Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I'm trying to figure out a way of saying this in the nicest way without sounding like a jerk, but I really think you need to not be close minded and do some research and see what the system is capable of. The drives do not need to be in specific locations or in ideal conditions. It's capable of making on-the-fly decisions in complex scenarios, even if it's not a situation the model has been explicitly trained for. In many, many cases it can see, react, and decide scenarios significantly further and faster than a human.

Again, there's a ton of work to be done, but this tech exists today and is improving rapidly.

I am fully aware of what the system is capable of, and it's an error to say it's "making decisions." It's incapable of making decisions, which is a huge problem when the end goal is autonomous driving. There are too many variables that require real-time decision making that this AI model will ALWAYS be unable to perform.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mescagnus
Well dealerships in the U.S. don't want any more electric cars on their lots because they aren't selling. The people have spoken. It's a no brainer.
I can confirm it’s the same deal in Canada.
Ford tried selling an electric truck which is now failing miserably, because people would buy it, discover it couldn’t pull a trailer 50 kilometres, and then return it.
 
They are worse for the environment in most of the world, the battery tech is not there yet.

Charging stations are few and far away around the globe. The energy grid is not able to sustain a full electric car transition in almost any country in the globe.

A more sustainable combustion fuel is the greener option. Like hydrogen for example.
EVs are not for everyone around the globe, yet, but, the battery tech is quite sufficient for most people (the majority drives far less than 200 miles per day).
I certainly know that there are plenty charging stations in California, and a lot in the rest of the US, and in Europe as well. it is a transition and it will further improve.
the grid is doing just fine, most charging happens overnight when the grid is not at peak use.
Sothern California is one of the markets that Toyota offered the Mirai, and Shell just announced that they are closing all of their hydrogen stations in CA. Hydrogen is good in general but no market for it.
 
What is the proportion? I doubt it's significant compared to the emissions from burning gasoline.


True, but the engines are so efficient that they are a net win even if the electricity comes from dirty sources. Reference: https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/driving-cleaner


With simpler engines and fewer moving parts, it is actually the opposite.
I think you need to do some research...

The particulate matter coming from breaks, tyres and other moving parts vastly outnumbers the particles coming from the simple burning of gasoline.

The idea is to remove the dirty sources that produce our electricity. What's the point of sticking with a dirty energy source if the population is ever increasing and more and more people have vehicles. You need to focus on renewable sustainable energy sources... not rely on fossil fuels and just say its lower relatively. Dirty energy needs to be got rid of completely.

They may have simpler engines but the electronics are way more complicated. Add the battery components, generally heavier build/design etc Only the engine has fewer moving parts... the rest of the car is mostly the same with regards to moving parts.. and there is a lot of moving parts on a car
 
  • Angry
Reactions: Victor Mortimer
Right it only took over a decade to realize they were in a sunk cost fallacy...

I'm not sure off-hand the entire (mostly rumor) history of this project. But in R&D timelines ten years doesn't seem entirely ridiculous for such a fast moving industry. But at this point, with seemingly nothing useful to show for it by now, yeah it's about time.
 
I think you need to do some research...

The particulate matter coming from breaks, tyres and other moving parts vastly outnumbers the particles coming from the simple burning of gasoline.

The idea is to remove the dirty sources that produce our electricity. What's the point of sticking with a dirty energy source if the population is ever increasing and more and more people have vehicles. You need to focus on renewable sustainable energy sources... not rely on fossil fuels and just say its lower relatively. Dirty energy needs to be got rid of completely.

They may have simpler engines but the electronics are way more complicated. Add the battery components, generally heavier build/design etc Only the engine has fewer moving parts... the rest of the car is mostly the same with regards to moving parts.. and there is a lot of moving parts on a car
It's not all about global warming (that's is a myth but you are not ready for this conversation)

Its about the people that mine and process the raw materials + the pollution of the old batteries, that can't be recycled
 
I really want to believe this isn’t a permanent shut-down. But if it is, my hope is that they continue to develop CarPlay, and then potentially buy a small or struggling auto company when the time is right, perhaps years down the road. (Pun semi-intended.) I think for them to ignore this for NOW is okay, but at some point I believe this is a market they should be in.

HOWEVER, if the idea is to get to serious work not just on AI, but on Apple robotics, and this is a pivot in that direction - that’s an undertaking of massive scale, and a more obvious, complimentary market for Apple - then I support the move. The car can wait until full self driving is genuinely viable, and it’s clear we are a way out on that still, regardless of what Elon would have everyone believe.
 
No rush at the moment. Apple is never first to market and there is a slowdown in EV market right now and into the foreseeable future. Should the market change, Apple can easily resume where it left off.
 
keep in mind that Tesla is at level 2, nothing more, and that still applies to FSD 12 ...
I don't understand people who say this. I know what you're literally saying, and what it means, but you (and others) say it as if it's a big important point.

Tesla hasn't yet enabled it to operate without a driver. That's literally a boolean - a single bit being flipped - away from being on. They haven't enabled it because the software isn't there yet. Nobody said it was. It is close though. Close enough that it could roll out today. Then they'd need to collect data for a few weeks/months to show regulators that a human driver isn't necessary, and maybe allowing humans to override it makes it more dangerous instead of safer.
 
The iPhone of EVs already exists: Tesla, and Tim Cook realized that. Whenever people say they want an EV, they actually mean a Tesla. This is why Ford, GM, Mercedes have all failed miserably in comparison. The only competition is with Chinese EV companies and that's only for their domestic market.
EVs need to get cheaper to become mass market and China + India are ready to flood the Western markets. Meanwhile, Governments are failing to regulate a standard and are slacking on the infrastructure in the hope that private businesses will do all the work.

I do see quite a few Teslas in the UK but they are very expensive and still a status symbol out of reach of the average worker's salary. The ICE used market is still very strong for this reason along with the mistrust of used EV batteries in the long term. The European vehicles are betting on Hybrid for now.

Apple is right to bail on a car project until the market fully switches to EV and all the kinks and standards are ironed out. That's if the Government doesn't price us mere mortals off the road before then.

As a petrol-head, I'm still hopeful for Hydrogen options as I don't want to be a slave to charging my car. Until then I'm sticking to petrol = Fill and go.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.