
Audi claims the A8 is the first production car to reach Level 3 autonomy - wallst07
https://www.theverge.com/2017/7/11/15952510/audi-a8-level-3-autonomous-driving-self-parking
======
apexalpha
As someone from Europe it is good to see the EU manufacturers finally showing
some serious progress.

I always chuckled a bit when (tech) press would say 'Google has beaten auto
manufacturers' after Google released some PR videoclip of them showing a car
driving.

European car companies just don't see the need to enlighten the world about
what they're up to, how they are progressing, but simply work until it's
finished for production and then unveil it.

Still haven't seen that 'vastly superiour' super-car from Google and Apple
everyone claimed were coming to take over.

Tesla does seem to succesfully run their company as a tech start-up: hyping
new products that are 1 or 2 year from being in production, personification of
the brand via the CEO god-status, continuous deliviry of software updates to
cars, public beta testing etc..

I am rooting for Tesla, I hope they find the capability to increase production
levels to something that comes near of the existing car giants.

~~~
TulliusCicero
> There are a couple caveats, obviously. The traffic jam pilot only works on
> highways with a physical barrier separating oncoming traffic, and the use of
> the system is subject to the laws of whichever jurisdiction you’re driving
> through. So bone up on the rules of the road before pressing that button.

Being able to self-drive on highways with physical barriers between oncoming
traffic is, like, the easiest use case for self-driving cars. This doesn't
very advanced to me at all. Urban driving is the actual hard part.

~~~
skgoa
True, but it's still the first time real world customers will be able to let
the car take complete control/responsibility in real world traffic. For me as
an automotive sw engineer this is truly massive step forward, even though what
you see from the outside doesn't seem that impressive at a glance.

Also, being stuck in a traffic jam during the daily comute is one of the most
annoying and most stressing parts of driving. Not having to deal with this is
a significant improvement in the driver's quality of life.

~~~
mpweiher
Yes, I think this was an ingenious move: find a situation that is somewhat
easier to deal with yet solves a real-world pain-point.

Almost an Apple move.

~~~
dfrey
An Apple move would be building a car without windows and telling me that it's
progress.

------
linsomniac
This press release, when you read the details, is not very impressive.

The headline sounds good, but the details are that it only works on highways,
up to 38MPH, and won't be enabled right away; they are going to roll it out
later. The one notable thing seems to be that you can be stuck in traffic and
take your hands off the wheel, unlike Tesla where you have to have your hands
on the wheel.

I'm not sure how they call this "first", since it won't be on new cars
released next year, until after some future software update, how is this
different from Tesla that is already shipping cars that can do this and more
with a software update?

Full disclosure: in Dec I sold my Audi A8 to get a Model S.

Currently, the Model S can basically drive itself in heavy traffic, but it
will periodically want your hand(s) on the wheel. I recently was in stop and
go traffic on a 2 lane road for an hour and the Tesla did great. The A8 won't
be able to there, it won't work on anything but a divided highway which this
was not.

Don't get me wrong, I've had 5 Audis over the years and have loved them. But
this really isn't "news", Audi is still playing catch up.

Oh, and from the testing I've done this winter, the Tesla AWD system is at
least as good as quattro. Probably better.

~~~
rsync
"This press release, when you read the details, is not very impressive."

This press release, like all high end / performance car press releases of the
last 2-3 years, can be summed up as:

"blah blah, not electric, blah blah"

Like you, I am an ex-A8 owner who loved ( _loved!_ ) those cars and have no
interest in buying another one - no matter how nice or feature filled or well-
designed they are. There's no way they don't know this and it becomes more and
more stupefying that they cede this highest-of-margins segment to Tesla.

"Oh, and from the testing I've done this winter, the Tesla AWD system is at
least as good as quattro. Probably better."

Exactly - it has _two motors_.

My disappointment is wide and deep as the major manufacturers continue to
refuse to make a modern car. However it is Audi and Volvo in particular whose
inaction is truly mind-blowing. Audi because they could continue to own
AWD/4WD and volvo because their target market is ripe for the aesthetic and
social benefits of electric cars.

Instead, Audi has spent ten years going down the "in 2-3 years we'll have an
electric platform" and volvo has committed to a shitty-hybrids-with-lawnmower-
engines-inside platform for the next 8-10 years.

