4 ms·

Both Tesla and Waymo are at too low an abstraction level for resilience. Cars need to understand roads/walls as concepts and make common sense inferences.

jijojv 9y ago
They're not comparable at all. Google/Waymo uses lidar and has been at it since 2009 and per https://waymo.com/faq https://waymo.com/faq they are "fully automated vehicle" but alas not for sale yet. Tesla's self-driving vaporware being sold since Oct'16 is camera only and should be activated any day now ? https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/823632597284691969 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/823632597284691969 " Yes, safety should improve significantly due to autonomy features, even if regs disallow no driver present 23 Jan 2017" 3 months maybe, 6 months definitely 23 Jan 2017
- bobsil1 9y ago
  Waymo’s approach is also brittle, e.g. to changes in the road since the last map pass. Tesla also uses radar and ultrasonic. Lidar isn’t necessary, just makes depth measurement easier. It’s lower res than cameras, low range, power-inefficient, conflicts with other lidar. Humans drive fine in sunlight, without a coherent IR scanning beam.
  - refulgentis 9y ago
    better safe than sorry, and I doubt the car seizes up and bails
  - delroth 9y ago
    How do you know how much Waymo's approach rely on maps vs. vision? My expectation would be that maps are really only used for "macro" navigation but anything beyond that (lanes, avoiding obstacles, etc.) would be done on the spot. Do you have any public source detailing this or do you just make this claim based on your own assumptions? (Disclaimer: I work at Google but have no idea how our self-driving cars work.)
    - bobsil1 9y ago
      https://medium.com/waymo/building-maps-for-a-self-driving-car-723b4d9cd3f4 https://medium.com/waymo/building-maps-for-a-self-driving-ca...
      - jvolkman 9y ago
        > Of course our streets are ever-changing, so our cars need to be able to recognize new conditions and make adjustments in real-time. For example, we can detect signs of construction (orange cones, workmen in vests, etc.) and understand that we may have to merge to bypass a closed lane, or that other road users may behave differently. Doesn't sound like the cars blindly trust potentially stale maps.
    - jijojv 9y ago
      That makes more logical sense.
- ldesegur 9y ago
  The low sunlight is hard to deal with by humans and computer vision isn't better. In the meantime, Tesla's CEO doesn't believe Lidar is necessary (https://www.theverge.com/2018/2/7/16988628/elon-musk-lidar-self-driving-car-tesla https://www.theverge.com/2018/2/7/16988628/elon-musk-lidar-s...). My advice to the company BOD & shareholders: have him take the Udacity's self driving car online course and after the first project, he'll clearly understand how limited detecting lanes by CV only can be. To Uber's ex-CEO's point: LIDAR is the SAUCE.
  - quotemstr 9y ago
    Musk's central point is that if humans can drive with two cameras, so can a machine. And he's right. Why wouldn't we do just as well as the visual cortex?
    - nugi 9y ago
      Humans have superior intelect, even if specific performance is lower. We have experince. We learned to drive, in the particular area where you operate your car generally, with all its idiosyncorcies. Then consider eye contact, nonverbal communication, bias, and personal investment in outcome that computers are incapable of. Its not as simple as better sensors and reaction time.
    - jonknee 9y ago
      But isn't the whole point of autonomous cars that humans are pretty shitty drivers? If I could augment my vision with a 360º setup of cameras and LIDAR you better believe I would!
      - quotemstr 9y ago
        I'd say people are actually pretty good drivers. I'm more interested in autonomous for the time savings than I am for the potential safety improvements.
        jonknee 9y ago
- YeGoblynQueenne 9y ago
  >> They're not comparable at all. Google/Waymo uses lidar and has been at it since 2009 and per https://waymo.com/faq https://waymo.com/faq they are "fully automated vehicle" but alas not for sale yet. If it's already fully automated, then why is it not for sale, yet?
  - jijojv 9y ago
    Perfect it before selling vaporware or risking it like Uber and Tesla. They are partnering with Manufacturers already e.g. https://www.theverge.com/2018/4/2/17189764/waymo-honda-self-driving-delivery-vehicle-krafcik https://www.theverge.com/2018/4/2/17189764/waymo-honda-self-... https://www.theverge.com/2018/3/27/17165992/waymo-jaguar-i-pace-self-driving-ny-auto-show-2018 https://www.theverge.com/2018/3/27/17165992/waymo-jaguar-i-p...
  - mhermher 9y ago
    The required hardware is too expensive to make it commercially feasible.
    - jijojv 9y ago
      Is it ? It's down to 8k https://arstechnica.com/cars/2017/01/googles-waymo-invests-in-lidar-technology-cuts-costs-by-90-percent/ https://arstechnica.com/cars/2017/01/googles-waymo-invests-i...

