5 ms·
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
by 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 agobetter safe than sorry, and I doubt the car seizes up and bails
- delroth 9y agoHow 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 agohttps://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 agoThat makes more logical sense.