~~~
t0mbstone
The reason they have to cede to Tesla is because of battery supply. There's a
reason why Tesla invested in a huge battery factory and established contracts
with a lot of providers so they could churn out the batteries cheaply.

~~~
Gravityloss
Daimler has built and is building large battery factories. Posts about those
don't get upvoted on HN. In the least it's best to see how this forum is a
very partial / biased view of the industry.

------
dosshell
I just want to say congratulations to all of the engineers behind it who are
reading this thread! Im impressed!

Often when I see a big project come to an end I can not stop thinking about
all the hours work put into something which didn't made it to the end.
Features they had to abandon or wait with until next revision.

Im very curious how good it will work and will try to get the hands on it as
quickly as possible. :)

------
neilwilson
Level 3: the "you need to stay awake even though you have absolutely nothing
to do" mode.

Probably going to turn out to be the most dangerous.

I am planning on dying in my sleep, but not because a Level 3 autonomous car
decided to throw a "Can't handle reality" exception.

(This somewhat tongue in cheek response should in no way be read as
denigrating the awesome technical achievement Level 3 represents. All speed to
Level 4 and Level 5)

~~~
tim333
Not sure with the Audi but Volvo's level 3 is being build to pull over and
park if you are asleep when it wants to stop driving so not that dangerous.

~~~
Ambroos
My Audi A3 has traffic jam assist and can drive itself in traffic jams as
well. Above 20km/h it'll require steering input every ~12 seconds, but not
below. When it does not receive steering input it'll turn on the hazard lights
and slowly come to a stop without leaving the lane it's in.

Sensors: all-around ultrasonic, 1 monochrome camera, 1 front radar.

------
metaphor
In case anyone one else was wondering what these "levels of autonomy" that the
article's author so haphazardly assumed was general knowledge, see SAE
J3016A[1], which is free to download with a registered SAE account...or your
favorite unofficial method.

Table 2 on p. 19 of the 30-page recommendation is a nice TL;DR summary.

Which begs the question...what part of Tesla Autopilot doesn't satisfy the SAE
definition?

[1]
[http://standards.sae.org/j3016_201609/](http://standards.sae.org/j3016_201609/)

~~~
JumpCrisscross
I found the Consumer Reports version easier to read, if at the cost of
precision.

[http://www.consumerreports.org/autonomous-driving/levels-
of-...](http://www.consumerreports.org/autonomous-driving/levels-of-car-
automation/)

~~~
cmarschner
Summary:

\- level 2: "hands off"

\- level 3: "eyes off"

\- level 4: "mind off"

~~~
jimmcslim
I remember reading recently that we should probably be avoiding level 3 in
production altogether (and possibly even level 2), since the general populace
doesn't have the capacity for responding quickly to failures in automatic
guidance systems; unlike perhaps aircraft pilots who are intimately aware of
the limitations of the systems.

~~~
skgoa
But that argument ignores that these systems help stop accidents from
happening 99% of the time and focuses only on the 1% when they fail. (numbers
are made up) Automation has lead to accidents in aviation as well. But it's
still being pushed forward, because when looking at total miles traveled, more
automation tends to be significantly safer. The same principle holds true for
ground vehicles.

~~~
CamperBob2
Driving is _infinitely_ harder than flying, from the perspective of a truly
autonomous system. Once at altitude, there isn't much to run into. There are
also very few possible emergencies that demand the pilot's attention within
the next few seconds. Midair collisions are about the only exception I can
think of, and there are already automated systems in place to prevent those.
Bird strikes might be another, but those don't tend to coincide with periods
of autopilot usage.

For a motor vehicle, though, the idea that "eyes off" and "mind off" should
exist as separate levels of autonomy is just nuts. "Eyes off" will absolutely
be interpreted as "mind off" by the majority of real-world drivers. It doesn't
make sense to offer an "eyes off" solution at all, IMHO. Wait until we can
genuinely call it a "mind off" solution.

~~~
stubish
eyes off means a driver is available. Its perfectly reasonable to cope with a
problem by slowing down, pulling over and asking the driver for help. This is
a choice that aircraft autopilots don't get to make. I agree that eyes off
should not involve sounding an alarm and make the distracted driver take over
in an instant at highway speed, and any solution that did that would be really
dangerous.

mind off would need to cope with there being no capable driver or even any
occupants at all. And even those systems will need to phone for roadside
assist sometimes.

