

Looking at the 2016 California DMV disengagement reports, Cruise is at 181
disengages in 9,776 miles of testing in California for 2016. This can be
compared crudely to Waymo's 124 disengages in 635,868 miles for 2016.

Waymo's operation is 2 orders of magnitude more advanced than Cruise, but in
terms of video demos, we haven't seen much of the environments Waymo's cars
are capable of navigating. Waymo has only revealed their cars driving on
suburban roads, it seems only Cruise is tackling hectic downtown driving head-
on.

GM, with their Lyft partnership and Orion assembly plant is, I think, in a
great position to deploy early fast with 1st gen robotaxis.

~~~
beamatronic
Waymo cars frequently drive the same routes several times a week. In fact if
you go to certain intersections such as El Camino Real and San Antonio Rd,
during the work week you only have to wait a few minutes to see one or more go
by.

~~~
unprepare
Do you think the routes are designed so that the car encounters specific
obstacles the teams are working on, or do you think its more like they are
doing extensive mapping of an area to make the autonomy a bit easier?

~~~
snovv_crash
I suspect it is so that it is easier to measure the effects tweaks/development
to the algorithms make.

------
pfarnsworth
Very impressive, I'm wondering how it was able to get around the white truck
that was double-parked? Does it have sensors on the mirrors and point straight
out? I imagine it would have no information as to oncoming cars, with the
truck blocking almost everything, so I wonder what the algorithm is for that.

~~~
Fuzzwah
Tesla posted about updates to their auto pilot system which included bouncing
radar under the car in front of them.

[https://www.tesla.com/en_AU/blog/upgrading-autopilot-
seeing-...](https://www.tesla.com/en_AU/blog/upgrading-autopilot-seeing-world-
radar)

------
NAHWheatCracker
At around 1:54 in the video, it comes to a stop light that is in front of a
Shell station's gas price board. It actually took me a second to notice the
stop light. There is another light on the left side of the screen, but it
still made me think.

Is it likely just using some image recognition and a confidence level to
determine when it is safe to go?

If so, could the system be fooled by a sign that is meant to always look like
a red light? Or worse, a green light to trick the system to run a red?

~~~
elihu
Eventually, I expect we'll have some national standard for wireless
transmitters on traffic signals, so they can send a message (timestamped and
cryptographically signed with the state's department of transportation's
public key) to the cars to tell them unambiguously when to stop and when it's
safe to go.

(This could help human drivers too; just add a red/yellow/green light to the
car dashboard for those times when you can't see the actual light because
there's a big truck in the way, or the sun is directly behind the traffic
signal.)

I also expect that by the time this sees near-universal adoption, we'll
already have the image recognition corner cases mostly worked out.

~~~
GordonS
A nitpick, but you would sign with the _private_ key, and verify with the
_public_ key.

~~~
elihu
Thanks, that's what I meant.

------
rhcom2
Seeing a firetruck in this made me wonder, how do self driving vehicles deal
with emergency services behind them? Detect the flashing lights?

~~~
jboggan
Given all the crazy corner cases I know they have covered I cannot imagine
they don't deal well with emergency vehicles. For example, I know Waymo has
put a ton of work into just covering the cases when motorcycles are lane-
splitting and overtaking them at high speed [0]. I'm sure they deal with
ambulances just fine.

0 - [http://extremepowersportssa.com/google-self-driving-car-
proj...](http://extremepowersportssa.com/google-self-driving-car-project-
considers-lane-splitting-motorcyclists/3859)

~~~
scurvy
Not to be pedantic, but it's lane sharing, not lane splitting. Lane splitting,
aka riding the dots, is illegal even in CA

~~~
Plough_Jogger
No, this is legal in CA.

California Highway Patrol guidelines:
[http://lanesplittingislegal.com/assets/docs/CHP-lane-
splitti...](http://lanesplittingislegal.com/assets/docs/CHP-lane-splitting-
guidelines-California.pdf)

~~~
rconti
Well, we're probably missing the point, and you probably both know, but I'll
continue anyway.

The reason lane sharing is legal in California is because there is not a
prohibition against multiple vehicles in the same lane adjacent to each other.
The other states, one presumes (since we know it's only legal in CA), specify
that vehicles may not drive side-by-side in the same lane.

I'm not sure what CA law has to say about riding _between_ lanes (or, probably
more accurately, occupying 2 lanes at the same time which would be what you
were doing if your wheels were going right down the line), but all this
business is why we call it lane SHARING; in theory, any time spent on the
white line is during a lane change (properly signalled, of course, except for
those who want to point out that CA state law is pretty vague on whether you
even need to signal a lane change).

So the fact that the CHP guideline calls it splitting does nothing to change
the legality of splitting versus sharing.

But the motorcycle community typically prefers to call it lane sharing, as
that's the circumstance under which it's definitely legal (assuming you are
not breaking any other laws at the same time).

And yes, I saw a demo from Google a number of years ago where the car very
gracefully handled a motorcycle lane sharing past it.