jijojv 9y ago

They're not comparable at all. Google/Waymo uses lidar and has been at it since 2009 and per https://waymo.com/faq https://waymo.com/faq they are "fully automated vehicle" but alas not for sale yet. Tesla's self-driving vaporware being sold since Oct'16 is camera only and should be activated any day now ? https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/823632597284691969 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/823632597284691969 " Yes, safety should improve significantly due to autonomy features, even if regs disallow no driver present 23 Jan 2017" 3 months maybe, 6 months definitely 23 Jan 2017

bobsil1 9y ago
Waymo’s approach is also brittle, e.g. to changes in the road since the last map pass. Tesla also uses radar and ultrasonic. Lidar isn’t necessary, just makes depth measurement easier. It’s lower res than cameras, low range, power-inefficient, conflicts with other lidar. Humans drive fine in sunlight, without a coherent IR scanning beam.
- refulgentis 9y ago
  better safe than sorry, and I doubt the car seizes up and bails
- delroth 9y ago
  How do you know how much Waymo's approach rely on maps vs. vision? My expectation would be that maps are really only used for "macro" navigation but anything beyond that (lanes, avoiding obstacles, etc.) would be done on the spot. Do you have any public source detailing this or do you just make this claim based on your own assumptions? (Disclaimer: I work at Google but have no idea how our self-driving cars work.)
  - bobsil1 9y ago
    https://medium.com/waymo/building-maps-for-a-self-driving-car-723b4d9cd3f4 https://medium.com/waymo/building-maps-for-a-self-driving-ca...
    - jvolkman 9y ago
      > Of course our streets are ever-changing, so our cars need to be able to recognize new conditions and make adjustments in real-time. For example, we can detect signs of construction (orange cones, workmen in vests, etc.) and understand that we may have to merge to bypass a closed lane, or that other road users may behave differently. Doesn't sound like the cars blindly trust potentially stale maps.
  - jijojv 9y ago
    That makes more logical sense.
ldesegur 9y ago
The low sunlight is hard to deal with by humans and computer vision isn't better. In the meantime, Tesla's CEO doesn't believe Lidar is necessary (https://www.theverge.com/2018/2/7/16988628/elon-musk-lidar-self-driving-car-tesla https://www.theverge.com/2018/2/7/16988628/elon-musk-lidar-s...). My advice to the company BOD & shareholders: have him take the Udacity's self driving car online course and after the first project, he'll clearly understand how limited detecting lanes by CV only can be. To Uber's ex-CEO's point: LIDAR is the SAUCE.
- quotemstr 9y ago
  Musk's central point is that if humans can drive with two cameras, so can a machine. And he's right. Why wouldn't we do just as well as the visual cortex?
  - nugi 9y ago
    Humans have superior intelect, even if specific performance is lower. We have experince. We learned to drive, in the particular area where you operate your car generally, with all its idiosyncorcies. Then consider eye contact, nonverbal communication, bias, and personal investment in outcome that computers are incapable of. Its not as simple as better sensors and reaction time.
  - jonknee 9y ago
    But isn't the whole point of autonomous cars that humans are pretty shitty drivers? If I could augment my vision with a 360º setup of cameras and LIDAR you better believe I would!
    - quotemstr 9y ago
      I'd say people are actually pretty good drivers. I'm more interested in autonomous for the time savings than I am for the potential safety improvements.
      - jonknee 9y ago
YeGoblynQueenne 9y ago
>> They're not comparable at all. Google/Waymo uses lidar and has been at it since 2009 and per https://waymo.com/faq https://waymo.com/faq they are "fully automated vehicle" but alas not for sale yet. If it's already fully automated, then why is it not for sale, yet?
- jijojv 9y ago
  Perfect it before selling vaporware or risking it like Uber and Tesla. They are partnering with Manufacturers already e.g. https://www.theverge.com/2018/4/2/17189764/waymo-honda-self-driving-delivery-vehicle-krafcik https://www.theverge.com/2018/4/2/17189764/waymo-honda-self-... https://www.theverge.com/2018/3/27/17165992/waymo-jaguar-i-pace-self-driving-ny-auto-show-2018 https://www.theverge.com/2018/3/27/17165992/waymo-jaguar-i-p...
- mhermher 9y ago
  The required hardware is too expensive to make it commercially feasible.
  - jijojv 9y ago
    Is it ? It's down to 8k https://arstechnica.com/cars/2017/01/googles-waymo-invests-in-lidar-technology-cuts-costs-by-90-percent/ https://arstechnica.com/cars/2017/01/googles-waymo-invests-i...