~~~
mannykannot
I think that is level 4 you are describing as "eyes off", not level 3, at
least according to the Consumer Reports summary of the standard:

"The car can drive itself, but the human driver must still pay attention and
take over _at any time_. The car is _supposed_ to notify its driver if
intervention is needed." [my emphasis.]

Pulling over or shutting down appears under level 4.

------
Frogolocalypse
Its looking more and more like I'm going to get what i want. I'm almost 50 so
i could get a fully autonomous car before i can't drive. Won't that be awesome
though?

~~~
Broken_Hippo
I hope it is _much_ sooner than that!

~~~
kylegordon
I hope and expect it to be within the next 5 to 10 years, tbh.

~~~
oblio
It probably depends on your budget. For a $100k car? Could be. For a $20k car?
Now that's quite a challenge!

~~~
Fricken
5 or 10 bucks. Pay per trip.

~~~
Broken_Hippo
I hope we get this sooner than the privately-owned self-driving cars. So long
as folks can buy monthly passes (or give poor folks the passes at free and/or
reduced rates), I think this has the potential to greatly improve lives.

~~~
maxerickson
Municipalities that run demand response bus services will be quick adopters.

One of their big costs is drivers, so they tend to use a few medium sized
vehicles. No drivers, they move to smaller vehicles and deploy more of them
(they probably even shift their level of service up, because why not).

------
skoocda
What I find even more exciting is that they're finally deploying their
predictive suspension technology in a production model.

What this system does is utilize the front cameras to scan and map the road
surface ahead. It can then apply up to 20 kN of force via electric motors to
raise or lower the wheels individually. This mitigates bumps from potholes or
uneven roads, which, apart from being more comfortable, will also ensure the
suspension lasts longer. This system also decreases body roll during turns,
and squat / dive under accel / decel. All of it is powered by the 48V semi-
hybrid electric system. Expect this to become much more commonplace with
further electrification.

Mercedes has a similar technology called Magic Body Control, but it can only
tighten or loosen the dampeners, rather than directly move the wheels. What
the Audi system can do, which the Merc cannot, is to raise the side of the car
during an impending t-bone collision, which allows the main body structure to
take the impact instead of the doors.

~~~
mercer
The impeding t-bone collision thing sounds fascinating. Do you by any chance
have any links with more details on that?

------
skywhopper
At this point this is vaporware. The car is still nearly a year away from
being on sale, and the software will come even later. Talking up something
like this so far ahead is just an attempt to depress sales for its
competition.

Calling it "level 3 autonomy" is misleading as well, given how highly
constrained the situations are in which it can operate at level 3. From what I
can tell from the press release, it only promises that the car can handle a
freeway traffic-jam situation, ie, it knows how to stay in a lane and not hit
anyone when traffic is crawling on a freeway.

Admittedly such a system would be nice for millions of people who commute
through such conditions daily, but that is probably one of the easiest tasks
for an autonomous system to perform because huge amounts of complexity can be
ignored: pedestrians, cyclists, intersections, road hazards, trip routing.
This is a baby step taken at the edge of a huge chasm. Good luck!

~~~
t0mbstone
My 2015 Hyundai Genesis can already do exactly that. It has automatic cruise
control with lane keep assist. Sure, it beeps at me if I leave my hands off
the wheel for more than 10 seconds, but if you disabled that in the firmware,
it would technically work.

------
andmarios
In an advert I saw yesterday, this car also features wireless charging,
through a charging plate installed on the ground.

I know the HN crowd is very pro-Tesla but do not underestimate traditional
car-makers.

~~~
zwily
Wireless charging for what? It's not EV, it's a hybrid. And not a plugin-
hybrid, from what I can tell.

~~~
andmarios
Charging is optional but supported.

Random video of A8 wireless charging:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ME8nFtbTH44](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ME8nFtbTH44)

------
Lio
I must have missed something in the text but doesn't the current production VW
Golf (part of the same company as Audi) also feature traffic jam assist and
lane assist?

I think it uses RADAR instead of LIDAR but I don't know for sure.

