waymo and-cruise-dominated-autonomous-testing-in-california-in-the-first-year-of-the-pandemic

Waymo and Cruise dominated autonomous testing in California in the first year of the pandemic

Unsurprisingly, there was much less autonomous vehicle testing in California in 2020 compared to years prior. The COVID-19 pandemic and ensuing lockdowns forced many AVs off the road in the early part of the year. But companies licensed to operate AVs on public roads in California still logged nearly 2 million miles of testing, with two of the top operators, Waymo and Cruise, comprising the bulk of those miles thanks to what some safety drivers allege was a lax attitude toward safety.

Autonomous vehicles registered in California traveled approximately 1.99 million miles in autonomous mode on public roads in 2020, a decrease of about 800,000 miles from the previous year, according to the state’s Department of Motor Vehicles. These mileage figures were reported as part of the state’s annual “disengagement reports,” which all licensed operators are required to submit. In addition to the miles driven, the reports list the frequency at which human safety drivers were forced to take control of their autonomous vehicles (also known as a “disengagement”).

The disengagement reports are widely disparaged as being, at best, meaningless and, at worse, misleading. Companies have a lot of discretion about when to disengage, the testing environments aren’t uniform, and it’s difficult to make an apples-to-apples comparison between companies. Media outlets tend to overhype the numbers in service of a false “race” narrative in which certain companies are outpacing others in miles driven and disengagements.

But this year, the reports can still serve as a time capsule of a year upended by the coronavirus pandemic. Waymo, for example, generally considered to be the leading autonomous vehicle operator in the world, only drove 628,838 miles, a 56-percent decrease compared to the 1.45 million miles it drove in 2019. That decrease is notable considering Waymo was recently approved to begin accepting passengers in its vehicles in preparation for the inevitable launch of a robotaxi service in California.

Waymo only reported 21 disengagements over the course of the year, or a rate of 0.033 disengagements per 1,000 miles. That’s an improvement over the company’s rate of 0.076 per 1,000 self-driven miles in 2019.

Cruise, a wholly owned subsidiary of General Motors and Waymo’s main rival, is also prepping to launch a similar service in the state. And interestingly enough, its mileage number remained more or less the same last year as compared to 2019. The company reported driving 770,049 miles, a 7-percent decrease over 2019. It logged 26 disengagements during the year for a rate of 0.033 per 1,000 miles, improving on its 2019 rate of 0.082.

The total miles driven by Waymo and Cruise, 1.39 million, is 70 percent of the total autonomous miles driven in California in 2020. Both companies briefly grounded their vehicles in the early months of the pandemic, but Cruise was back on the road by late April, using deliveries to local food banks as a pretext. Waymo followed suit, resuming limited operations in June delivering packages for two Bay Area nonprofits. Over the summer, as COVID-19 cases in California were peaking, both companies resumed regular operations. Only when the air quality became very poor during the summer’s historic wildfires did Waymo and Cruise pull their vehicles from the road — and only briefly.

This was a worrisome decision for many of the companies’ backup drivers. Waymo and Cruise contract the labor of thousands of operational staff in the Bay Area, including backup drivers, mechanics, cleaners, and fleet managers. Backup drivers, in particular, play a crucial role: they monitor the driving operations of the self-driving car and occasionally take control when something goes wrong.

Some backup drivers were glad to be back at work. But others raised concerns about being stuck in a vehicle for hours a day with another person without the ability to socially distance. They chafed at being asked to come back to work while the salaried employees in the engineering and software divisions of these companies got to continue to work from home.

Waymo and Cruise both insist that safety, including the safety of their contract workers, is a top concern. But several drivers have accused the companies of exploiting loopholes to get cars back on the road in defiance of local public health orders. Cruise, in particular, was criticized for deploying non-delivery vehicles despite public health orders banning regular autonomous vehicle testing. Cruise said the extra vehicles were needed for R&D support for the delivery operation.

