澳洲7人自驾选什么车_自驾车在哪里

澳洲7人自驾选什么车

Tech giants and automakers were falling over each other to announce their self-driving vehicle plans a few years back. All of the FAANG (Facebook, Amazon, Apple, Netflix, and Google (now Alphabet)) minus Netflix, were interested in self-driving cars. As if to not leave Netflix behind, Volvo announced plans to have Netflix in driverless cars. Investors were giddy with possible returns. Social media was buzzing with astonishing claims. Startups sprouted all over the world touting various benefits of an unproven tech. Nearly all of them envisioned driverless cars plying streets by 2020. Uber and Lyft were (and still are) banking on self-driving taxis to finally see a profit.

技术巨头和汽车制造商相互争夺，宣布了几年前的自动驾驶汽车计划。 减去Netflix的所有FAANG( Facebook ， Amazon ， Apple ，Netflix， Google和Google (现为Alphabet))都对自动驾驶汽车感兴趣。 好像不让Netflix落后一样， 沃尔沃宣布了将Netflix应用于无人驾驶汽车的计划 。 投资者对可能的回报感到头晕。 社交媒体充斥着惊人的说法。 新兴公司遍布世界各地，吹捧未经证实的技术带来的各种好处。 他们几乎都设想到2020年无人驾驶汽车在街道上行驶 。 Uber和Lyft曾经(现在)仍在依靠自动驾驶出租车谋取利润。

10 million self-driving cars will be on the road by 2020 — Business Insider headline in 2016

到2020年，将有1000万辆自动驾驶汽车上路- 2016年《 商业内幕》标题

Well, it’s 2020 and no actual driverless car, taxi, or truck is on the road. To be fair, driver-assist tech has advanced. Adaptive cruise control, lane control, collision alert, and Tesla’s autopilot can ensure smooth sailing on the highway. Yet, true autonomous, the one where the car drives itself without a human intervening is not here except in test vehicles. This flies in the face of all the furor of a few years back. Investors are cautious, startups are going belly up, and companies are scaling back ambition.

好吧，这是2020年，道路上没有实际的无人驾驶汽车，出租车或卡车。 公平地说， 驾驶员辅助技术已经发展。 自适应巡航控制，车道控制，碰撞预警和特斯拉的自动驾驶仪可以确保在高速公路上的顺畅航行。 然而，真正的自动驾驶汽车只有在没有测试人员干预的情况下才能自动驾驶。 面对几年前的种种风潮，这是不切实际的。 投资者持谨慎态度， 初创公司将破产 ，公司正在缩减雄心。

So, what happened? What hurdles did the driverless car hit? And, is there any hope? Or was it another case of overhype and low returns?

所以发生了什么事？ 无人驾驶汽车遇到了哪些障碍？ 而且，有没有希望？ 还是另一种过度炒作和低回报的情况？

不同类型的无人驾驶技术 (The different types of driverless tech)

Driverless, self-driving, or autonomous all refer to a vehicle that is smart enough to drive from one point to another without human assistance. They are classified into six levels from the manual (Level 0) to full automation (Level 5).

无人驾驶，自动驾驶或自动驾驶汽车均指的是足够智能的车辆， 无需人工协助即可从一个点行驶到另一个点 。 从手册(级别0)到全自动(级别5)，它们分为六个级别。

A driverless vehicle can be designed in two ways. One is a de novo driverless vehicle—designed from grounds up with the intention of being autonomous. The other is a set of tech to be mounted on a regular vehicle to make it autonomous. The former is more capital intensive. But, it may make sense because the car is designed with the purpose of it being driverless. The vast majority of companies are targeting the latter segment. It makes sense why. The upfront investment is less, time to experimentation is short and once the tech is ready it can be attached to any vehicle (in theory) making it more viable. This includes Waymo, Uber, Lyft, GM’s Cruise, Apple, etc. Cruise has also built its own model of a driverless car with no steering.