Could any explain what the new A8 is offering in addition to the Golf?

------
fernly
In a "level 3" system, how does it know the destination? I suppose, you have
to put it in as with a normal GPS first? Then, what does it do at the point
the GPS would say, "your destination is ahead on the right, the route guidance
is now finished"?

~~~
patd
My VW's onboard GPS (same group as Audi) actually says "you have reached your
destination" when passing in front of the destination.

But I suppose it will probably start scanning the road for parking spots like
in the auto park feature that exists for years like in this demo from a few
years ago:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vt20UnkmkLI](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vt20UnkmkLI)

------
jimmcslim
There seems to be a fairly big caveat in that "the A8 is capable of driving
all by itself at speeds of up to 37 mph.".

And also:

"The traffic jam pilot only works on highways with a physical barrier
separating oncoming traffic."

~~~
moomin
So, not in London where it would be useful...

~~~
rkangel
I don't know. I've spent a load of time stuck in traffic on the North Circular
where there are barriers a lot of the way. But then there are junctions with
traffic lights quite regularly I suppose.

~~~
moomin
Actually yeah, the north circular qualifies. The south circular? Nope.

------
saturdaysaint
I find comparison tests, like this one from last year, far more useful than
marketing or discussion of "levels":
[http://www.caranddriver.com/features/semi-autonomous-cars-
co...](http://www.caranddriver.com/features/semi-autonomous-cars-compared-
tesla-vs-bmw-mercedes-and-infiniti-feature). tl;dr: Tesla's autopilot was
substantially better than BMW, Infiniti, and Mercedes.

------
martinmusio7
I did not expect Audi to be at the forefront of autonomous cars! But what do
these level exactly mean? 'Level 3' and 'level 4 by 2020'

~~~
suprfnk
[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autonomous_car#Classificatio...](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autonomous_car#Classification)

------
throwaway2016a
Sounds like a feature my Volvo XC-90 already has. Up to 35 MPH it can follow
traffic in a traffic jam. If it gets confused it beeps and tells me I need to
steer. I use it all the time, I love it! And it's a 1 year old car. I can only
imagine what Volvo will have once the new Audi comes out.

And I'm saying that as an Audi fan. My other car is an A4.

------
WhiteSource1
I know the article mentioned NVIDIA GPUs but who are their partners? Is this
developed by Mobileye?

~~~
Ambroos
According to an Audi video on the new A8, this is the computing hardware
inside: [https://i.imgur.com/euwi7eZ.png](https://i.imgur.com/euwi7eZ.png)

In short: \- MobilEye EyeQ3 \- Nvidia K1 \- an Altera Cyclone FPGA \- an
Infineon Aurix microcontroller

Each is used for a few different functions.

~~~
WhiteSource1
Thanks.

Impressive specs. And it looks like Mobileeye is inside every self driving car
I've seen.

------
iplaw
The new A8 looks quite a bit like the new Lincoln Continental. If you
integrated the door handles on the A8 with the window trim, it'd be hard to
distinguish between the two cars from an appreciable distance - at least the
rear, profile, and 3/4 views. The rear light arrangement, the integrated dual
exhaust ports, the silver trim character lines, even the A/B/C columns.

A8: [https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/1--
FKfJ3y71OTTYIz91rno4mYNs=...](https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/1--
FKfJ3y71OTTYIz91rno4mYNs=/800x0/filters:no_upscale\(\)/cdn.vox-
cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/8832289/A178299_large.jpg)

Continental: [https://www.cstatic-
images.com/stock/1170x1170/99/img-122263...](https://www.cstatic-
images.com/stock/1170x1170/99/img-1222639871-1488390548499.jpg)

------
doener
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14748510](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14748510)

------
yalogin
But a Model S does all of this already. What makes this “far ahead” of a
Tesla? Is it that I do t have to keep my hands on the steering wheel?

~~~
zwily
That's right - requiring you to keep your hands on the wheel makes the Tesla
not level 3.

