7 ms·

Tesla sent out an email today. Autopilot Updates We just released the latest version of Autopilot. You can now experience Enhanced Autopilot features including

Tesla sent out an email today. Autopilot Updates We just released the latest version of Autopilot. You can now experience Enhanced Autopilot features including Traffic-Aware Cruise Control, Autosteer, Auto Lane Change, Parallel + Perpendicular Autopark, and Summon. Automatic Emergency Braking, Forward + Side Collision Warning, and more advanced safety features are also active and standard. All Tesla vehicles have the hardware needed for full self-driving capability at a safety level substantially greater than that of a human driver. And Tesla vehicles continue to improve with over-the-air software updates, introducing new features and improving existing functionality to make your vehicle safer and more capable over time.

mattybrennan 9y ago
All the necessary hardware? Do Teslas have lidar?
- throwaway-1209 9y ago
  Lidar is not "necessary" hardware. Humans drive just fine without lidar.
  - rpedela 9y ago
    The human visual cortex is still far more advanced than a computer's. Maybe that will change some day, but asking about non-camera sensing equipment is a reasonable question until it does.
    - throwaway-1209 9y ago
      Sure, and it's not only cortex. Humans also know a lot about the world, and can predict things much better. There are areas in which humans are limited, however, such as reaction time, spectral sensitivity, the fact that humans can only see well in the center of where they're looking at and fake the rest of their visual field, etc. It's not at all clear to me that a human pair of eyeballs is better than 8 high quality, wide spectrum cameras feeding into the system at once. That said, I think it's disingenuous of Tesla to call their system "autopilot" or imply autonomy of any kind when talking about their system. I will call something autopilot when it can drive me from door to door without me touching the wheel, in less than friendly weather conditions. Not drive in a straight line where it never rains.
      - rpedela 9y ago
        You can have a 1000 cameras and it still doesn't matter if you don't have a good computer to process the data. That is where machine learning, etc comes in. Machine learning is really starting to come into its own in last few years especially for image recognition but it still sucks compared to humans. That doesn't mean self-driving based on cameras isn't good enough but it needs to be proven and we aren't there yet.
        throwaway-1209 9y ago
        Dude, I work on high performance machine learning and machine vision 12 hours a day. You don't need to tell me it sucks, I know. But it's superhuman on some tasks already, and in a few short years, it'll be superhuman on a few more, and little by little it'll get there. All you get from that lidar is a depth map. You can do that without a lidar, using two or more cameras. If you also interpolate across a series of predictions, and have sensor fusion (which Tesla does, they also use radars and ultrasonic sensors) you can even make it robust. Truly, people who say it can't be done should not interrupt people who are doing it.
  - UnoriginalGuy 9y ago
    Humans have the computation equivalent of 38 petaflops of processing power. Does a Tesla vehicle? If you seriously want to play the inane game of "well if a human doesn't have it then a Tesla doesn't need it" then let's play that game and talk about the things humans have that the Tesla lacks. What's interesting about human's vision system is that the human eyeball is, relatively speaking, poor. We have digital cameras far better than that already. It is what the human brain that does with that raw data which makes us, as a species, thrive. Most of what we believe we "see" we never actually see, our brain fills in the gaps dynamically and infers information over time. So this human processing ability, much of it automated rather than conscious, is totally relevant if you want to have this "Tesla Vs. human" debate. It is also why Lidar might be needed to make up the massive shortfall in a Tesla's processing ability relative to the human brain. But hey, you want to keep to the "but HUMANS don't need it" then I ask where is my 38 petaflops and 1 TB of memory...
    - aidenn0 9y ago
      I'm curious where you get the number "38 petaflops" from.
      - CamperBob2 9y ago
        In the same sense that your dog solves differential equations when he catches a Frisbee, I suppose.
        throwaway-1209 9y ago
        It's memory + control driven with visual feedback, not much more. You don't have to solve anything if you already sorta know the solution, and can adjust it for the goal.
      - UnoriginalGuy 9y ago
        IBM researchers: https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/news-blog/computers-have-a-lot-to-learn-from-2009-03-10/ https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/news-blog/computers-hav... You can find other figures, but many are in the petaflop range, well above what could be realistically installed in a vehicle.
  - deelowe 9y ago
    It's pretty obvious what the poster meant. Why doesn't tesla need lidar? Cars aren't humans, so that comparison isn't really helpful.
    - kinkrtyavimoodh 9y ago