无人驾驶车辆可以以两种方式设计。 一种是从头开始设计的旨在实现自主的无人驾驶汽车。 另一种是一套技术，可以安装在常规车辆上以使其具有自主性。 前者是资本密集型的​​。 但是，这可能是有道理的，因为汽车的设计目的是使其无人驾驶。 绝大多数公司都将目标锁定在后者。 这是有道理的。 前期投资少，试验时间短，一旦技术就绪，它就可以连接到任何车辆上(理论上)，使其更具可行性。 其中包括Waymo，Uber，Lyft，通用汽车的Cruise，苹果等。Cruise还建立了自己的无转向无人驾驶汽车模型。

演示地址

延误的原因 (The cause of delays)

Autonomous cars work on a simple principle — take information from surrounding and make judgment calls — something human drivers do all the time. The problem is putting it into reality. A driverless car would use cameras and radar tech to take in info, then decide what to do based on hard-wired code. Machine learning trains the car on millions of miles of data. Using this plus knowledge of traffic rules, the car should make proper driving decisions. And herein lies the problem, to collect the driving data, an imperfect machine has to be on the road. This puts other pedestrians and vehicles in a training exercise they did not agree to.

自动驾驶汽车的工作原理很简单-从周围环境获取信息并做出判断电话-人类驾驶员一直在做的事情。 问题在于将其变为现实。 无人驾驶汽车将使用摄像头和雷达技术来获取信息，然后根据硬编码确定要做什么。 机器学习使汽车可以驾驭数百万英里的数据。 利用这些知识以及交通规则知识，汽车应该做出适当的驾驶决策。 问题在于，要收集行驶数据，不完善的机器必须在路上。 这使其他行人和车辆接受了他们不同意的训练。

An alternative is training simulations. So, engineers develop various models for the car to train on. Do they work as well as real-life learning? Not quite. Driving a car involves a lot of everyday communication — eye contact, or waving someone to cross the road even when the light is green. Also, it is hard to simulate rare traffic conditions like someone dashing across the street not at a crosswalk, or for sudden weather issues.

另一种方法是训练模拟。 因此， 工程师为汽车开发了各种模型来进行训练。 它们是否像现实生活一样工作？ 不完全的。 驾驶汽车涉及很多日常交流-眼神交流，或挥手横过马路，即使灯是绿色的。 此外，很难模拟罕见的交通状况，例如有人在人行横道上冲过马路或突然出现的天气问题。

演示地址

Driverless cars have been marred by accidents. The most noticeable one was by an experimental Uber vehicle that ran over a pedestrian walking across the street with a bike. The vehicle also had a human behind the wheel. Investigations into the mishap identified numerous issues at the tech level as well as human error. Uber halted their trials to fix the flaws. Accidents have also occurred with Tesla Autopilot. A lot of them have to do with the drivers. Tesla Autopilot is not autonomous and requires the driver to be attentive much like another driver-assist tech. Not doing so can be fatal.

无人驾驶汽车因事故而损坏。 最引人注目的是一辆实验性的Uber车辆，它骑着自行车在行人横穿马路时撞过。 车辆的后方还有人。 对事故的调查发现了技术层面的许多问题以及人为错误。 优步停止了修复缺陷的试验。 特斯拉自动驾驶仪也发生了事故。 其中很多与驱动程序有关。 Tesla Autopilot并非自动驾驶，需要驾驶员像其他驾驶员辅助技术一样细心。 否则可能会致命。

Uber had “inadequate safety culture, exhibited by a lack of risk assessment mechanisms, of oversight of vehicle operators, and of personnel with backgrounds in safety management” — NTSB report on 2017 Uber crash

Uber“缺乏适当的安全文化，表现为缺乏风险评估机制，对车辆操作员以及具有安全管理背景的人员进行监督” — NTSB关于2017年Uber撞车的报告

COVID-19 has added further delays to autonomous car development. Social distancing rules made work hard at offices or in test cars, where 2 drivers are mandated. Shipment delays of necessary equipment didn’t help either. Investment in this tech may also dry out with the delays in development. At this rate, one wonder is we should we write driverless tech off? And is there any real-world benefit of having this tech anyway?

