5 ms·

A lot of those problems seem to revolve around line of sight issues, which won’t matter because the thing will be loaded with sensors. And one additional thoug

A lot of those problems seem to revolve around line of sight issues, which won’t matter because the thing will be loaded with sensors. And one additional thought: When evaluating a potentially disruptive technology, the opinion of veterans is important and may indicate that they won’t ever adopt the new technology in massive numbers. However veterans by definition have a lot of hard earned experience, which means they won’t see the benefits of automation and ai assistance, while people new to the field will have the benefit of not having to gain that experience to be productive. Which means that the old tech will age out as veterans retire.

Cuuugi 9y ago
Sensors are absolutely nice to have, but depending on them is a completely different story.
- malnourish 9y ago
  We absolutely depend on sensors for many things, e.g. airplanes. Why not here?
  - codingdave 9y ago
    We absolutely do NOT depend on sensors when backing up airplanes. We have human beings walking the plane out, with those funny lights held up to let the pilot know if they are clear or not. Even in cars with rear-view cameras, you still need to check what is going on in the area outside of the camera view. Yes, sensors help, and I'm glad we have them. But I don't trust the safety of myself or those around me to those sensors. I double-check.
    - malnourish 9y ago
      Fair enough, I was thinking solely in flight, but I stand corrected. Thanks
  - Cuuugi 9y ago
    That's a pretty false equivalency in my opinion. Airplanes can still "operate" without some of the sensors, and have a much higher maintenance standard. As the other comment suggested, Tesla doesn't have the greatest track record with these sensors, and putting 16.5 ton driving force behind that could have very lethal consequences. I just wish Tesla was held to a higher standard of scrutiny.
    - malnourish 9y ago
      Good point, and I agree about scrutiny.
- Verdex_3 9y ago
  Eyes are sensors too. They've just been historically better than man made sensors. At some point we'll be able to collect enough data using man made sensors and then turn it into a clear enough picture using computers that the benefit of having a human making decisions will be limited at best. It doesn't even have to be as good as a human could be; it just has to be good enough given the problem space and the economic forces involved.
- mitchty 9y ago
  Everything we do depends on sensors, our eyes, ears, nose, etc... they are all sensors. I can't imagine not depending upon them, nor how to design something without a way to sense to be able to move through the world. What viable alternative is there if not to use sensors to understand the world?
  - Cuuugi 9y ago
    Did you read either comment? I was referring to removing the human element from driving (aka. Line of sight concerns)
    - mitchty 9y ago
      > Did you read either comment? Yes I did, your comment would have been improved with specificity in the first place.
      - Cuuugi 9y ago
        Within the context of the conversation, it was very specific. You are just being argumentative in my opinion.
        mitchty 9y ago
        Fair enough, but even in context it was rather unclear at first read.
jaxbot 9y ago
But on the other hand, Tesla already has a few notable sensor failures, the biggest one being the fatal crash when the sensors failed to see a semi truck at 90 degrees to path of travel (or cancelled it out as noise, etc.) Obviously things improve with time, but Tesla has never convinced me of having a robust pipeline for validating their sensors/AI projects. Everything they release feels like someone said "well, it's good enough for how much we're willing to spend." Notably, their refusal to evaluate LIDAR when every other company is banking on it.
- dewski 9y ago
  You don’t think Tesla evaluated LIDAR at all? I’m sure they did preliminary tests to confirm or deny what they could and couldn’t do with it. Considering every car produced by Tesla in the last two years has Autopilot, I think their pipeline is pretty great at gathering data for every car and performing tests against the data they gather.
  - tqkxzugoaupvwqr 9y ago
    LIDAR sensors are expensive. I wouldn’t be surprised if Tesla stopped evaluating them right there and thought, looking at the price of regular camera sensors, “Well, humans have two RGB cameras in their head and seem to do just fine. We can replicate that!”.
- saulrh 9y ago
  As a counterpoint, I personally have had a few notable sensor failures, culminating in an incident when I was 17 that convinced me that I was not safe to operate motor vehicles. No injuries or damage, but I still don't own a car, and my decision is reaffirmed every time I catch a ride from someone and try to follow along to see how it goes. You may have experienced fewer sensor failures than you've seen Teslas having in the news. But... you're exactly one person, and you're hearing the news about every "sensor failure" that Tesla has had in the entire world. And beyond that, a sensor failure is defined as an event that you don't experience. How many times have you only avoided death by pure chance? Tesla's "notable sensor failures" are literally an every-day occurrence for the mark-one eyeball. The semi crash you're talking about? Humans do exactly that with such regularity that the EU mandates guard rails under the beds of semi trailers. The difference is that, for Tesla's "sensor failures", obviously things improve with time. You think that humans do the same? Our cars are better, signage and visibility technology are better, but I guarantee you that today's drivers are, in aggregate, the same dumb-ass teenagers that they have been for the last hundred years. And that's why I support Tesla. We can argue forever about whether they're safer than humans today, because driving is such a personal thing that nobody is willing to disentangle their anecdotes from data, but it is obvious that automated vehicles will be safer than humans in the near future. Possibly the very near future.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
w8rbt 9y ago
Sensors can also introduce problems: http://cap.ece.gatech.edu/papers/1569927381.pdf http://cap.ece.gatech.edu/papers/1569927381.pdf You may also make the LIDAR think something is in front of the vehicle (when that's not true) and maybe it'll slam on the breaks? Or if you fool the sonar to make it think there's nothing in the way when there actually is, etc. Lot's of potential here. So in addition to solving problems, sensors introduce many problems and we don't yet fully understand the extent of the problems that have been introduced.
lazyant 9y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shoshin https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shoshin

