It is clear that GM's automatic driving technology is too poor to be called automatic driving as ``human intervention is performed every time the car travels a few kilometers''
In October 2023, American automaker
GM's Cruise Moved Fast in the Driverless Race. It Got Ugly. - The New York Times
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/03/technology/cruise-general-motors-self-driving-cars.html
Could Cruise be the Theranos of AI? And is there a dark secret at the core of the entire driverless car industry?
https://garymarcus.substack.com/p/could-cruise-be-the-theranos-of-ai
Regarding Cruise Automation (currently GM Cruise), which is rumored to have been acquired by GM for $1 billion (approximately 150 billion yen) in 2016, The New York Times reports that many people are actually looking forward to GM Cruise's self-driving technology. It was reported that the technology is far from being able to do that.
Regarding this report, roboticist Rodney Brooks said, ``A report in The New York Times has reported something that was previously unknown about GM Cruise's self-driving technology.According to this report, GM It is said that remote human intervention occurs every 2.5 to 5 miles (approximately 4 to 8 km) in Cruise's self-driving vehicle.If this is true, it is a spectacular deception.GM Cruise's self-driving vehicle is not self-driving. It's not like the car was autonomous,'' he said, noting that there was too much human operator intervention to call it autonomous.
According to reports, each vehicle equipped with GM Cruise's self-driving technology was supported by 1.5 staff members. Another source said, ``GM Cruise's self-driving technology definitely relies on remote human intervention,'' making GM Cruise's self-driving AI seem better than it actually is. It is revealed that there is intervention by a human operator in order to make it appear.
However, it is unclear what is actually being done with this 'intervention by a human operator.' Although GM Cruise's self-driving vehicles operate without any problems without operator intervention, it is unclear whether GM is using operator intervention for over-protection, or whether it is at a level where it cannot run properly without operator intervention. not clear. Therefore, it has been pointed out that it is necessary to clarify ``what the operator is doing with the intervention.''
Gary Marcus, a computer scientist, said: ``I don't really know, but I have a feeling that if we leave this kind of technology alone, all hell will break loose. We found that very little was revealed about how companies using remote operators were using remote operators.Are GM Cruise, as well as other self-driving technology developers, overly reliant on operators? , we don't know anything about what the operator is doing or whether the vehicle will function properly without operator intervention.'' Little information is disclosed about operator intervention in self-driving technology. was considered a problem.
Cruise Origin, an autonomous vehicle jointly developed by GM, GM Cruise, and Honda
In addition, there have been voices of skepticism about the self-driving vehicles developed by GM and GM Cruise for some time. According to a report from CNBC, GM Cruise's self-driving vehicles have been operating in San Francisco since August 2023, but the vehicles have not crashed into firefighting scenes, blocked the passage of ambulances, or entered crime scenes. This seems to have caused multiple problems. San Francisco Fire Department Chief Janine Nicholson said, ``(GM Cruise self-driving vehicles) have caused over 75 incidents.It's like playing Russian roulette, so in the interest of public safety, self-driving We need to fix the vehicle,'' and San Francisco lawyer David Chiu also pointed out, ``There are some issues that need to be resolved.'' In response to these issues, the California Department of Transportation has suspended GM Cruise's driverless vehicle operation permit in October 2023.
Why San Francisco's robotaxi rollout has been such a mess
https://www.cnbc.com/2023/11/04/why-san-franciscos-robotaxi-rollout-has-been-such-a-mess.html
On the overseas bulletin board Hacker News, a person who said, ``I have ridden in GM Cruise's self-driving taxi many times that was provided free of charge in San Francisco'' wrote, I am writing about my experiences.
I took a bunch of Cruise rides in SF when it was free, and I think I know what w... | Hacker News
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38147144
According to this person, GM Cruise's self-driving taxis are clearly running automatically, but they often get confused by the surrounding environment and get stuck.
For example, if a self-driving taxi is trying to turn right and a van sticks out slightly from the corner, the vehicle will become stranded. This apparently happens because GM Cruise's self-driving taxis are not programmed to travel farther out on the road and are not allowed to turn if they cannot see around a corner. .
In fact, when encountering a situation like this, it seems that he called GM Cruise support, but it seems that the support did not notice that the problem had occurred until he called. In addition, since we had the above hypothesis as to why the self-driving taxi would not turn corners, we suggested to support that we 'move the car forward little by little,' but the operator backed the vehicle a few meters and then stopped the self-driving taxi. It seems that the operator did not try to solve the problem by driving himself.
In the end, the operator apparently tried the same action (backward) at least three times before accepting the proposal to 'move the vehicle forward.' After that, when the self-driving taxi moved forward a little, it became possible to see what was around the corner, and it was clear that the vehicle started automatically. So this user said, ``This is not about a remote operator controlling the vehicle, it's just that there are frequent incidents where the remote operator has to intervene when the vehicle stops.'' I think so,'' he said, expressing his opinion.
Related Posts:
