Gary Marcus

Rank 14 of 47
|
Score 83
6/21/2025, 12:03:48 AM
X
In reply to:
Tesla addict
@truth_zeeker
·
210d
@GaryMarcus @fchollet Because the very initial cautious rollout strategy is similar doesn't mean the trajectory will be the same.
The underlying architecture is different, the derived constraints different, and the data available for Tesla to scale to other geofenced areas is orders of magnitude
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
210d
@truth_zeeker @fchollet well this is six years, but i will start. an announcement from Waymo in 2019 that looks a lot like what Tesla just rolled out: https://waymo.com/blog/2019/12/w…
Tesla addict
@truth_zeeker
·
210d
@GaryMarcus @fchollet It's amazing how you guys are able to draw definitive conclusions without even having a few months of their robotaxis in service to look back and extrapolate scaling trends.
A first deployment obviously has to be extremely cautious for the unknown unknowns.
I'd be curious by
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
210d
@fchollet the rollout is pitiful and doesn’t speak strongly against your take.

i was shocked Tesla didn’t fall on that news.
François Chollet
@fchollet
·
210d
@GaryMarcus The cars will keep 2 full-time employees busy for each ride: the remote safety driver, and the safety monitor in the car. That's less autonomous than a regular taxi.

Waymo is ~5 years ahead and the gap is increasing with each passing month.
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
211d
10 geofenced cars with remote operators, a decade after Elon first promised miracles.

Waymo has more cities than Tesla has robotaxis.

The statement critiques Tesla's delayed rollout of robotaxis and questions the relevance of their data and confidence in the technology. It engages in a technical discussion about autonomous vehicle deployment strategies.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not cause harm but raises concerns about Tesla's approach, which is a valid critique.
  2. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement does not promote understanding or empathy but focuses on technical and strategic aspects.
  3. Principle 4:
    I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
    The statement engages in constructive criticism without personal attacks, maintaining a focus on the technology and strategy. [+1]