      What the poster seems to have meant is that LIDAR is essential hardware. Which is not some universal truth, so it is they who should justify it.
      - DaiPlusPlus 9y ago
        Visual cameras can be blinded fairly easily - even high-end cameras - simply point such a camera at the sun and try to make out a cloud in the sky. If Tesla were using true high-dynamic-range cameras (e.g. Oversampled binary imagers) then I would be more confident - but Tesla isn't saying that they are - and if they really were they would definitely boast about it. LIDAR also does work great in the rain - provided you have multiple LIDAR units (e.g. Ford's snow-proof sensor array: https://qz.com/637509/driverless-cars-have-a-new-way-to-navigate-in-rain-or-snow/ https://qz.com/637509/driverless-cars-have-a-new-way-to-navi... ). What I like about LIDAR is that it will never give you false-negative data regarding object proximity (i.e. it will never tell you an obstruction in the road is not there) but visual-only cameras can be fooled very easily and definitely can give you false-negatives regarding road obstructions. It seems inherently less safe to rely on a more homogeneous sensor array: conversely it makes sense to use as many different types of sensor as possible to ensure your design isn't susceptible to being brought down thanks to a weakness in your predominant sensor type.
    - tigershark 9y ago
      Lidar is absolutely useless for level 5 autonomy given that doesn't work in "bad" weather. It may be useful for level 4 autonomy but for sure it is not necessary even then. Source: no car driven around the planet at the moment has any lidar apart for testing purposes.
  - blazespin 9y ago
    Not really, humans are horrible drivers with miserably slow reaction times.
    - Silhouette 9y ago
      Some humans are horrible drivers. Some humans are good drivers. The biggest difference is often how proactive the driver is. It's true that a careful, experienced driver will typically recognise a rapidly emerging hazard as much as several tenths of a second faster than a novice, giving them significantly more time and space to react. However, a careful, experienced driver will also anticipate places where there are likely to be hazards and adjust their driving style to compensate. Does a self-driving car know that there's a park just round the corner and it's half an hour after the local kids came out of school, thus increasing the risk of a child chasing a ball into the road? Does a self-driving car understand that the group of people standing quite near the road up ahead are outside a bar at 11:30pm and thus quite likely to be drunk and suddenly stagger into the road? Does a self-driving car know about the pothole in the cycle lane that you had to avoid while riding into town yesterday, and anticipate that anyone riding in that cycle lane today may move out into the main traffic lane without warning to go around it? Does a self-driving car know that the news last night reported on a local black spot for "accidents" caused by people wanting to make fake insurance claims, and decide to take another route that is a little slower but avoids that black spot? Better sensors, fast data processing, and the ability to monitor all sensors all the time are big advantages, for sure, but these things mostly support reactive behaviour. I've seen nothing so far to suggest that the better reactions currently outweigh proactively avoiding or mitigating these kinds of hazards in the first place. Obviously that might change in any number of ways in the future, but we seem to be a long, long way from that point yet.
      - kthejoker2 9y ago
        a) Most humans aren't aware of these things, either, so they're really non sequiturs at best. b) Even if you accept them as valid premises, it's much easier to disperse this kind of info to every car on the road than it is to disperse it to humans (every tourist in a city needs to know where every bar / park is? Or watch the local news?)
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- gogeek 9y ago
  They don't work in bad weather conditions like rain. So auto driving systems can't rely on LIDAR what rules it out as main sensor.
chuckdries 9y ago
>All tesla vehicles As i understand it, the newer ones use a machine learning based approach and different hardware than the old ones. Does this mean tesla is actively working in parallel to develop two completely different self driving car softwares, one built on ML and one around a more traditional heuristic approach?
sbierwagen 9y ago
"All Tesla vehicles have the hardware needed for full self-driving capability at a safety level substantially greater than that of a human driver." In the Model S configuration page, "enhanced autopilot" and "full self-driving capability" are still optional extras that together cost $8,000, so I'm not sure what they're talking about here. https://www.tesla.com/models/design https://www.tesla.com/models/design
- gervase 9y ago
  My understanding is that all new Tesla vehicles have all the necessary hardware, and the features are software-locked behind that $8,000 fee. Apparently, these features can also be unlocked at a future time, for a higher fee of $10,000.
  - prostoalex 9y ago
    Just new? My understanding is that all applies to every single Model S ever produced.
    - AdamTReineke 9y ago