Waymo and Cruise weren’t alone in racking up big mileage numbers during the pandemic. Pony.ai, a self-driving startup based in Silicon Valley and Guangzhou, China, reported driving 225,496 miles in autonomous mode. And Zoox, an autonomous vehicle company recently acquired by Amazon, drove 102,521 miles.

Apple, which has been working on its own secretive car project for years, reported driving 18,805 miles, more than doubling its mileage in 2019. The tech giant also reported 130 disengagements, up from 64 the previous year.

facebook-is-reportedly-working-on-a-clubhouse-copy

Facebook is reportedly working on a Clubhouse copy

Facebook, a company known for ripping its ideas from competitors, has reportedly set its sights on social audio. The New York Times reports today that the company is working on a copycat of Clubhouse, the buzzy invite-only social audio startup. The Times reports the product is in the “early stages of development,” so it’s unclear if and when it might launch.

The news comes only five days after CEO Mark Zuckerberg joined Clubhouse and participated in a room to talk about the future of augmented and virtual reality. His presence on the app was shocking, given it’s a new social network, so the fact that Facebook might now be cloning Clubhouse is no surprise. The company has already done so with multiple other apps, including, most infamously, Stories, which it took from Snapchat, and Reels, its TikTok competitor that launched last year.

Twitter is also working on a Clubhouse competitor called Spaces, which is in beta at the moment. Its team acquired social podcasting company Breaker, seemingly for its expertise in social audio, to help beef up its efforts. Meanwhile, Mark Cuban is also at work on a live audio app called Fireside, which The Verge reported on earlier this week. Clearly, lots of people in tech think audio will be an important format for communicating in the future, and they’re rapidly trying to get in on it before the trend dies out.

toyota-teams-up-with-aurora-and-denso-on-robotaxi-development

Toyota teams up with Aurora and Denso on robotaxi development

It’s 2021 and we’re still finding unique ways to pair up to develop self-driving cars. The latest is between Toyota, AV startup Aurora, and auto part supplier Denso. The three companies will join forces to develop a fleet of robotaxis, with the first hitting the road by the end of this year.

It’s a big get for Aurora, the scrappy AV startup founded by Chris Urmson, the former head engineer of Google’s self-driving car project, among others. Toyota, which outsold Volkswagen in 2020 to reclaim its status as the biggest automaker in the world, is one of the few car companies that has yet to pair up with an autonomous vehicle startup. Denso, which spun out of Toyota in the mid-20th century, is one of the largest auto suppliers on the planet. So Aurora is now officially rolling with the big dogs.

The companies plan to develop and test driverless vehicles equipped with Aurora’s self-driving hardware and software stack, starting with the Toyota Sienna minivan. “By the end of 2021, we expect to have designed, built, and begun testing an initial fleet of these Siennas near our areas of development,” the companies said.

Once they finish testing, the companies will begin mass producing autonomous vehicles for a full-scale ride-hailing operation. According to Aurora:

It brings our companies together to lay the groundwork for the mass-production, launch, and support of these vehicles with Toyota on ride-hailing networks, including Uber’s, over the next few years. As part of this long-term effort, we’ll be exploring mass production of key autonomous driving components with Denso and a comprehensive services solution with Toyota for when these vehicles are deployed at scale, including financing, insurance, maintenance, and more.

Aurora recently grew its ranks of engineers after acquiring Uber’s self-driving car division late last year. The startup sent offer letters to about three-fourths of the ride-hailing company’s Advanced Technologies Group, which is based in Pittsburgh and Toronto, according to TechCrunch.

Toyota has largely kept its self-driving car tinkering quiet. The Japanese company has released some information about its test vehicles and the types of sensors it’s using, but we’ve seen very little of the cars in operation. Toyota was planning to offer a limited ride-hailing pilot in downtown Tokyo during the 2020 Summer Olympics, but that was delayed due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The automaker also recently invested $400 million in Pony.ai, a self-driving startup based in the US and China.

