4 ms·
I mean, it is pretty baffling that people are defending the self-driving car when it has LIDAR.
by Declanomous 9y ago
I mean, it is pretty baffling that people are defending the self-driving car when it has LIDAR.
- mateuszf 9y agoReally? Isn't LIDAR just some input device, whose data is interpreted in software?
- AstralStorm 9y agoA pretty complex device too. I'm not sure about this specific one, but LIDAR tend to operate in a scan fashion with a refresh rate. This means it can get chopped noisy data in a time sense which requires post-processing.
- jessaustin 9y agoCan we agree that robocars shouldn't drive faster than that processing can occur?
- Piskvorrr 9y agoNobody should; this is one of the basic tenets of highway codes everywhere.
- blensor 9y agoThat would not have mattered im this case. The Veldoyne LIDAR they seem to be using (from the photo of one of their Volvos) is the HDL-64E (don't know which revision but the key specs are the same). This sensor can operate between 5 and 15Hz (full rotations per second). So in the slowest setting the car (assuming it was going at 45mph) moves 4 meters within a full rotation and in the fastest setting moves 1.5 meters. That might sound a lot, and in some applications it is a lot, but please keep in mind that after one full rotation the sensor has scanned an area of up to 45000 square meters ( maximum scanning distance is 120 meters). So each rotation gives you a pretty good situational awareness of your surroundings (barring any occlusions that prevent the sensor from seeing certain spots). Unless the person is covered in IR absorbing material (some black materials do a quite good job at that) it should be impossible for a pedestrian to sneak up on the car without it being sweeped multiple times by the laser beams
- wavefunction 9y agoPeople are saying that "you couldn't see the woman" due to the visible light levels in the video Uber/the police have released but technically informed people are saying "the car has more than just visible light sensors" so arguing that the visible light video exonerates Uber is a defense built on shaky ground.
- coldcode 9y agoAlso given other people taking pictures at that location do not support the "it was too dark" video.
- hcknwscommenter 9y agoThis. The video is incredibly misleading. Perhaps criminally so. https://arstechnica.com/cars/2018/03/police-chief-said-uber-victim-came-from-the-shadows-dont-believe-it/ https://arstechnica.com/cars/2018/03/police-chief-said-uber-...
- andreareina 9y agoA lot of the defending the self-driving car came in the form of, "conditions were bad, the car's sensors didn't detect her, even a human probably wouldn't have seen her". i.e., bad input (and not bad processing of said inputs)
- lima 9y agoIt certainly shows why Google/Waymo are so cautious. They could have brought their product to market much sooner. Move fast and break things...?
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- shaki-dora 9y agoMove fast and don't brake? Move fast and kill pedestrians?