3 ms·

I understand that these systems must ignore stationary objects or they'd break all of a sudden at every road sign you encounter, but is there no way to tell a r

I understand that these systems must ignore stationary objects or they'd break all of a sudden at every road sign you encounter, but is there no way to tell a road sign (albeit a big one) from a fire truck that is 20 times bigger than a road sign, and 2-3 times bigger than your car? No one is going to pay that much attention if your car is on auto-pilot. That's just how people are, no matter what's written on the manual (which no one reads).

Retric 9y ago
Road signs are huge. Also the problem is a road sign or overpass over a crest of a hill. It's stationary directly in front of you, the road simply curves away. EX: Here is a car in-front of a road sign. http://iowahighwayends.net/ends/June06/16/34exit263_99_halfmi.jpg http://iowahighwayends.net/ends/June06/16/34exit263_99_halfm... We assume the sign is not on the actual road, and the software makes the same assumption. It's just not always true. EX2: https://i.pinimg.com/736x/f7/11/eb/f711ebb462449a422151daab63f3fa1c--chesapeake-bay-bridge-west-virginia.jpg https://i.pinimg.com/736x/f7/11/eb/f711ebb462449a422151daab6... again perfectly safe but it looks like a static object blocking the road up ahead.
- nkkollaw 9y ago
  > Road signs are huge. As big as a fire truck, and in the middle of the street, at the same level as your car!? > Also the problem is a road sign or overpass over a crest of a hill. It's stationary directly in front of you, the road simply curves away. Isn't the autopilot aware of where the street is, and knows that you are not going to hit it? I'm not convinced. Of course, I know there are a lot of much-smarter-than-me people working on this for years, but I still don't get it.
  - Retric 9y ago
    Size varies, but it's not unusual for them to be 10 feet tall and 20 feet wide. They can also be stack on top of each other or be placed side to side. To give an idea individual letters can be 16" tall. http://onlinemanuals.txdot.gov/txdotmanuals/fsh/images/Figure%204-10.gif http://onlinemanuals.txdot.gov/txdotmanuals/fsh/images/Figur... And sizes are rounded to nearest 1/2 foot.
    - ec109685 9y ago
      But with two cameras a system can see that the road sign is far away.
      - Retric 9y ago
        If that worked well they would not need a radar system. Accurate binocular vision is a hard problem we make a lot of assumptions about how the world works. Again here is a sample image. http://iowahighwayends.net/ends/June06/16/34exit263_99_halfmi.jpg http://iowahighwayends.net/ends/June06/16/34exit263_99_halfm... Notice the road bleeds into the sign, but based on experience we assume the car is not about to hit the bridge at road height. It's a single image, so we are not using binocular vision to figure this out.
        nkkollaw 9y ago
        Those signs are 4 meters above ground level. You're saying that that can't/shouldn't be taken into consideration? They're not at all in front of any car...
        Retric 9y ago
        But how can you tell they are 4 meters above the ground level. Nothing in the image directly shows the last row of signs are that high off the road. We can say they are not close enough to be a problem yet, but all I am pointing out is it's a harder problem than your thinking about with a lot of potential false positives.
        nkkollaw 9y ago
        I am not talking about images, and I never have. I'm talking about maps + GPS (where is the road? will it curve in 50 meters?), and radar (what's in front of the car? how far is it? is it in the middle of the street, or on the side? Is it at the same height as my car?). I don't see how these two tools together can make accellerating towards a stationary object in front of you make more sense than slowing down, or at least make some sort of sound to alert/wake up the driver. Like I said, I know it's a difficult problems and very smart people have been working on this for possibly 20 years, but it still doesn't make sense to me.

Retric 9y ago

Road signs are huge. Also the problem is a road sign or overpass over a crest of a hill. It's stationary directly in front of you, the road simply curves away. EX: Here is a car in-front of a road sign. http://iowahighwayends.net/ends/June06/16/34exit263_99_halfmi.jpg http://iowahighwayends.net/ends/June06/16/34exit263_99_halfm... We assume the sign is not on the actual road, and the software makes the same assumption. It's just not always true. EX2: https://i.pinimg.com/736x/f7/11/eb/f711ebb462449a422151daab63f3fa1c--chesapeake-bay-bridge-west-virginia.jpg https://i.pinimg.com/736x/f7/11/eb/f711ebb462449a422151daab6... again perfectly safe but it looks like a static object blocking the road up ahead.

nkkollaw 9y ago
> Road signs are huge. As big as a fire truck, and in the middle of the street, at the same level as your car!? > Also the problem is a road sign or overpass over a crest of a hill. It's stationary directly in front of you, the road simply curves away. Isn't the autopilot aware of where the street is, and knows that you are not going to hit it? I'm not convinced. Of course, I know there are a lot of much-smarter-than-me people working on this for years, but I still don't get it.
- Retric 9y ago
  Size varies, but it's not unusual for them to be 10 feet tall and 20 feet wide. They can also be stack on top of each other or be placed side to side. To give an idea individual letters can be 16" tall. http://onlinemanuals.txdot.gov/txdotmanuals/fsh/images/Figure%204-10.gif http://onlinemanuals.txdot.gov/txdotmanuals/fsh/images/Figur... And sizes are rounded to nearest 1/2 foot.
  - ec109685 9y ago
    But with two cameras a system can see that the road sign is far away.
    - Retric 9y ago
      If that worked well they would not need a radar system. Accurate binocular vision is a hard problem we make a lot of assumptions about how the world works. Again here is a sample image. http://iowahighwayends.net/ends/June06/16/34exit263_99_halfmi.jpg http://iowahighwayends.net/ends/June06/16/34exit263_99_halfm... Notice the road bleeds into the sign, but based on experience we assume the car is not about to hit the bridge at road height. It's a single image, so we are not using binocular vision to figure this out.
      - nkkollaw 9y ago
        Those signs are 4 meters above ground level. You're saying that that can't/shouldn't be taken into consideration? They're not at all in front of any car...
        Retric 9y ago
        But how can you tell they are 4 meters above the ground level. Nothing in the image directly shows the last row of signs are that high off the road. We can say they are not close enough to be a problem yet, but all I am pointing out is it's a harder problem than your thinking about with a lot of potential false positives.
        nkkollaw 9y ago
        I am not talking about images, and I never have. I'm talking about maps + GPS (where is the road? will it curve in 50 meters?), and radar (what's in front of the car? how far is it? is it in the middle of the street, or on the side? Is it at the same height as my car?). I don't see how these two tools together can make accellerating towards a stationary object in front of you make more sense than slowing down, or at least make some sort of sound to alert/wake up the driver. Like I said, I know it's a difficult problems and very smart people have been working on this for possibly 20 years, but it still doesn't make sense to me.