Apple Cancels Self-Driving Vehicle Testing Permit in California After Abandoning Car Project

[breenmask]

No, waymo is way ahead of Tesla.

It's not.

Look at the availability. Being first to driverless of <0.00001% of all roads does not make you closer to level 5 autonomy.

Elon doesn't understand metaphysics and thinks of the self in terms of cause and effect which is self-refuting since the self assumes free will. He believes given enough data, something like human consciousness and intelligence can arise, eliminating the need for all these sensors since humans just need eyes and a mind to drive. He's never heard about the hard problem of consciousness and is basically a materialist and interprets data through this paradigm. Extrapolating from that he believes consciousness arose after organisms after 'evolving' gain enough data that gave rise to consciousness. This is the problem with that, meaning is not inherent in matter. It is a mental category we attach to the external world, similar to how cause is something we attach to ball a hitting ball b and 'causing' ball b to move, but cause isn't in the sense data, we apply cause that event in the mind. So data in of itself is meaningless without consciousness already there. So essentially he thinks meaning and consciousness arose from non-meaning. This is a contradiction. AI will always be something that is deterministic and moves according to an algorithm and its code. It cannot replicate the human mind as humans are essentially spiritual. If you deny humans are spiritual then by definition we are material objects that move according to cause and effect, which would make knowledge impossible, since justified true belief assumes our ability to freely weigh evidence. What elon presented will not at all be ready in 2 years. This is just a show and he is still holding out hope just given enough data his AI system will have human level cognition. Even Waymo knows they are no where near level 5 autonomy and need background remote control in case, and this is with all their sensors and everything.

Largely disagreed. You don't need consciousness to drive a car safer than a human and Elon isn't saying enough data will give birth to consciousness.

 

[svish]

Not surprised to hear this. Was not expecting to see an Apple Car

 

[burgman]

Except he's not an innovator, he just had enough money to make some lucky buys. And with an attitude more like Henry Ford.

One lucky ok I’d agree, Starlink, SpaceX, The Boring Company, Neurolink weren’t purchased. Also Henry Ford invented mass production of cars. So applies to Tesla but nothing else. Sad he’s unmasked as a character out of 007 movie or Austin Powers. What he is doing in Texas is early 1900’s company town building without the smokestacks.

 

[burgman]

It's not.

Look at the availability. Being first to driverless of <0.00001% of all roads does not make you closer to level 5 autonomy.



Largely disagreed. You don't need consciousness to drive a car safer than a human and Elon isn't saying enough data will give birth to consciousness.

Having media circus event on a movie set doesn’t either. Look up how they did it not close to prime time on streets

 

[CrysisDeu]

I think the long-term vision of light and average-looking glasses with augmented reality is still very interesting. If you think about a spectrum that goes from glasses to headset, I'm still not sure why Apple went all the way to the headset side. The only reasons I can think of are:

1. It's still going to take many years to get to glasses, and they didn't want to stay out of the game in terms of hype, which could also explain why they packed crazy technology in the Vision Pro, almost as a show-off.
2. A lot of the technology in the Vision Pro will evolve and be included in the glasses (no idea what, as I'm not an engineer)

Meta, with Orion, really showed something very interesting, and they also say it's at least 3 years from being sold as a product.

But the problem is Meta is more likely to be successful in AR compared to Apple for one reason:
The founder is the ceo of the company

 

[nostradumbass]

Just buy Tesla Apple. Elon is a jerk anyway.

It's only worth 10% of current value. US lets fraud go on too long before it falls over like Enron.

 

[9081094]

Apple was NEVER going to build a car.

I've been saying that for what feels like a decade at this point. It was somebody's pet project that was NEVER going to be a product.

A very expensive pet project that absorbed a lot of the R&D budget. Imagine what could have done with the money if Apple spent those on iPhone, Mac, Apple Watch, iPad and their software…

 

[ennisw]

It's quite weird that a lot of phone companies began working on vehicles manufaction since 2018.

 

[aknabi]

You're right! This is something that people miss about AI-anything - it all lacks human intuition. That's not something that as far as we know can be calculated or simulated.

We'll have to wait for the LBM... Large Bozo Model Classifier... that can take the motion/text/images from someone and classify them as a bozo... and determine the appropriate anti-bozo response.