      Just new ones, since fall of 2016. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla_Autopilot https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla_Autopilot for more on the different hardware generations.
    - _ph_ 9y ago
      The 8 camera system with NVidia hardware has been built into all Model S since October 2016. Before they used a Mobileye system with one camera. Only the 8 camera system is promised to achieve full autonomy.
- skykooler 9y ago
  All Teslas come with the hardware needed. The $8000 enables the software.
  - 9y ago
dperfect 9y ago
> You can now experience Enhanced Autopilot features including Traffic-Aware Cruise Control, Autosteer, Auto Lane Change, Parallel + Perpendicular Autopark, and Summon Scary stuff, really. No consumer wants (or needs) autopilot "features" - at least not from a marketing standpoint. If you ask me, the car either drives itself or you are driving it. It's a bit ridiculous to expect people to use these things safely. If anyone has to think about when the car is or isn't in control, I'm sorry, but you've already lost in my book. Humans just aren't that good at switching context or remembering what a product does (or what this particular version of a product does).
- bjelkeman-again 9y ago
  In my experience, having driven or been driven by the autopilot v1 hardware and software for thousands of kilometers, it is not ridiculous to use this safely. You configure how you use it once, you don't have to remember the state of every feature. There are moments when you have to think about what state the car is in. But in opinion it is by far offset by how much less tiring it is to drive a long way.
  - nitrogen 9y ago
    Having driven a long distance in the vicinity of a Tesla that was presumably on autopilot, I found it very unsafe-seeming, darting around within its lane, sometimes drifting onto the lane line. You may not realize if you aren't paying attention, but your car might not drive as well as you expect.
    - PeterStuer 9y ago
      Having driven for years in the vicinity of human drivers, I'd say they do far worse than that. And that is before you add the DUI.
    - prostoalex 9y ago
      Agree that lane weaving is annoying and frequently has no good explanation - there are no tight curves, the road markings are in perfect condition, there are no obstacles ahead and no one is changing lanes in front of the car. I also wish that left-most and right-most lanes were special-cased, with a bit of preference towards left and right side respectively, instead of sticking to the center of the lane no matter what. Just seems safer overall, and with fairly large number of US roads not exceeding 2 lanes in one direction, seems like a pretty good rule of thumb.
wibr 9y ago
I don't really believe that the hardware is enough for what they are trying to achieve. There is almost no redundancy e.g. on sensor level except for the front radar supporting the front cameras and ultrasound for close distances, however if one of those rear-facing cameras fails due to a defect or dirt on the lens the vehicle would have to stop because it wouldn't be able to detect oncoming cars. I am also not sure about the processing power, handling video streams and doing deep learning for up to eight cameras in real time seems a little too much for a current gpu?
- agumonkey 9y ago
  The processing power "could" be enough, but lack of redundancy in sensors is a lot more troubling to me.
  - whazor 9y ago
    Then again, if one of the sensors breaks. It's a small chance that the vehicle will crash when trying to find a safe spot to stop.
- DaiPlusPlus 9y ago
  I'm interested how they plan to solve the problems that the cameras alone cannot solve (assuming they're just RGB cameras with no special dynamic-range abilities) - like white-out snow conditions or driving directly facing the sun (a contributory cause towards the Tesla+truck fatal crash last year) - I understand that only systems with active projection (e.g. Lidar) and beyond-visual-spectrum cameras can provide reliable data... and yet Tesla claims that their current hardware, without these more exotic sensors, is sufficient.
  - aws_ls 9y ago
    There are quite a few transforms HSV, HSL etc that you can do on images for doing things like lane detection in different conditions (bright light or darkness). Also typically you take the input from 3 camera sources left, right and center. To add to it there are techniques like applying shadow to a bright image. When we combine some of these techniques, the task does become possible, even in in adverse conditions. Also, various techniques often complement each other. For e.g. We may derive a steering angle out of a Machine learning system, and we can cross check that against the lane detection, vehicle detection (no collision) etc. To think of it, we when we drive ourselves, we just use the eyes. So there is a view that cameras alone are sufficient. But definitely as Radar and Lidar complement the cameras and make the driving system more robust. As Lidar gets cheaper, we are bound to see it being used more even in camera only approaches.
ageofwant 9y ago
Tesla's test and validation framework must be something else. I've never written code that may kill someone if it fails. Not directly at least. A in-dept report on Teslas' code and system qualification framework would be a very interesting read, I'm sure.