~~~
e28eta
Your comment matched my understanding from ~10 years ago (from discussions on
CA motorcycling forums). However, AB-51 passed last August and it's added
"lane splitting" to the vehicle code (which I just found out about 10 minutes
ago).

[https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtm...](https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160AB51)

Anecdotally, I'd heard of motorcyclists cited for violating the CA Vehicle
Code if they occupy two lanes: "Existing law requires ... that a vehicle be
driven as nearly as practical entirely within a single lane and not be moved
from the lane until the movement can be made with reasonable safety."

This resulted in the semantic distinction. It's _not_ illegal for two vehicles
to share a lane. It is illegal (and still is) to drive in two lanes or to
drive "between" the lanes.

------
nojvek
I think GM is in a great position to compete with Uber and tesla if they
capitalize on the tech.

As a customer I'll still be happy with multiple choices driving prices down
and offering a better service than buses and taxis.

God I hate buses in the US. Public transport is very broken.

~~~
segmondy
I'm sad to say this, but I think GM is going to crush Tesla in the long run.
GM knows about building cars, tech becomes cheaper and available over time. It
will take Tesla longer to learn how to build and mass produce at a cheap price
than for GM to have all the tech they need to match up with Tesla. Initially I
was worried that Honda would be the one, but they don't seem to be taking the
electric and self driving car serious. GM has their volt/bolt with decent
range, I happen to work at a company that shares a lot with some of the auto
manufacturing suppliers for American car companies, and I see them testing
their self driving cars sometimes. Oh and they have a bunch of Teslas for
inspiration I suppose. :)

~~~
Animats
_I think GM is going to crush Tesla in the long run._

Maybe in the short run.

Jan 2017 EV sales:[1]

    
    
        Chevy Volt:         1611
        Toyota Prius Prime: 1366
        Chevy Bolt:         1182
        Tesla Model S:       900
        Nissan Leaf:         772
        Tesla Model X:       750
    

The Bolt has only been shipping since late December. That's just getting
started.

[1] [http://insideevs.com/monthly-plug-in-sales-
scorecard/](http://insideevs.com/monthly-plug-in-sales-scorecard/)

~~~
segmondy
Why do you say so? That's 2793 Chevys vs 1650 Teslas.

There are more people who can afford Chevy than Tesla.

Tesla hasn't demonstrated that they can manufacture cheaply, they have
promised and we are still waiting. GM might not have a luxury electric
package, but they know how from their experience in building Cadillac. Tesla
not in the dealerships is a problem. GM manufactures outside of the country
and has about 30 factories. They can build and sell electric car outside.
Tesla doesn't, building, shipping & custom fees increases price of car a lot.

I'm not convinced that Tesla will win this battle if all variables remain the
same. They need to move faster to have a chance.

~~~
chc
Animats is saying you don't have to wait to see GM beat Tesla, not that they
won't beat them in the long run.

Of course, comparing sales of Chevy's and Toyota's mostly low-end lineup to
Tesla's luxury offerings is pretty odd anyway. At the moment it seems pretty
TBD.

(I also maintain that including cars like the Volt and Prius in the same
category as the Bolt and Model S doesn't make much sense. You may as well
compare the Bolt and Model S to all gas-powered cars if you're going to
include those gas-powered cars in the mix — it's equally unenlightening.)

~~~
coredog64
Allegedly some large fraction of driving takes place within 20 miles of home.
In light of that, including vehicles with 20-40 miles of EV only range makes
perfect sense.

~~~
chc
Sure, a lot of driving is done near home. But if trips outside that range were
really negligible, gas tanks wouldn't be a standard feature in those cars.
They're not including them just for funsies.

