Even after $100B, self-driving cars are going nowhere
In the short run, technological progress is <i>much slower</i> than anyone hopes, but in the long run it is <i>much faster</i> than anyone expects.<p>My favorite example is that in 1987, the scientific consensus was that it would take &quot;at least 100 years&quot; and likely much longer to sequence the entire human gnome.[a] But the vast majority of it was sequenced by 2000, only 13 years later. Moreover, just two decades later, anyone could get their genome checked for known markers for pocket change by companies like 23andMe, founded in 2006.<p>Having some expertise and interest in AI, I regularly watch presentations by all companies working on self-driving and also look at the videos posted by beta testers online. While it&#x27;s fun to watch the failures, I&#x27;m more interested in judging whether the technology is continuing to improve.<p>My perceptions contradict this article: (1) The technology is progressing <i>faster</i> than is generally recognized, with vehicles getting progressively better at dealing with edge cases and handling failures gracefully. (2) Judging by the videos I&#x27;ve watched online, Tesla is significantly ahead of everyone else.<p>Prediction: Before the end of the decade, this article will seem... short-sighted.<p>--<p>[a] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.nature.com&#x2F;scitable&#x2F;topicpage&#x2F;sequencing-human-genome-the-contributions-of-francis-686&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.nature.com&#x2F;scitable&#x2F;topicpage&#x2F;sequencing-human-g...</a><p>--<p>EDIT: I edited my statement about 23andMe based on sausagefeet&#x27;s comment below.