COVID-19增加了自动驾驶汽车开发的进一步延迟 。 社会上的疏远规则使办公室或试驾车(要求两名驾驶员)的工作变得非常困难。 必要设备的装运延误也无济于事。 随着开发的延迟，对该技术的投资也可能枯竭 。 以这种速度，一个奇迹是我们应该取消无人驾驶技术吗？ 不管怎么说，拥有这项技术有任何现实世界的好处吗？

无人驾驶技术案例 (The case for driverless tech)

Proponents of driverless tech often tout the tech as safer and greener than human driving. The safety of driverless cars remains to be seen. On the face of it, autonomous cars won’t be drunk, napping, or texting when driving. On the other hand, a true Level 5 autonomous car is still a work in progress. Likewise, the idea that self-driving cars may reduce car ownership or driving may not be true. An increase in tech efficiency is often offset by expanded use. One study showed that given the option of a simulated self-driven car (a chauffeur), families made more trips. Car ownership is another facet. The onset of ride-sharing apps hasn’t reduced car ownership. Although, this may change when autonomous cars are introduced.

无人驾驶技术的支持者常常吹捧该技术比人类驾驶更安全，更环保 。 无人驾驶汽车的安全性还有待观察。 从表面上看，自动驾驶汽车在驾驶时不会醉酒，小睡或发短信。 另一方面，真正的5级自动驾驶汽车仍在开发中。 同样， 自动驾驶汽车可能会减少汽车拥有量或驾驶的想法可能也不正确。 技术效率的提高通常被扩大使用范围所抵消。 一项研究表明，由于可以选择模拟自动驾驶汽车(专职司机)，家庭出行次数更多 。 拥有汽车是另一个方面。 拼车应用的出现并没有减少汽车的拥有量 。 虽然，当引入自动驾驶汽车时，这可能会改变。

Grendelkhan, Wikipedia Wikipedia. Grendelkhan提供 。

So while driverless car’s environmental benefits and safety are debatable, there are tangible benefits. These cars are great for the elderly, the long commuter, and the disabled. Ridesharing companies are banking on this tech to make profits. The trucking industry can also benefit from automation. The first company to break through the driverless tech would reap riches for their investors and owners alike. Innovations in the driverless tech can also distill to other nascent tech areas. But, then again, all this only happens when the tech is available for consumers.

因此，尽管无人驾驶汽车的环境效益和安全性值得商,，但仍有明显的好处 。 这些汽车非常适合老年人，长途通勤和残疾人士使用。 拼车公司利用这项技术赚钱。 货运业也可以从自动化中受益。 第一家突破无人驾驶技术的公司将为其投资者和所有者带来财富。 无人驾驶技术的创新也可以提炼到其他新兴技术领域。 但话又说回来，只有当技术可供消费者使用时，所有这些事情才会发生。

到目前为止的进展 (The progress so far)

The autonomous driving industry uses two benchmarks to measure progress — total miles driven and manual override per 1000 miles (also referred to as disengagement rate). The former is a proxy for the driving data accumulated that trains the model. The latter measures how good autonomous driving is. If an autonomous vehicle needs regular interruption by humans to avoid traffic incidences, it is not very safe (or very autonomous).

自动驾驶行业使用两个基准来衡量进度-行驶总里程和每1000英里的手动超驰 (也称为脱离速度)。 前者是用于训练模型的累积驾驶数据的代理。 后者衡量自动驾驶的性能。 如果自动驾驶车辆需要人为打扰以免发生交通事故，那么它不是很安全(或非常自动驾驶)。

At 100% interruptions, the car is basically driven by humans. So, the higher the total miles is and the lower the manual overrides are, the more autonomous a car is. But, not all miles are the same. Driving in rural areas or highways is not the same as crowded cities. So, both benchmarks could be gamed by driving a car on a closed course, not crowded freeways, or deserted rural roads.