Cuuugi 9y ago

Sensors are absolutely nice to have, but depending on them is a completely different story.

malnourish 9y ago
We absolutely depend on sensors for many things, e.g. airplanes. Why not here?
- codingdave 9y ago
  We absolutely do NOT depend on sensors when backing up airplanes. We have human beings walking the plane out, with those funny lights held up to let the pilot know if they are clear or not. Even in cars with rear-view cameras, you still need to check what is going on in the area outside of the camera view. Yes, sensors help, and I'm glad we have them. But I don't trust the safety of myself or those around me to those sensors. I double-check.
  - malnourish 9y ago
    Fair enough, I was thinking solely in flight, but I stand corrected. Thanks
- Cuuugi 9y ago
  That's a pretty false equivalency in my opinion. Airplanes can still "operate" without some of the sensors, and have a much higher maintenance standard. As the other comment suggested, Tesla doesn't have the greatest track record with these sensors, and putting 16.5 ton driving force behind that could have very lethal consequences. I just wish Tesla was held to a higher standard of scrutiny.
  - malnourish 9y ago
    Good point, and I agree about scrutiny.
Verdex_3 9y ago
Eyes are sensors too. They've just been historically better than man made sensors. At some point we'll be able to collect enough data using man made sensors and then turn it into a clear enough picture using computers that the benefit of having a human making decisions will be limited at best. It doesn't even have to be as good as a human could be; it just has to be good enough given the problem space and the economic forces involved.
mitchty 9y ago
Everything we do depends on sensors, our eyes, ears, nose, etc... they are all sensors. I can't imagine not depending upon them, nor how to design something without a way to sense to be able to move through the world. What viable alternative is there if not to use sensors to understand the world?
- Cuuugi 9y ago
  Did you read either comment? I was referring to removing the human element from driving (aka. Line of sight concerns)
  - mitchty 9y ago
    > Did you read either comment? Yes I did, your comment would have been improved with specificity in the first place.
    - Cuuugi 9y ago
      Within the context of the conversation, it was very specific. You are just being argumentative in my opinion.
      - mitchty 9y ago
        Fair enough, but even in context it was rather unclear at first read.

jaxbot 9y ago

But on the other hand, Tesla already has a few notable sensor failures, the biggest one being the fatal crash when the sensors failed to see a semi truck at 90 degrees to path of travel (or cancelled it out as noise, etc.) Obviously things improve with time, but Tesla has never convinced me of having a robust pipeline for validating their sensors/AI projects. Everything they release feels like someone said "well, it's good enough for how much we're willing to spend." Notably, their refusal to evaluate LIDAR when every other company is banking on it.

dewski 9y ago
You don’t think Tesla evaluated LIDAR at all? I’m sure they did preliminary tests to confirm or deny what they could and couldn’t do with it. Considering every car produced by Tesla in the last two years has Autopilot, I think their pipeline is pretty great at gathering data for every car and performing tests against the data they gather.
- tqkxzugoaupvwqr 9y ago
  LIDAR sensors are expensive. I wouldn’t be surprised if Tesla stopped evaluating them right there and thought, looking at the price of regular camera sensors, “Well, humans have two RGB cameras in their head and seem to do just fine. We can replicate that!”.
saulrh 9y ago
As a counterpoint, I personally have had a few notable sensor failures, culminating in an incident when I was 17 that convinced me that I was not safe to operate motor vehicles. No injuries or damage, but I still don't own a car, and my decision is reaffirmed every time I catch a ride from someone and try to follow along to see how it goes. You may have experienced fewer sensor failures than you've seen Teslas having in the news. But... you're exactly one person, and you're hearing the news about every "sensor failure" that Tesla has had in the entire world. And beyond that, a sensor failure is defined as an event that you don't experience. How many times have you only avoided death by pure chance? Tesla's "notable sensor failures" are literally an every-day occurrence for the mark-one eyeball. The semi crash you're talking about? Humans do exactly that with such regularity that the EU mandates guard rails under the beds of semi trailers. The difference is that, for Tesla's "sensor failures", obviously things improve with time. You think that humans do the same? Our cars are better, signage and visibility technology are better, but I guarantee you that today's drivers are, in aggregate, the same dumb-ass teenagers that they have been for the last hundred years. And that's why I support Tesla. We can argue forever about whether they're safer than humans today, because driving is such a personal thing that nobody is willing to disentangle their anecdotes from data, but it is obvious that automated vehicles will be safer than humans in the near future. Possibly the very near future.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

w8rbt 9y ago

Sensors can also introduce problems: http://cap.ece.gatech.edu/papers/1569927381.pdf http://cap.ece.gatech.edu/papers/1569927381.pdf You may also make the LIDAR think something is in front of the vehicle (when that's not true) and maybe it'll slam on the breaks? Or if you fool the sonar to make it think there's nothing in the way when there actually is, etc. Lot's of potential here. So in addition to solving problems, sensors introduce many problems and we don't yet fully understand the extent of the problems that have been introduced.

lazyant 9y ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shoshin https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shoshin