As an aside, I think you're slightly misunderstanding that statistic. If I do
a 60-mile round trip directly away from my house and back, 66% of those miles
are within 20 miles of home even though the trip isn't anywhere near 20 miles
in total. If I drive 15 miles away from my house and then drive a a semi-
circle for 80 miles, all of those are within 20 miles of home.

------
wyldfire
> The Cruise car makes a left turn and then gets stuck behind a delivery
> truck. It waits as a couple of other vehicles overtake it

I suppose I'd probably notice if I was a semi-engaged driver, but not as much
if I considered myself "just a passenger" in an autonomous vehicle. It looks
like barely more than 30s elapses there.

~~~
markkanof
I'm not sure I would have done anything different than the computer did. I'm a
cautious driver and have been in similar situations where I felt it was
prudent to take a moment and really try to see past the truck to look for any
oncoming traffic. I've then had an impatient driver behind me decide to zoom
around.

~~~
freehunter
I used to be the type of driver who would impatiently zoom around, until one
day I noticed several deer beginning to cross the freeway. I slammed on my
brakes, but the driver behind me honked and swerved around me and, at over
80mph, took two of the deer with him. He left the scene in an ambulance and
his car went to the scrapyard on a flatbed. No one ever told me what happened
to the man, but while we were waiting for the ambulance and while he was being
loaded, I never saw him even wiggle a toe or blink an eye. He was breathing
but completely unresponsive. I don't know if he survived or not.

It's moments like that one that can change your outlook on life in an instant.
That was four years ago and I haven't intentionally broken the speed limit
since then. Even if it means other impatient drivers are zooming around me. I
have, however, been rear-ended twice since then.

~~~
erichocean
> _Even if it means other impatient drivers are zooming around me. I have,
> however, been rear-ended twice since then._

Wait, so you _already_ saw someone be seriously injured, and since then,
you've caused two other accidents (which are a danger to you too), and you're
still going with "I'll drive the speed limit and _not_ drive with the flow of
traffic?"

smh

Drive with the flow of traffic: save lives.

~~~
bluehawk
That's a bold assumption about his accidents being his fault. Maybe he was
rear ended at a light when fully stopped. And even if he was going slower than
traffic, it's still the other driver's job not to _hit other cars._

------
digitalneal
I wish they released a realtime cut of this. I feel like some of the quirks
have been obscured with sped up footage.

------
golfer
That video was impressive. It shows great situational awareness.

Here's what I wonder about the future. Is there a point in which consolidation
will take place in the auto industry as a result of superior _self-driving_
performance and capabilities? Meaning -- can the value created by self-driving
software be more of a factor than the other existing assets of a GM, Ford,
Chrysler, Toyota, etc?

~~~
gizmo
I predict that self-driving technology will become a commoditized box +
sensors for use by different car brands. It will very quickly reach the point
where one autonomous driving engine will not be noticeably better or worse
than any of the others on the market.

~~~
golfer
Interesting. So price will not factor in? And, will a luxury car be expected
to have better self-driving awareness/features than a cheaper car?

And before it hits commodity state, what if Waymo's Chrysler minivans and GM's
Chevrolets are far superior self-drivers than say, BMWs & Mercedes? How much
does that alter the demand curve?

~~~
gizmo
I don't expect there to be different tiers of autonomous driving, because the
sensors are cheap and the software can be duplicated at no cost. There are a
billion cars in the world, so whatever the initial cost is to develop the self
driving software, it's going to be pennies per car in the long run. It will be
very tough for car manufacturers to defend their customers dying in a totally
avoidable accident because their driving AI -- like a chess engine --
deliberately made a worse move because the customer didn't buy the premium
package.

I expect premium car brands to charge more for the same self-driving
technology, though, as at least in the short term self-driving capability will
be sold as an expensive extra.

I think the commodity stage will be hit two years after the first truly self-
driving cars are sold. So it shouldn't give one brand a lasting advantage.