Toyota has developed a self-driving software called “Chauffeur,” which ironically was also the codename for Google’s self-driving project under Urmson. Toyota’s software is “focused on full autonomy, where the human is essentially removed from the driving equation, either completely in all environments, or within a restricted driving domain.” Toyota has a second product called “Guardian,” which is essentially an advanced driver-assist system akin to Tesla’s Autopilot. Neither is being offered in any production car today.

Toyota Research Institute, the automaker’s Silicon Valley-based division, has been conducting tests at its Ottawa Lake, Michigan, closed-course facility for a number of years. In 2018, Toyota agreed to invest $500 million in a joint self-driving project with Uber, but that investment is now moot as Aurora owns what’s left of Uber’s AV division.

linux-on-apple-m1-project-reveals-new-details-about-m1-system-architecture

Linux on Apple M1 Project Reveals New Details About M1 System Architecture

(Image credit: Apple)

Corellium, a software company specializing in virtualization solutions, has managed to port Linux to an Apple M1-based PC and even succeeded in making almost all the system peripherals work. In the process, Corellium discovered several interesting details about Apple’s M1 processor and the system architecture. 

A couple of weeks ago, we reported that a startup called Corellium had managed to run Linux on an Apple M1-based computer. Back then, the operating system ran, but it did not support many things, essentially making the PC unusable to a large degree. Recently the company finally managed to make most of the things (including Wi-Fi) work, which means that Linux can now be used on the latest Macs. But the whole project of running a non-Apple OS on such computers has an interesting side effect as it reveals how different Apple’s SoCs are compared to other Arm-based architectures.

Loads of Proprietary Technologies

It’s no secret that Apple has focused on building its own Arm-based microarchitectures to offer unbeatable performance with its iPhones and iPads for quite a while now. Unlike its rivals, the company did not throw in more cores, instead improving its cores’ single-core/single-thread performance. In addition to custom cores, Apple apparently uses a highly custom system architecture too, according to Corellium.

(Image credit: Apple)

When virtually all 64-bit Arm-based systems bootup, they call firmware through an interface called PSCI, but in the case of the M1, the CPU cores start at an address specified by an MMIO register and then start to run the kernel. Furthermore, Apple systems also use a proprietary Apple Interrupt Controller (AIC) that is not compatible with Arm’s standards. Meanwhile, the timer interrupts are connected to the FIQ, an obscure architectural feature primarily used on 32-bit Arm systems that is not compatible with Linux. 

To make various processors in an M1-powered PC interact with each other, the OS has to provide a set of inter-processor interrupts (IPIs). Previously IPIs were handled just like traditional IRQs using MMIO accesses to the AIC, but in the case of the M1, Apple uses processor core registers to dispatch and acknowledge IPIsas they rely on FIQs.  

Apple’s oddities do not end there. For example, Apple’s Wi-Fi/Bluetooth controller connects to the SoC using a non-standard PCIe-based protocol (which fortunately was supported by Corellium virtualization software). To make matters more complicated, Apple’s PCIe and the integrated Synopsys DWC3 USB controller use the company’s proprietary input–output memory management unit (IOMMU) called device address resolution table (DART). Furthermore, Apple’s I2C has a custom firmware that uses an exclusive protocol, which thwarted using the USB Type-A ports.

Complications

Using a proprietary system architecture is not something new for Apple, but it will make it much harder to port other operating systems to its platforms as well as running those OSes in virtualization mode. Recently a developer managed to make Microsoft’s upcoming Windows 10X run on an Apple M1-based system using QEMU virtualization, but this OS is not yet final, and it is unclear how stable it is. Furthermore, Windows 10X does not run Win32 apps, making it less valuable for some users. 

Running Windows 10 or Linux on an Apple Mac may not be crucially important for most Mac owners. But a complicated system architecture featuring multiple proprietary technologies will likely make it harder to develop certain kinds of software and hardware for Arm-based Macs.