mattybrennan 9y ago

All the necessary hardware? Do Teslas have lidar?

throwaway-1209 9y ago
Lidar is not "necessary" hardware. Humans drive just fine without lidar.
- rpedela 9y ago
  The human visual cortex is still far more advanced than a computer's. Maybe that will change some day, but asking about non-camera sensing equipment is a reasonable question until it does.
  - throwaway-1209 9y ago
    Sure, and it's not only cortex. Humans also know a lot about the world, and can predict things much better. There are areas in which humans are limited, however, such as reaction time, spectral sensitivity, the fact that humans can only see well in the center of where they're looking at and fake the rest of their visual field, etc. It's not at all clear to me that a human pair of eyeballs is better than 8 high quality, wide spectrum cameras feeding into the system at once. That said, I think it's disingenuous of Tesla to call their system "autopilot" or imply autonomy of any kind when talking about their system. I will call something autopilot when it can drive me from door to door without me touching the wheel, in less than friendly weather conditions. Not drive in a straight line where it never rains.
    - rpedela 9y ago
      You can have a 1000 cameras and it still doesn't matter if you don't have a good computer to process the data. That is where machine learning, etc comes in. Machine learning is really starting to come into its own in last few years especially for image recognition but it still sucks compared to humans. That doesn't mean self-driving based on cameras isn't good enough but it needs to be proven and we aren't there yet.
      - throwaway-1209 9y ago
        Dude, I work on high performance machine learning and machine vision 12 hours a day. You don't need to tell me it sucks, I know. But it's superhuman on some tasks already, and in a few short years, it'll be superhuman on a few more, and little by little it'll get there. All you get from that lidar is a depth map. You can do that without a lidar, using two or more cameras. If you also interpolate across a series of predictions, and have sensor fusion (which Tesla does, they also use radars and ultrasonic sensors) you can even make it robust. Truly, people who say it can't be done should not interrupt people who are doing it.
- UnoriginalGuy 9y ago
  Humans have the computation equivalent of 38 petaflops of processing power. Does a Tesla vehicle? If you seriously want to play the inane game of "well if a human doesn't have it then a Tesla doesn't need it" then let's play that game and talk about the things humans have that the Tesla lacks. What's interesting about human's vision system is that the human eyeball is, relatively speaking, poor. We have digital cameras far better than that already. It is what the human brain that does with that raw data which makes us, as a species, thrive. Most of what we believe we "see" we never actually see, our brain fills in the gaps dynamically and infers information over time. So this human processing ability, much of it automated rather than conscious, is totally relevant if you want to have this "Tesla Vs. human" debate. It is also why Lidar might be needed to make up the massive shortfall in a Tesla's processing ability relative to the human brain. But hey, you want to keep to the "but HUMANS don't need it" then I ask where is my 38 petaflops and 1 TB of memory...
  - aidenn0 9y ago
    I'm curious where you get the number "38 petaflops" from.
    - CamperBob2 9y ago
      In the same sense that your dog solves differential equations when he catches a Frisbee, I suppose.
      - throwaway-1209 9y ago
        It's memory + control driven with visual feedback, not much more. You don't have to solve anything if you already sorta know the solution, and can adjust it for the goal.
    - UnoriginalGuy 9y ago
      IBM researchers: https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/news-blog/computers-have-a-lot-to-learn-from-2009-03-10/ https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/news-blog/computers-hav... You can find other figures, but many are in the petaflop range, well above what could be realistically installed in a vehicle.
- deelowe 9y ago
  It's pretty obvious what the poster meant. Why doesn't tesla need lidar? Cars aren't humans, so that comparison isn't really helpful.
  - kinkrtyavimoodh 9y ago
    What the poster seems to have meant is that LIDAR is essential hardware. Which is not some universal truth, so it is they who should justify it.
    - DaiPlusPlus 9y ago
      Visual cameras can be blinded fairly easily - even high-end cameras - simply point such a camera at the sun and try to make out a cloud in the sky. If Tesla were using true high-dynamic-range cameras (e.g. Oversampled binary imagers) then I would be more confident - but Tesla isn't saying that they are - and if they really were they would definitely boast about it. LIDAR also does work great in the rain - provided you have multiple LIDAR units (e.g. Ford's snow-proof sensor array: https://qz.com/637509/driverless-cars-have-a-new-way-to-navigate-in-rain-or-snow/ https://qz.com/637509/driverless-cars-have-a-new-way-to-navi... ). What I like about LIDAR is that it will never give you false-negative data regarding object proximity (i.e. it will never tell you an obstruction in the road is not there) but visual-only cameras can be fooled very easily and definitely can give you false-negatives regarding road obstructions. It seems inherently less safe to rely on a more homogeneous sensor array: conversely it makes sense to use as many different types of sensor as possible to ensure your design isn't susceptible to being brought down thanks to a weakness in your predominant sensor type.
  - tigershark 9y ago
    Lidar is absolutely useless for level 5 autonomy given that doesn't work in "bad" weather. It may be useful for level 4 autonomy but for sure it is not necessary even then. Source: no car driven around the planet at the moment has any lidar apart for testing purposes.
- blazespin 9y ago
  Not really, humans are horrible drivers with miserably slow reaction times.
  - Silhouette 9y ago
    Some humans are horrible drivers. Some humans are good drivers. The biggest difference is often how proactive the driver is. It's true that a careful, experienced driver will typically recognise a rapidly emerging hazard as much as several tenths of a second faster than a novice, giving them significantly more time and space to react. However, a careful, experienced driver will also anticipate places where there are likely to be hazards and adjust their driving style to compensate. Does a self-driving car know that there's a park just round the corner and it's half an hour after the local kids came out of school, thus increasing the risk of a child chasing a ball into the road? Does a self-driving car understand that the group of people standing quite near the road up ahead are outside a bar at 11:30pm and thus quite likely to be drunk and suddenly stagger into the road? Does a self-driving car know about the pothole in the cycle lane that you had to avoid while riding into town yesterday, and anticipate that anyone riding in that cycle lane today may move out into the main traffic lane without warning to go around it? Does a self-driving car know that the news last night reported on a local black spot for "accidents" caused by people wanting to make fake insurance claims, and decide to take another route that is a little slower but avoids that black spot? Better sensors, fast data processing, and the ability to monitor all sensors all the time are big advantages, for sure, but these things mostly support reactive behaviour. I've seen nothing so far to suggest that the better reactions currently outweigh proactively avoiding or mitigating these kinds of hazards in the first place. Obviously that might change in any number of ways in the future, but we seem to be a long, long way from that point yet.
    - kthejoker2 9y ago
      a) Most humans aren't aware of these things, either, so they're really non sequiturs at best. b) Even if you accept them as valid premises, it's much easier to disperse this kind of info to every car on the road than it is to disperse it to humans (every tourist in a city needs to know where every bar / park is? Or watch the local news?)
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
gogeek 9y ago
They don't work in bad weather conditions like rain. So auto driving systems can't rely on LIDAR what rules it out as main sensor.