~~~
saiya-jin
there might be some added value in premium cars - for example certification
that it can go 100kmh fully autonomous (better processing hardware, more &
expensive sensors), 130 (as per most EU countries) and so on. BMW can have a
gap on safe driving at 200 kmh, ferrari 250 kmh.

but overall I feel those premium brands will have very tough times - most of
their added value is in driving experience (for example what BMW delivers in
ie 3-sedans is a wonderful experience) and this will be removed. not that many
people feel the need to pay premium for something that will feel like a
commercial airliner, travelling will be race to the bottom costwise.

~~~
inimino
> most of their added value is in driving experience

I think BMW's added value is in comfort and prestige. People buy a BMW because
they can afford it and other people can see that they have one. The ride is
smooth, the interior is nice, it has good sound insulation, etc. A small
fraction buys them because they are fun to drive. BMW makes luxury sedans, not
sports cars. The top of the luxury sedan market is not Ferrari but RR and
Bentley where people literally buy the car and pay someone else to drive it.

------
falcolas
So, silly question - why are these technologies not being made broadly
available as driver assist tools while we work our way up to L4 driving
automation?

If we're really concerned about making driving safer, this seems like a good
compromise until we get to broadly available (and affordable) L4.

~~~
gumby
> So, silly question - why are these technologies not being made broadly
> available as driver assist tools while we work our way up to L4 driving
> automation?

Well, they are. Lane departure warnings, auto braking, self parking are all
incremental automation/assistive technologies that have been rolling out
slowly and will continue to.

Advertising stuff now is a kind of marketing aimed at hiring and in building
enthusiasm for a company like GM that as seen as a has been (not picking on
GM, they are simply the topic of this article!).

I think your real question is, "why aren't I seeing these features on current
model year cars?" It's about the structure of the car industry. For example,
when I worked with <car company X> on brake-by-wire in 1996 it was for the
2004 model year. They had a team with functional steer by wire -- I still
haven't seen it in production! This is a combination of historical industry
practice, a focus on safety, and regulatory constraints. A mixture of good and
bad.

~~~
falcolas
> I think your real question is, "why aren't I seeing these features on
> current model year cars?"

Or as 3rd party modules which can be installed by a moderately competent
mechanic.

And while yes, some of these are being offered, they are far from freely
available and affordable - two things which would seem to me to be important
for full blown automation.

~~~
NiceBoots
Look up Comma.ai. They got a cease and desist letter from the NHTSA.

~~~
zhengyi13
... that'd be the guy who refused to answer even basic safety testing
questions though, right?

Or am I thinking of someone else?

------
fuzzythinker
At 1:04 [1], it stops for a few seconds before the intersection. Seems to be
due to the white car that is parked in opposite direction as all other cars so
it waited for ~20 seconds to confirm that the car is indeeded parked? Should a
no-motion indicates it's not moving? Why wait for so long?

[https://youtu.be/Vfgjemwc9NU?t=63](https://youtu.be/Vfgjemwc9NU?t=63)

~~~
Roedou
They marked it with the 'Scheduled Stop' in the top left, and it seems like
the passenger is fiddling with some controls as well? I assumed this was to
simulate a pick-up/drop-off, or was just a waypoint in the trip?

------
ndh2
While certainly impressive, keep in mind that it's only one video showing one
of possibly thousands of trials with possibly thousands of difficult corner-
case situations where the car got stuck or acted improperly. One video doesn't
prove anything, especially not one with a person ready to take over at any
moment.

~~~
cbhl
Voluntary data of corner-cases where the car got stuck or acted improperly are
available from virtually every company in the self-driving car space except
Uber. See the "Vehicle Disengagement Reports" at the DMV's website:
[https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/dmv/detail/vr/autonomous/disen...](https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/dmv/detail/vr/autonomous/disengagement_report_2016)

------
monk_e_boy
American roads look really unfamiliar to someone from the UK. You stop a lot!
So many stop signs.

~~~
greeneggs
There isn't really any planning. San Francisco never removes stop signs, but
just adds them steadily as neighborhoods request them. Eventually they are
turned into traffic lights. (I imagine "traffic signals installed" must be a
performance metric for someone.)

A downside of having stop signs at almost every corner is that drivers seem to
forget how to drive in areas without them. They assume that if they approach
an intersection without a stop sign then they can drive through it at full
speed, instead of looking for cross traffic and pedestrians.

------
dmritard96
Looking at this space, I honestly expected more drive by wire and remote VR
pilot type intermediary solutions than full autonomy. I wonder if remote
control will be completely bypassed or if certain sectors will still benefit
from this.

