34 comments

  • Animats 39 minutes ago

    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.

    • drob518 17 minutes 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.

    • amluto 7 minutes ago

      By a water sensor do you mean a sensor to detect the water level relative to the chassis? It seems like a very inexpensive downward-facing ultrasound sensor could work.

    • wombat-man 30 minutes 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?

      • tintor 22 minutes 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.

        • dietr1ch 8 minutes ago

          But are they not continuously updating the road database with their fleet?

      • kpw94 18 minutes 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.

      • AnimalMuppet 27 minutes 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 17 minutes 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).

    • OptionOfT 21 minutes ago

      Doesn't Land Rover historically have like a wading sensor?

    • mmooss 8 minutes ago

      > frequently

      I've never made that mistake; I'm not aware of anyone I know doing it. I very rarely see it myself, except on news footage. Of course it happens some time somewhere but that says nothing about frequency.

      > That's a tough problem

      Not really. Don't drive where you don't know it's safe. Definitely don't drive into moving water - puddles only, and only if not too deep: I can usually figure it out based on the rest of the road - unless it's a sinkhole, the geometry is somewhat consistent - and especially by looking at objects in the water such as other cars driving through it. Sorry your friend isn't competent to figure it out.

      People here are always quick to defend the autonomous cars, like a close friend. How often will we fall in love with a technology or company? It always distorts the truth.

  • moribvndvs 7 minutes ago

    Waymo: *locks doors, chorus to Floods by Pantera starts playing, guns it into the water*

    “Wash away maaaaan, take him with the floooood”

  • xnx 30 minutes ago

    "recall" = applies software update

  • srameshc 31 minutes ago

    Does anyone with a better understanding about LIDAR vs camera approach to autonomous drivng explain how would Tesla handle such situation ?

    • xnx 28 minutes ago

      Waymo has LIDAR and cameras, so it is better equipped for every situation.

    • tintor 27 minutes ago

      LIDAR isn't helpful for water. Standing water behaves like a mirror on LIDAR.

      • amluto 5 minutes ago

        If the LIDAR can sense the road close enough to the front of the car, then it could estimate how far underwater the car is.

      • throwway120385 21 minutes 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.

  • steele 9 minutes ago

    Go fish

  • gib444 34 minutes 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 31 minutes ago

    What is a recall in this case? Is them getting a software update a recall now?

    • superfrank 22 minutes 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

    • svachalek 27 minutes ago

      I think so. For some kind of legalese reasons that's generally what a Tesla "recall" amounts to these days.

    • SpicyLemonZest 19 minutes 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.

  • Desafinado 30 minutes ago

    FFS, can we just go back to talking to each other in person and driving our own vehicles? Where'd the 90s go?

    • cryo32 7 minutes ago

      Or invest in public transport instead

    • vachina 16 minutes ago

      If the car drives itself we will have more time to talk to each other in person.

    • superfrank 20 minutes ago

      > can we just go back to talking to each other in person

      He posts on an internet message board

    • Analemma_ 28 minutes 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 24 minutes 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.

        • flextheruler 8 minutes ago

          Tesla cars are not capable of driving autonomously according to the company and regulators.

        • mikem170 15 minutes ago

          If self-driving is better, then presumably cheaper insurance costs would be an incentive.