chuckdries 9y ago

>All tesla vehicles As i understand it, the newer ones use a machine learning based approach and different hardware than the old ones. Does this mean tesla is actively working in parallel to develop two completely different self driving car softwares, one built on ML and one around a more traditional heuristic approach?

sbierwagen 9y ago

"All Tesla vehicles have the hardware needed for full self-driving capability at a safety level substantially greater than that of a human driver." In the Model S configuration page, "enhanced autopilot" and "full self-driving capability" are still optional extras that together cost $8,000, so I'm not sure what they're talking about here. https://www.tesla.com/models/design https://www.tesla.com/models/design

gervase 9y ago
My understanding is that all new Tesla vehicles have all the necessary hardware, and the features are software-locked behind that $8,000 fee. Apparently, these features can also be unlocked at a future time, for a higher fee of $10,000.
- prostoalex 9y ago
  Just new? My understanding is that all applies to every single Model S ever produced.
  - AdamTReineke 9y ago
    Just new ones, since fall of 2016. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla_Autopilot https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla_Autopilot for more on the different hardware generations.
  - _ph_ 9y ago
    The 8 camera system with NVidia hardware has been built into all Model S since October 2016. Before they used a Mobileye system with one camera. Only the 8 camera system is promised to achieve full autonomy.
skykooler 9y ago
All Teslas come with the hardware needed. The $8000 enables the software.
- 9y ago

