That's a tough problem - distinguishing wet pavement from deep water.
Humans make that mistake frequently.
Autonomous vehicles should probably be equipped with a water sensor. (We did that in our DARPA Grand Challenge vehicle back in 2005). Then they can enter water very cautiously and see if it's too deep. This may make them too cautious about shallow puddles on roads, though.
wombat-man•20m ago
If they have a laser measurement of the road from before, couldn't they see that the level of water vs the expected road surface?
AnimalMuppet•17m ago
If they have a pre-existing database of every road, sure. And if it's kept up-to-date at all times in all vehicles.
mortenjorck•7m ago
Isn’t that the Waymo data model, though? They extensively pre-drive every new market, building dense volumetric maps of the entire service area before they begin service, so they essentially do have that database of every road (that they drive on).
tintor•12m ago
Such detailed database of fine grained road geometry gets stale very quickly, due to road maintenance and road construction. In US highway lanes are shifted sideways frequently.
kpw94•7m ago
That seems a very risky assumption for any car (self driving or human driver) during flash floods. "Turn around don't drown":
You think you know how deep it is under because you've taken that road many times before (or in your case you have historical laser measurement)
But you don't know:
- Maybe the road under fully collapsed
- Maybe the flow of water is extremely strong, so you need to accurately estimate that too.
OptionOfT•10m ago
Doesn't Land Rover historically have like a wading sensor?
drob518•7m ago
It’s a particularly hard problem in Texas. We get torrential rains and the landscape is relatively flat. Couple that with shallow soil over lots of limestone and it means flooding is really common. We also have roads that have a “low water crossing,” where a road crosses a creekbed that is normally dry but which will flood. There are often water depth signs there (basically a vertical ruler with feet marks so you can see where the water is up to). We lose people to this scenario (driving into flood waters) every year. It’s particularly problematic when it’s dark and you miss a warning sign. Before you know it, you’re in deep water and the flow can sweep the whole car downstream until it gets pinned against a tree, possibly with water forcing its way into the car.
gib444•23m ago
This is ok though because humans drive into flood waters too.
Look, you can't make progress without getting your feet wet and then diving straight into the deep end.
bethekidyouwant•20m ago
What is a recall in this case? Is them getting a software update a recall now?
svachalek•16m ago
I think so. For some kind of legalese reasons that's generally what a Tesla "recall" amounts to these days.
superfrank•12m ago
They suspended service areas they deem high risk until the software update can be applied. So while, yes, it's just a software update, it's a recall in the sense that they've temporarily pulled all the cars off the road in certain areas
SpicyLemonZest•8m ago
Yes, this is a common terminology issue. "Recall" is legally defined in terms of the kind of problems that require one, not the solution to those problems, because the relevant regulations were written when there was no way to fix consumer products other than physically delivering them to the manufacturer or an authorized repair person.
srameshc•20m ago
Does anyone with a better understanding about LIDAR vs camera approach to autonomous drivng explain how would Tesla handle such situation ?
xnx•18m ago
Waymo has LIDAR and cameras, so it is better equipped for every situation.
LIDAR isn't helpful for water. Standing water behaves like a mirror on LIDAR.
throwway120385•11m ago
Could you use a different spectrum of EM radiation to detect water? There are parts of the microwave band that attenuate the signal by absorption and I wonder if you could use that. The only clue a human driver has in that situation is in the visible spectrum. The lines of the road disappear from view, which can be challenging to see at night.
Desafinado•20m ago
FFS, can we just go back to talking to each other in person and driving our own vehicles? Where'd the 90s go?
Analemma_•17m ago
Just this morning I was almost killed twice on my bike ride to work by two separate drivers, one of whom looked to be 80 and could barely see over the dashboard, and one who was on their phone. I didn’t even bother trying to remember the plate numbers, knowing that the odds of any kind of consequences are absolute zero.
No, we can’t go back to driving our own vehicles. Waymo everywhere and human driving outlawed, ASAP.
qwerpy•13m ago
Agree. Multiple people I know have bought Teslas because they don’t trust themselves or their spouses to drive safely, and want them to use FSD. There should be incentives to get people onto self driving.
mikem170•5m ago
If self-driving is better, then presumably cheaper insurance costs would be an incentive.
superfrank•9m ago
> can we just go back to talking to each other in person
He posts on an internet message board
vachina•6m ago
If the car drives itself we will have more time to talk to each other in person.
Animats•28m ago
wombat-man•20m ago
AnimalMuppet•17m ago
mortenjorck•7m ago
tintor•12m ago
kpw94•7m ago
You think you know how deep it is under because you've taken that road many times before (or in your case you have historical laser measurement)
But you don't know:
- Maybe the road under fully collapsed
- Maybe the flow of water is extremely strong, so you need to accurately estimate that too.
OptionOfT•10m ago
drob518•7m ago