I can hail a robotaxi. So can anyone living in San Francisco, Phoenix, Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou, Shenzhen, Chongqing or Wuhan. The barriers to wider rollout are political and regulatory, not technological.
Waymo cars, and I believe Apollo and Cruise as well, are “level 4” autonomous vehicles, i.e. there is no human involved in driving them whatsoever. There is a “human available to provide assistance” in roughly the same sense that a member of the American Automobile Association has an offsite human available to provide assistance in case of crashes, flat tires, etc.
I don’t see any reason to think AGI is imminent but this particular argument against it doesn’t go through. Robotaxi tech is very good and improving swiftly.
Cruise has remote human operators who intervene every 2.5 to 5 miles, according to a recent NYT article. Dunno about Waymo or Apollo. That does not sound like “roughly the same sense as AAA.”
Even Teslas still have human interventions in something like half of rides. (So, way better than Cruise but still far from good enough)
Kyle Vogt responded to the New York Times article. He claims 2.5 to 5 miles is the rate that Cruise vehicles request help from remote operators, not the rate that they actually get help. Vogt doesn’t say what the rate they actually get help is.
I’m a bit sus. If that number were so much better than the 2.5-5 miles number cited by the times, why wouldn’t he come out and say it?
I can hail a robotaxi. So can anyone living in San Francisco, Phoenix, Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou, Shenzhen, Chongqing or Wuhan. The barriers to wider rollout are political and regulatory, not technological.
Waymo cars, and I believe Apollo and Cruise as well, are “level 4” autonomous vehicles, i.e. there is no human involved in driving them whatsoever. There is a “human available to provide assistance” in roughly the same sense that a member of the American Automobile Association has an offsite human available to provide assistance in case of crashes, flat tires, etc.
I don’t see any reason to think AGI is imminent but this particular argument against it doesn’t go through. Robotaxi tech is very good and improving swiftly.
Cruise has remote human operators who intervene every 2.5 to 5 miles, according to a recent NYT article. Dunno about Waymo or Apollo. That does not sound like “roughly the same sense as AAA.”
Even Teslas still have human interventions in something like half of rides. (So, way better than Cruise but still far from good enough)
Kyle Vogt responded to the New York Times article. He claims 2.5 to 5 miles is the rate that Cruise vehicles request help from remote operators, not the rate that they actually get help. Vogt doesn’t say what the rate they actually get help is.
I’m a bit sus. If that number were so much better than the 2.5-5 miles number cited by the times, why wouldn’t he come out and say it?