在100％的干扰下，汽车基本上是由人驾驶的。 因此，总英里数越高，手动倍率越低，汽车的自主性就越高。 但是，并非所有里程都是相同的。 在农村地区或高速公路上驾驶与拥挤的城市不同。 因此， 可以通过在封闭道路上驾驶汽车，而不是拥挤的高速公路或空旷的乡村道路来达到两个基准。

Data on the benchmarks are hard to find because only California mandates their reporting. Companies dislike California’s mandate. Their argument is the benchmarks are not an accurate measure. One can always game the system by driving around on a less traversed roads. The benchmarks also put the companies in a bad light if their data is not good. Regardless, one thing is true that these metrics are not good for intercompany comparison.

基准数据很难找到，因为只有加利福尼亚州才要求其报告。 公司不喜欢加利福尼亚的命令 。 他们的论点是基准不是精确的度量。 人们总是可以通过在较少经过的道路上行驶来对系统进行游戏。 如果数据不佳，基准测试也会使两家公司陷入困境。 无论如何，有一点是真实的 ，这些指标不利于公司间的比较。

“Comparing disengagement rates between companies is worse than meaningless: It creates perverse incentives….If I wanted to look even better, I’d do a ton of easy freeway miles in California and do my real testing anywhere else” — Bryant Walker Smith, Associate Professor, USC School of Law and an expert in self-driving cars

“比较公司之间的互动率比没有意义的糟糕得多：它会产生不正当的激励……如果我想变得更好，我会在加利福尼亚州进行大量轻松的高速公路行驶，并在其他任何地方进行真正的测试。” – Bryant Walker Smith，南加州大学法学院副教授，自动驾驶汽车专家

Alphabet’s Waymo and GM’s Cruise have impressive data on the metrics available. They clocked close to a million miles in 2019 in CA and had less than 0.1 disengagement rate per 1000 miles. Yet, one cannot base this meager and easy to game data to predict which company would win the autonomous race, if any.

Alphabet的Waymo和GM的Cruise拥有可用指标的令人印象深刻的数据。 他们在2019年在加利福尼亚州行驶了近一百万英里 ，每1000英里的脱离接触率不到0.1 。 但是，人们无法根据这种微薄而容易的游戏数据来预测哪家公司将赢得自动竞赛。

那是什么意思呢？ (So what does it all mean?)

In a nutshell, we won’t get a self-driving car this year. We may not get it in the next few years. But, we are probably closer to getting one than ever before.

简而言之，今年我们不会有自动驾驶汽车。 未来几年我们可能无法实现。 但是，我们可能比以往任何时候都更接近获得一个。

We are closer than ever to an autonomous car, and yet so far!

我们比自动驾驶汽车更近了，但是到目前为止！

We may never get a true Level 5 autonomous car. Instead, the driver-assist tech would become sufficiently advanced to navigate the highways on its own with little intervention. Road tech may also develop to guide the cars. We have made significant progress from the initial frenzy days. In the end, the initial frenzy can after all be the churn of industry. Excitement is followed by better sense and then real progress.

我们可能永远不会获得真正的5级自动驾驶汽车。 取而代之的是，驾驶员辅助技术将变得足够先进，可以在很少干预的情况下自行通过高速公路。 道路技术也可能发展为引导汽车。 从最初的疯狂时期开始，我们已经取得了重大进展。 最后，最初的狂潮终究会成为行业的动荡。 兴奋之后是更好的感觉，然后才是真正的进步。

翻译自: https://medium.com/predict/where-are-the-self-driving-cars-b5124e3da293

澳洲7人自驾选什么车