this post was submitted on 05 Nov 2023
187 points (90.5% liked)

Technology

59292 readers
4160 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 73 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

At first I was thinking, a bit of human supervision could not be too bad. And then I got to the part where they said 1.5 workers per vehicle. My maths may be off, but to me that sounds like 0.5 more than is necessary to drive a normal vehicle.

Theranos? Maybe, but at that point, I'd compare it to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mechanical_Turk too.

[–] [email protected] 39 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

When I worked at Waymo, we had a ratio of about 10 cars to 1 remote human. I dunno if Cruise is being over-protective, if their tech is just that bad that they need more people than cars, or if the number is just incorrect.

Either way, it hardly matters. It's not like these things are commercially available for a long time yet, anyway. In the testing stages - which Cruise 100% is still in - you definitely want a sturdy team of humans capable of intervening for safety reasons.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

If the cars are running all day long it might make sense to need another human to pick up later shifts. Still though, that ratio is way too high to be economical.