------
Zaheer
How does this compare to other players right now (ex. Waymo, Tesla, etc)?

~~~
Animats
Car and Driver says Waymo is way out in front.[1] The 2016 California DMV
autonomous vehicle disconnect reports are out, and Waymo is doing three orders
of magnitude better than the others in miles between disconnects. Waymo is up
to 5,000 miles between disconnects, out of 600K miles driven. Waymo reported
zero disconnects on interstates and freeways in the last year. For
Waymo/Google, this is about 2x better than last year. That was 2x better than
the previous year.

Everybody else is reporting orders of magnitude more disconnects per mile.

[1] [http://blog.caranddriver.com/in-the-self-driving-race-
waymo-...](http://blog.caranddriver.com/in-the-self-driving-race-waymo-looks-
to-be-way-out-in-front/)

~~~
luminiferous
I'm not sure it's necessarily a good comparison, though. As I recall, Waymo's
testing is mostly freeway and suburban driving. I'd be curious to see how much
of their testing is done in a heavily urban environment, such as downtown SF
or Oakland, and how it affects their disengage numbers.

~~~
Animats
Waymo's testing is mostly on suburban streets in Mountain View CA, with
another test unit in Austin. Their accident reports are usually from Mountain
View, and it's almost always them being rear-ended.

~~~
antisthenes
Rear-ended is probably a good thing, since that means automation is erring on
the side of caution and applying braking when necessary or when uncertainty is
above a certain threshold.

Of course someone could make the argument that excessive braking is dangerous,
but honestly, the shit I see drivers do behind the wheel of their car weekly
(eating, texting, putting on makeup, _shaving_ ), I'd prefer excessive braking
over any of that.

~~~
Animats
Many of Google's rear-endings occur at intersections where there's obstructed
visibility to the side. The autonomous vehicle moves slightly forward into the
intersection, detects cross traffic, and stops. Someone behind them then hits
them at slow speed.[1][2]

[1]
[https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/wcm/connect/4a39c1b9-ca1f-4184...](https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/wcm/connect/4a39c1b9-ca1f-4184-8b78-96d6baf98628/Google_102616.pdf?MOD=AJPERES)
[2] [https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/wcm/connect/69feb1fa-
ff90-4b7a...](https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/wcm/connect/69feb1fa-
ff90-4b7a-b8b4-dcaacdb20c65/Google_090716.pdf?MOD=AJPERES)

~~~
autotypo
Sounds like it needed to check for tailgaters before braking, as humans must
do in most city driving. This must be improved by now.

------
Corrado
As I was watching this video I thought about how much further along with self
driving cars we could be if the data was open source. Sharing this type of
information between companies would increase everyone's velocity and get us
that much closer to real world driverless vehicles.

At some point the vehicles will have to talk to each other anyway (ie. car-to-
car network), so we might as well formalize it.

------
1024core
This is still pretty simple stuff it has to deal with. If you really want to
test Cruise, try driving in downtown SF on a weekday around 5pm.

~~~
chomp
Or any other location in the US also! Try a Boston winter, or Houston's
unending road construction. It feels like we're creating self driving cars
that are experts at driving in SF.

~~~
seanmcdirmid
Gotta take the first steps. Its ok to keep raising the bar.

------
karpodiem
Until I see autonomous vehicles testing in blizzard conditions, or even a
moderate snowfall, it's relegated to the West coast. This eliminates nearly
2/3 of the US population (who live in areas where snowfall occurs).

We're at least 5-7 years away from them testing in these conditions.

~~~
Jimpulse
Surprisingly, they are already testing in snow conditions.

[http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3399315/The-d...](http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3399315/The-
driverless-car-cope-SNOW-Ford-vehicle-blizzards-tackle-slippery-corners.html)

~~~
karpodiem
That 'testing' is taking place on the University of Michigan's M City track.
I'm looking forward to testing during these conditions, in the real world,
with someone behind the wheel acting as backup.

I'll revise my 5-7 year comment then - I think it will this amount of time (if
not more) for these autonomous vehicles to move beyond testing (prod) in
winter climates.

Driving on the interstate in a snow storm with semi trucks is no joke - there
might actually be a threshold in which pulling over is the best option.

------
dorianm
As in the first video there is a ~30s delay when stuck behind a truck. Which I
think is reasonable and most human drivers take far too many risks. Seems to
be than humans will learn to drive better thanks to self driving cars :).

------
Apocryphon
Given GM's partnership with Lyft, makes me wonder if Uber should be concerned.

------
dbg31415
Looks like the car cuts off another other driver here?

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vfgjemwc9NU&t=0m42s](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vfgjemwc9NU&t=0m42s)

~~~
dripton
Looks like both cars have a stop sign, and this one got there first.

~~~
dbg31415
My driver's ed teacher would have dinged me if I pulled that. True the car got
there a smidge after the POV car, but when turning and going through another
car's lane you should always yield to that car before going into the
intersection. I think a human driver would have said, "Yup, I got here 0.5
seconds before him... but I'll let him go before I attempt the turn."

------
amelius
At 00:49, shouldn't the car have yielded to the car coming from the opposite
side of the street?

~~~
spullara
Since the GM Cruise car was at the stop sign first, no.

------
Aoyagi
Is this going to be Cadillac's "Supercruise"?

------
bsaul
Anyone knows how those technologies work at night time ?

~~~
dkonofalski
Shouldn't make a difference as, as far as I know, none of the tech they're
using is visually based except for a few of the cameras. Most of the primary
systems are LIDAR, RADAR, or some other tech that doesn't rely on perfect
visual detection and even the ones that do have a mode for "night vision" or a
modifier to allow a similar type of function.

~~~
joakleaf
What about street signs, road markings, and even signals? That must be visual,
and they certainly look different at night

Can you create a "normalized" image (hardware- or software-wise) that is
independent of the time of day? Is that what you mean by "night-vision" and
"modifier"?

I would still imagine that certain light conditions (i.e. just around sunset)
could make things difficult.

Would be interesting if anyone knows how they handle this.

~~~
dkonofalski
They do have cameras for those kinds of things but most of them are a backup
system and they have the actual signals, signs, and speed limits embedded in
the GPS data. If you do a google search, you can find several instances of
Tesla's speed-limiting a car going down the freeway where the GPS data was
incorrect. The car all but ignored what the signs actually said as long as it
could identify that a sign was there.

I'm sure there are light conditions that it can't handle, but there are so
many fallback systems that it doesn't have to rely simply on visual data.

~~~
joakleaf
Ah, ok, so if the can encounters a pre-mapped street signs, the car doesn't
bother to actually check the sign.

Hmm... seems a tad dangerous to me. What if the sign is changed, or two signs
are almost in identical position?

I suppose it will be ok if the pre-mapped version is used, whenever a
confident visual prediction cannot be made (e.g. due to light, mud, bullet
holes, or whatever).

~~~
dkonofalski
This is part of the issue that's being addressed in the current autopilot.
Tesla throttles the autopilot speed to be no more than a certain amount past
the posted speed limit. Drivers have been complaining that the posted limits
don't match the pre-mapped limits already.

~~~
joakleaf
.... still seems a bit dangerous.

Would also be interesting to hear what the other teams do, but I only remember
seeing videos in daylight so far.

Somehow I completely overlooked this issue in the past.

------
marricks
I think one of the more depressing things is that (potentially) many driver-
less cars will be gas powered. Does anyone know if Waymo is going to be used
on any electric cars?

There doesn't seem to be any reason driver-less cars have to be electric, but
if big companies pushed the tech onto electric cars it'd be a nice way to
speed up their adoption and infrastructure for them.

~~~
dsfyu404ed
>I think one of the more depressing things is that (potentially) many driver-
less cars will be gas powered. Does anyone know if Waymo is going to be used
on any electric cars?

It's not like the software isn't portable or that GM has any aversion to
building electric if market conditions are favorable.

~~~
marricks
Of course not, but having the tech tied to an electric push I think makes the
whole package more attractive to consumers. Perhaps I'm too tied to a Tesla
mindset on this though, of course self driving cars offer a bunch of
advantages on their own.

~~~
yellow_postit
I have a strong sense that self driving will be generally distributed through
the US car population before electric only vehicles given the pace of software
vs. pace of battery technology. This will drive mass adoption of gas powered
self driving cars pushing back the adoption curve for all electrics. One way
to stem this may be through tax and insurance incentives, a discount on self
driving due to safety, a discount for electric for environmental reasons, and
an extra discount for both.

~~~
jfim
I was under the impression that electric cars had a lower cost per mile, but
the electrics have a higher up front cost.

If you have a self driving fleet (eg. Lyft, Uber, GM, etc.), you'd want to
optimize for the former, not the latter. Uber has proved that if you can get a
car within a couple of minutes at a low enough price, it's a valid enough
substitute to car ownership, at least in cities.