 

[nutritious]

It's not.

Look at the availability. Being first to driverless of <0.00001% of all roads does not make you closer to level 5 autonomy.



Largely disagreed. You don't need consciousness to drive a car safer than a human and Elon isn't saying enough data will give birth to consciousness.

No he does think that. I've heard him say that's how he think human consciousness came to be and I think he's applying that thinking to the progress of how he thinks AI will play out.

Good reading here: https://cleantechnica.com/2024/02/29/tesla-is-way-behind-waymo-reader-comment/amp/

 

[breenmask]

No he does think that. I've heard him say that's how he think human consciousness

show me link on where he thinks enough data would breed consciousness specifically for Tesla FSD

Good reading here: https://cleantechnica.com/2024/02/29/tesla-is-way-behind-waymo-reader-comment/amp/

who is Charlie Doyle? a random reader comment?

not a good read.

 

[nutritious]

show me link on where he thinks enough data would breed consciousness specifically for Tesla FSD



who is Charlie Doyle? a random reader comment?

not a good read.

I am not going to engage with you too much because you haven't actually engaged with my original post in any kind of real way because it went over your head and it would go over Elon's head, too, and it would go over the heads of many AI researchers to be honest because we've divorced classical metaphysics from our liberal education, which is making us poor thinkers.

Watch his 2018 interview with Joe Rogan, he discussed AI and its potential to replicate human cognition. Musk talked about how neural networks work and how, in his view, the brain can be modeled as a complex system of neurons firing in response to inputs, suggesting that such systems could potentially be replicated in machines. neural networks in the context of artificial intelligence are indeed data driven systems. I never said he said that FSD is meant to be a conscious system. Read what I said again, I said he is interpreting the way AI will progress through a faulty paradigm.

My point to you is evidences and theories don't arise in a neutral fashion. They get formed through conceptual frameworks and ways of thinking and my point is Elon has a faulty conceptual framework for mapping out the progress of AI.

Let me explain something to you. In order to use reason in a proper way, it needs to be oriented toward is what good. Inherently interest in what what is good will require humility. Many times people surrender their intellect to their emotions and have their emotions guide their intellect. There needs to be a harmony. What you said about the article would be a genetic fallacy. Your rebuttal is a fallacy. Why are you engaging in fallacies? Probably because you've had a **** education (I would argue even ivy league schools offer **** educations) and you surrender your intellect to the emotions of wanting to be right.

Here's an even better article for you will make it even more crystal clear:

Elon Musk wants to dominate robotaxis—first he needs to catch up to Waymo

I talked to Dmitri Dolgov, co-CEO of Waymo.

www.understandingai.org

 

[djgamble]

Just buy Tesla Apple. Elon is a jerk anyway.

I see this news from Apple as being an indication that:

- The autonomous driving tech is nowhere near being flawless.

- Tesla's already gobbled up all the overly generous government grants (2030's approaching too, so the whole 'carbon free by 2030' bus is running outta battery power).

- The market's already flooded by EV chancers and Lexus has a solid EV (as do true premium brands like BMW and established brands like Hyundai... before you go into all the Chinese ones which I have my suspicion are basically Teslas since that's where it makes all of its international models).

- Cook's not a visionary like Steve but he's a sharp operations manager who knows when to fold 'em. The ship's sailed. All worth exploring but the market's already too crowded. Time to move on...

 

[djgamble]

I think Apple acquiring Tesla was a major possibility in 2016-2018. When Tesla became consistently profitable and their stock price shot up 15x, that killed Apple's appetite to acquire them.

We all know that Elon's not the brain behind Tesla or its founder...right?

It was NEVER on the table as Elon's always been the money man behind Tesla, whose insanity forced the founders (who are also the visionaries that discovered the niche of selling sports EVs to rich people & engineered them) out.

Tesla was never for sale as its founders were unwillingly tied to an egotistic venture capitalist who wouldn't have agreed to any reasonable terms. Musk lucked upon these guys at a time when left-leaning US state governments were throwing billions at EV makers. After a million of other failed ventures (which generally ended in Musk being kicked off boards despite being the money guy), something finally stuck. Unfortunately Apple didn't buy the idea before Musk...