dperfect 9y ago

> You can now experience Enhanced Autopilot features including Traffic-Aware Cruise Control, Autosteer, Auto Lane Change, Parallel + Perpendicular Autopark, and Summon Scary stuff, really. No consumer wants (or needs) autopilot "features" - at least not from a marketing standpoint. If you ask me, the car either drives itself or you are driving it. It's a bit ridiculous to expect people to use these things safely. If anyone has to think about when the car is or isn't in control, I'm sorry, but you've already lost in my book. Humans just aren't that good at switching context or remembering what a product does (or what this particular version of a product does).

bjelkeman-again 9y ago
In my experience, having driven or been driven by the autopilot v1 hardware and software for thousands of kilometers, it is not ridiculous to use this safely. You configure how you use it once, you don't have to remember the state of every feature. There are moments when you have to think about what state the car is in. But in opinion it is by far offset by how much less tiring it is to drive a long way.
- nitrogen 9y ago
  Having driven a long distance in the vicinity of a Tesla that was presumably on autopilot, I found it very unsafe-seeming, darting around within its lane, sometimes drifting onto the lane line. You may not realize if you aren't paying attention, but your car might not drive as well as you expect.
  - PeterStuer 9y ago
    Having driven for years in the vicinity of human drivers, I'd say they do far worse than that. And that is before you add the DUI.
  - prostoalex 9y ago
    Agree that lane weaving is annoying and frequently has no good explanation - there are no tight curves, the road markings are in perfect condition, there are no obstacles ahead and no one is changing lanes in front of the car. I also wish that left-most and right-most lanes were special-cased, with a bit of preference towards left and right side respectively, instead of sticking to the center of the lane no matter what. Just seems safer overall, and with fairly large number of US roads not exceeding 2 lanes in one direction, seems like a pretty good rule of thumb.

wibr 9y ago

I don't really believe that the hardware is enough for what they are trying to achieve. There is almost no redundancy e.g. on sensor level except for the front radar supporting the front cameras and ultrasound for close distances, however if one of those rear-facing cameras fails due to a defect or dirt on the lens the vehicle would have to stop because it wouldn't be able to detect oncoming cars. I am also not sure about the processing power, handling video streams and doing deep learning for up to eight cameras in real time seems a little too much for a current gpu?

agumonkey 9y ago
The processing power "could" be enough, but lack of redundancy in sensors is a lot more troubling to me.
- whazor 9y ago
  Then again, if one of the sensors breaks. It's a small chance that the vehicle will crash when trying to find a safe spot to stop.
DaiPlusPlus 9y ago
I'm interested how they plan to solve the problems that the cameras alone cannot solve (assuming they're just RGB cameras with no special dynamic-range abilities) - like white-out snow conditions or driving directly facing the sun (a contributory cause towards the Tesla+truck fatal crash last year) - I understand that only systems with active projection (e.g. Lidar) and beyond-visual-spectrum cameras can provide reliable data... and yet Tesla claims that their current hardware, without these more exotic sensors, is sufficient.
- aws_ls 9y ago
  There are quite a few transforms HSV, HSL etc that you can do on images for doing things like lane detection in different conditions (bright light or darkness). Also typically you take the input from 3 camera sources left, right and center. To add to it there are techniques like applying shadow to a bright image. When we combine some of these techniques, the task does become possible, even in in adverse conditions. Also, various techniques often complement each other. For e.g. We may derive a steering angle out of a Machine learning system, and we can cross check that against the lane detection, vehicle detection (no collision) etc. To think of it, we when we drive ourselves, we just use the eyes. So there is a view that cameras alone are sufficient. But definitely as Radar and Lidar complement the cameras and make the driving system more robust. As Lidar gets cheaper, we are bound to see it being used more even in camera only approaches.

ageofwant 9y ago

Tesla's test and validation framework must be something else. I've never written code that may kill someone if it fails. Not directly at least. A in-dept report on Teslas' code and system qualification framework would be a very interesting read, I'm sure.