------
jsolson
The system as described is considerably weaker than what my _previous
generation_ Model S actually _does_. On a highway with a barrier and traffic I
can basically leave autopilot engaged indefinitely without having to correct
it. Perhaps Audi handles a wider variety of weather conditions?

~~~
Animats
That's the Tesla "self-crashing car" feature. Watch these videos.[1] Teslas
will run into a clearly visible obstacle partially obstructing the lane. Tesla
is a level 2 system with inadequate safety interlocks and crappy obstacle
detection.

[1] [http://autoweek.com/article/autonomous-cars/tesla-model-s-
au...](http://autoweek.com/article/autonomous-cars/tesla-model-s-autopilot-
strikes-again-dallas-crash)

~~~
ClassyJacket
Do you have statistics that per kilometre it makes stupid mistakes more than a
human driver?

Lots of human caused accidents were driving into obvious things too. I don't
drive drunk or sleepy, so maybe I'm above average, but my only standard for
safety for a self driving car is that it's safer than me driving.

~~~
gambiting
It's absolutely irrelevant if it crashes "less" than a human driver. It just
cannot fail to detect an obstacle in front of it to be allowed on the road,
period. If there is any edge case where that can happen, then the car
shouldn't be certified as safe to use. Like, I don't understand how it's not
obvious. A heart surgery machine that kills the patient every once in a 1000
operations would be taken off the market faster than you can say "litigation",
even if a human surgeon has a worse survival rate(say 1 in 100 operations, so
lets say the machine is an order of magnitude safer). That has already
happened with radiotheraphy machines, there was a model that _on average_
definitely saved lives but it had a failure mode where it would kill a person.
Would you continue using it? Of course not.

Or airplanes - autopilot in planes has contributed tremendously to improving
flying safety, but every time there is a crash under autopilot both Boeing and
Airbus will ground every single plane of the same type to figure out the
cause, they don't just go "oh well, it's still safer than flying manually so
it's good for us".

I really don't understand this notion that an autonomous car merely needs to
be "better than average driver" to be allowed on the road. Absolutely disagree
here.

~~~
Tade0
Here's a justification for you: It's impossible to get a failure rate of 0, so
there has to be a point where we get a satisfactory(for now) level of safety.

Traffic kills so many people annually, that even a slight increase in safety
is going to save more lives that are lost to aircraft accidents, radiotheraphy
machine failure and such.

~~~
gambiting
Of course, and I acknowledge that accidents will happen anyway. But we cannot
have a car that is on the road with "autonomous" driving functionality when it
is _known_ that the sensors can't detect an obstacle above half-pillar
height(like in that famous tesla crash), or that the lane detection can fail
in intense sunlight(like dozens of videos on Youtube show). It should have no
known failure states upon release, and then ones which are found should be
fixed later. I'm just worried that we're in such a rush to release autonomous
cars on the road that we are ignoring known issues for the sake of improving
average safety on the road - literally no other industry works like this.

~~~
Silhouette
Isn't your argument why we have the saying that "the best is the enemy of the
good"? You seem to be dismissing any automated product that is not perfect
even if it is demonstrably already much safer overall than the manual human
equivalent. Surely this can't be the right policy if the goal is to maximise
safety.

This is not to say that current autonomous vehicles actually are much safer
than the human equivalent. Indeed, everything I've seen so far suggests that
they have a long way to go before crossing that threshold, so personally I'm a
sceptic about claims that we will see viable fully autonomous vehicles any
time in the next few years. But this doesn't seem to be your argument here.

~~~
mercer
> Isn't your argument why we have the saying that "the best is the enemy of
> the good"?

Regardless of the OP's position on this, I do think the reality is that in
practice it's difficult to sell or legalize anything that isn't
_significantly_ better than 'the average driver'. Whether it makes sense or
not, we seem to demand any 'AI-powered' system to be better than the average
human. I personally wish this wasn't the case, but it appears to be so.

For example, I personally marvel at the abilities of Siri and Google Now, at
the very least when it comes to understanding what I'm saying. It's quite
possible, in fact, that both are often objectively better at understanding me
than most people around me: more than once I said something to Siri where I
immediately realized that it was mumbly enough for any real human in my
vicinity to ask 'what?' (often only to right away act on what I said,
indicating that they did manage to interpret what I'd said). And yet Siri or
Google Now actually transcribed what I'd said.

Being as good as the people around me would not be good enough, because every
time Siri fails it makes me shake my fist at the whole concept of 'personal
assistants' on my iDevices, rather than sigh at the umpteenth person around me
saying 'what?' and then obviously acting on what I'd said, which is much more
common.

I've not studied this properly, so I might be wrong. But I get the impression
that I hold my AI to a much higher standard than I would my human
interactions.

------
omarforgotpwd
37mph? Sounds like they're way behind what I've seen a Model S do.