 

[mirisa]

Toyota: Electric vehicles are NOT safe, especially NOT self-driving.

Apple realized this too: Toyota were really right after all.

 

[Alameda]

Goes to show that even Apple can't pull such a monstrous project off with all their money. Shame, I was looking forward to a fresh design take on cars.

Anyway, Tesla will take over the rest.

Of course they could!
Look… Apple pulled off the iPhone against multiple billion dollar players who were firmly entrenched in the market.

I don’t know why they gave up. It’s not necessary to sell a car that drives itself; plenty of people are happy to drive and there’s plenty of innovation to offer besides the car driving itself.

 

[webkit]

We all know that Elon's not the brain behind Tesla or its founder...right?

Musk did not found the company but became CEO in 2008 and was extremely instrumental in the company's growth/expansion. Besides, it's not like EVs were a new idea in 2003 when Tesla Motors was founded.

It was NEVER on the table as Elon's always been the money man behind Tesla, whose insanity forced the founders (who are also the visionaries that discovered the niche of selling sports EVs to rich people & engineered them) out.

Tesla was never for sale as its founders were unwillingly tied to an egotistic venture capitalist who wouldn't have agreed to any reasonable terms. Musk lucked upon these guys at a time when left-leaning US state governments were throwing billions at EV makers. After a million of other failed ventures (which generally ended in Musk being kicked off boards despite being the money guy), something finally stuck. Unfortunately Apple didn't buy the idea before Musk...

When Tesla went public in 2010, any power the original co-founders or venture capitalists had regarding the sale of Tesla was notably diminished. By 2017, when Musk claims he approached Apple regarding a possible buyout of Tesla, most of the co-founders and original venture capitalists had divested a lot of their shares of Tesla. Musk and institutional investors like Vanguard were the major shareholders at that point. If Musk had been able to find a suitable buyer for Tesla, it would've sold. The problem in 2017 was not being able to potentially sell the company but rather dealing with the difficult financial situation at the time largely due to Model 3 production issues.

 

[ProbablyDylan]

Something I thought of while on the road getting breakfast today. What if Tim killed their car because he figured out that plenty of people like driving? I certainly do. I wouldn't buy a self driving car for that reason alone!

 

[webkit]

Something I thought of while on the road getting breakfast today. What if Tim killed their car because he figured out that plenty of people like driving? I certainly do. I wouldn't buy a self driving car for that reason alone!

That depends on what the plan was for "Apple Car." Was it going to be exclusively self-driving or was that just to be an optional feature? Even people who like driving may occasionally want to be able to turn on or activate self-driving.

 

[ChrisA]

Lidar prices have dropped significantly, 3d sensors are now in the hundreds, not tens of thousands. And visible light has SEVERE limitations that make cameras utterly unviable for self-driving as the only data acquisition option. We use it as human drivers because it's all we've got, there's no reason to handicap computers like that.

And Turdla isn't even using cheap radar sensors. That's a big part of why they're murdering motorcyclists. I know when I'm riding I now have to stay as far away from Turdlas as possible.

Yes, I know LIDAR prices have fallen. I own two lidar units and I paid something like $35 for each. The $400 units are better. but for car navigation, you need more range.

One thing that makes FSD easy is that we compare safety to human drivers. Humans are VERY bad at driving. Worldwide, human drivers kill about 1,000,000 people every year. They set the bar very low.

 

[Unami]

All other players in the market are headed towards extinction. Waymo too. Their only hope is to license FSD from Tesla.

Sorry, but it's just facts.

Sure, but not with a robotaxi only having two seats and FSD needing human intervention every 12 miles on average.

I like the design of the robotaxi and the bus - nice 30ies/60ies style - but two seats is a joke.

For sure, autonomous driving will eventually work and just need cameras. But other electric car manufacturers have already mostly cought up with Tesla or even deliver a better experience in some parts (better build quality, more hardware buttons, car play,...).

