|
|
|
|
|
|
by colinmorelli
402 days ago
|
|
|
The point is not that those things were meant when we said self driving cars. It's that, at every step along the way, there were a group of people who doubted that cars could do that thing, and then they did that thing. And then the thing we said they can't do changed to something else. Today, you absolutely can "get in a car, tell it where you want to go, and it goes there while you read a book" - it's literally what Waymo is and has been doing. And now we're saying it can't do it in Mumbai, so it's still not self-driving. At some point, the distinction seems pointless. We are undeniably continuing to make progress on the road to autonomous driving, and it does work in certain scenarios today. To suggest things are slowing down because we haven't met the most reason interpretation of the words is neither helpful nor correct. |
|
|
...Can you cite that?
> And then the thing we said they can't do changed to something else.
...And they were the same people?
> We are undeniably continuing to make progress
Where did anyone deny this?
> To suggest things are slowing down
Where did anyone make this argument?
The quote from TFA:
> but the hype has promised completely autonomous cars reliably zipping about in rush hour traffic.
The author did not restrict that to SF, and is presumably referring to "hype" that "promised" this globally.