~~~
skgoa
This article is about a traffic jam assist that is robust enough that the
driver doesn't need to pay attention at all. The Tesla S can't do this. Audi
have lane keep and ACC as well, just like Tesla, but that's not what we are
discussing here.

~~~
zwily
Below 37MPH, I actually trust Tesla's AP (v1) a ton. At slow speeds, it
doesn't nag you about putting your hands on the wheel very often either. I
still pay attention (no phone reading, etc), but I've never had to take over
control at low speeds.

------
shimon_e
Should people still to learn to drive today?

~~~
yorwba
I have never learned to drive and I don't plan to learn it anytime soon,
unless I move to somewhere with abysmal public transport for some reason.

Of course it all depends on your personal mobility habits and where you live,
but in many big cities, you can absolutely get by without ever sitting in a
car.

~~~
monk_e_boy
Driving is fun. You should give it a go. The sense of freedom is amazing.

~~~
dsfyu404ed
Yeah, my car doesn't charge me surge pricing. I never have to stand in the
rain waiting for it to show up. I can set the HVAC controls the way I want.
The mechanic doesn't take my money up front and bleed it away for boondoggle
politically motivated projects then ask me to pay more to do the work I
already paid him for.

For day to day commuting public transit can be less stressful but for going
where you want when you want it's hard to beat a car.

~~~
icebraining
This is a perspective from a very specific environment. If you live in a dense
city, chances are you won't get to keep your car near you house or the other
places you're going to, so you'll have to walk in the rain to and from it.
Plus, European gas prices feel like surge pricing every day :|

~~~
dsfyu404ed
I live and work in a city in the Northeast US. The number of easily accessible
parking spaces to me is less than the number of vehicles and people who need
to use them in my household. It's no different than college where parking is a
"long enough to be annoying in the winter" walk away.

I generally walk anywhere under two miles and avoid driving between 7am and
7pm. Having a means of transportation under my personal control readily
available to me is well worth it. Tonight I'm going to go meet someone selling
something on Craigslist. It's about the size of a milk crate and weighs >50lb.
I could carry it on the subway and do it for free (monthly pass).

Next week I have to get a coffee table. Sure, I could buy one online but I
think buying a used high quality one for cheap/free on CL or from a thrift
store and having the ability to get precise measurements in advance

I could take an Uber or taxi but it only takes a few Ubers a week to be more
expensive than owning a car (if you own it outright).

If your life involves doing anything more than being a worker bee who goes
lives by a schedule and pays someone else for assistance with transportation
outside that scope then having your own means of transportation is invaluable
in terms of convenience and possibly cheaper.

~~~
icebraining
I agree about owning one's own means of transportation, that's why I have a
bike :)

------
grecy
> _first production car to reach Level 3 autonomy_

> _when it goes on sale next year_

> _The traffic jam pilot only works on highways with a physical barrier
> separating oncoming traffic_

> _Audi says it is rolling out this feature “gradually,”_

I applaud the development and effort, though I have had enough of people
claiming to be first at things that are not yet possible to buy and use.

------
kirillzubovsky
Tesla fanboy here. It's a little silly to say "Our car is level 3 autonomy,
but only when it comes to market sometimes next year." By then Tesla could be
level 3 autonomy, as all that's required to achieve that is for Elon to push
some software updates and voila, the car is now smarter than ever. Being
capable of something in theory doesn't make it a practical statement, imo.

~~~
gamblor956
Teslas do not have the required hardware to reach Level 3 autonomy unless
they've been secretly including LIDAR in all of their vehicles.

~~~
crush-n-spread
Humans can drive perfectly fine with just two cameras and mirrors, I'm sure
it's possible with Tesla's standard 8 cameras and neural net software.

~~~
pacaro
Humans can drive perfectly well with monocular vision. Plenty of people either
only have one eye, or don't integrate 3D for some reason.

The variance on human driving ability is higher than we would accept from a
machine, but I have two friends who don't have stereoscopic vision, and I
trust both of them to drive me