It's like with other hardware (smart watch, touchscreen phone, mp3 player) where Apple got into the game after the first or second wave of early-adopter companies. I wouldn't be surprised if Tesla went belly up before FSD becomes reliable enough and electric cars get cheap enough ($30k for a two seater is still way too much for a sustainable mass market - see electric vehicle sales stalling as the upper middle class or higher market becomes saturated)

 

[wigby]

You almost need a jerk leader to build revolutionary products - Elon alone has Tesla, spaceX and starlink. Then there’s Steve Jobs and Sam Altman for OpenAI as further examples. If you’re a “nice” leader that bows to public opinion you get today’s Google with Sundar Pichai, todays Apple with Tim Cook and the Chevy Blazer with Mary Barra. You must make your own decision if you want awesome products or pleasant CEOs

That theory has long been debunked. You're just looking at headlines. Headlines only write about jerks, not regular, successful CEOs, much less regular people.

 

[ChrisA]

Sure, but not with a robotaxi only having two seats and FSD needing human intervention every 12 miles on average.

I like the design of the robotaxi and the bus - nice 30ies/60ies style - but two seats is a joke.

For sure, autonomous driving will eventually work and just need cameras. But other electric car manufacturers have already mostly cought up with Tesla or even deliver a better experience in some parts (better build quality, more hardware buttons, car play,...).

It's like with other hardware (smart watch, touchscreen phone, mp3 player) where Apple got into the game after the first or second wave of early-adopter companies. I wouldn't be surprised if Tesla went belly up before FSD becomes reliable enough and electric cars get cheap enough ($30k for a two seater is still way too much for a sustainable mass market - see electric vehicle sales stalling as the upper middle class or higher market becomes saturated)

The median number of Uber passengers is 1.5

This means the majority of rides have less than 2 passengers. So the new Robotaxi should be able to handle MOST rides. I assume these cars will be owned by a taxi service. When you click the app for a ride the software SHOULD ask you for the number of people and amount of luggage if any and then select the proper size taxi for your needs. Sometimes the taxi service would send a Model Y, but most of the time a two seater would work.

Musk did say you will be able to buy this but he also talked about how wasteful private car ownership is because you only used the car a few dozen hours a week. I think these robotaxis are to be sold to fleet operators who if they are even a little bit smart will buy a mix of 2 and 5 seat cars and maybe even a few Robovans with 20 seats

The other option if you requested a ride for six people is to send three 2-seat cars. One hopes the software is good enough to somehow send enough seats, either a 2-seater for most rides or a 5-seater or maybe the 20-seat or some combination. But the vast majority of the rides will be for just one person.

OK, there is one more case. Zero passengers. Perhaps I want to deliver groceries? I can ask the car to go to the store and pick up the Walmart curb-side order and bring it home. No one needs to be in the car for that. The Walmart employee will put the order in the trunk or hatchback. (yes they do that for you)

Look at any road in your city and count the number of people in each car. The most common number is 1.

 

[oldwatery]

The whole EV market is crashing, the scam is about to catch up with everyone. There are some good reasons for EV such as city pollution but they’re are not net positive environmentally and not nearly as useful as an ICE vehicle. The battery fiasco is just about to truly start. They should go back to being a niche product without subsidies or quotas.

I agree. Electric vehicles are going to cause more damage to our already fragile world than any other system. We are being fed a lie. There are several far more safe, sustainable and less impactful ways of propulsion than this electric crap. As for Elon Musk….dont get me started!

 

[ChrisA]

I agree. Electric vehicles are going to cause more damage to our already fragile world than any other system. We are being fed a lie. There are several far more safe, sustainable and less impactful ways of propulsion than this electric crap. As for Elon Musk….dont get me started!

You will need so STRONG numbers to make that argument. Don't make up or repeat claims without showing your work. Yes, some anti-science nuts make claims about how batteries pollute the earth but, let's see the numbers over the 200,000 mile lifetime of the car. And be sure to take recycling of materials into account when you do the math.

Actually there are only practical two ways to move a car
(1) with a heat engine. this is how gas, diesel and steam engines work. In all cases a volume of gas is expanded inside a closed cylinder and a prison is moved
(2) with electric motors. But there are MANY ways to get the electric power. You can use batteries or a hydrogen fuel cell but either way, the car is electric, on-vehical generation such as solar or nuclear power doesn't work well for cars are cars are too small.

So unless you want to burn some kind of fuel, "electric" is the only possible solution. The remaining question is only one: How to get the electric power. Today cars use batteries and trains use overhead electrified wires.

There simply is no other sustainable option to electric power.