4 ms·

I think “every expert” may be stretching the truth, unless you are proclaiming that Tesla has no experts working on this.

theptip 8y ago
They said > every expert in the field unconnected to Tesla
- hndamien 8y ago
  The edit button is a wonderful tool. Besides, the fact that I can drive my car relying primarily on two eyes and a brain suggests that it must be possible to extract and process the information to drive a car with stereo vision, and without LIDAR. LIDAR may become cheap and small enough that it should be added purely from a safety perspective - more better information is better. However, I think plenty of experts would agree that theoretically it is possible without. Here are some experts that think it works without LIDAR, so you may wish to edit “every”. https://arxiv.org/pdf/1708.09839.pdf https://arxiv.org/pdf/1708.09839.pdf
  - darkpuma 8y ago
    Even if they can make it work, they note that Tesla's hardware is still inadequate. Tesla boast 8 cameras providing 360 degree coverage, but the authors of that paper are unimpressed: >"The autopilot feature [19] in cars produced by Tesla Motors enables autonomous driving on highways through a combination of a forward-looking camera and radar. Due to the limited field-of-view, these cars cannot execute autonomous driving in cities which require surround perception." So while you may have found some experts who think Level 5 automation can be done using only CV, you've only reinforced my main point that Elon Musk is not a trustworthy person.
darkpuma 8y ago
> every expert in the field unconnected to Tesla I'm saying that when you ask people not getting a paycheck from Tesla, they say that LIDAR is required. Very notably including Mobileye, who severed their connection with Tesla over this disagreement. Mobileye is particularly notable since they invested heavily into camera-only solutions; Mobileye has a strong financial incentive to dismiss LIDAR, yet they don't. It's obvious why Tesla doesn't either put LIDAR in all their cars or remove the self driving hardware claims from their advertising; Elon wants to have his cake and eat it too. More from mobileye: > Level 3 – Autonomous Under Certain Circumstances [...] Mobileye expects this additional redundancy to be covered by additional sensors like radar and lidar (for shape and object detection) and by Mobileye’s REM™ localization map for identification of safe drivable paths and knowledge of intersections and other traffic signage or instructions. https://www.mobileye.com/future-of-mobility/history-autonomous-driving/ https://www.mobileye.com/future-of-mobility/history-autonomo... Harsher words than mine, from GM’s director of autonomous vehicle integration Scott Miller: >“The level of technology and knowing what it takes to do the mission, to say you can be a full Level 5 with just cameras and radars is not physically possible,” said Miller. He went on to add that Musk is “full of crap.” https://futurism.com/gm-expert-calls-elon-musk-full-of-crap-for-saying-teslas-can-achieve-level-5-autonomy/ https://futurism.com/gm-expert-calls-elon-musk-full-of-crap-... An article about the angular resolution limitations of radar (overcoming this is exactly what LIDAR is for): >Raj Rajkumar, who researches autonomous driving at Carnegie Mellon University, thinks those assumptions concern one of Tesla's key sensors. “The radars they use are apparently meant for detecting moving objects (as typically used in adaptive cruise control systems), and seem to be not very good in detecting stationary objects," he says. >That's not nearly as crazy as it may seem. Radar knows the speed of any object it sees, and is also simple, cheap, robust, and easy to build into a front bumper. But it also detects lots of things a car rolling down the highway needn't worry about, like overhead highway signs, loose hubcaps, or speed limit signs. So engineers make a choice, telling the car to ignore these things and keep its eyes on the other cars on the road: They program the system to focus on the stuff that's moving. https://www.wired.co.uk/article/tesla-fire-truck-crash-autopilot-accident https://www.wired.co.uk/article/tesla-fire-truck-crash-autop... If you search around for this, you'll find there are A LOT of people calling BS on Tesla's claims that cameras and radar are adequate sensors for Level 5 automation. Tesla's website hints at none of this. The only caveats I see from them are concerning software and regulation: >Please note that Self-Driving functionality is dependent upon extensive software validation and regulatory approval, which may vary widely by jurisdiction. It is not possible to know exactly when each element of the functionality described above will be available, as this is highly dependent on local regulatory approval. Please note also that using a self-driving Tesla for car sharing and ride hailing for friends and family is fine, but doing so for revenue purposes will only be permissible on the Tesla Network, details of which will be released next year.
- leesec 8y ago
  Required for what, the self driving cars that don't exist yet? Radar and computer vision is simply a separate approach, not a wrong one. Tesla is as much an expert in the field as anyone, given that, you know, they have the best self driving commercial product by far.
  - darkpuma 8y ago
    >"Required for what, the self driving cars that don't exist yet?" Required for Level 5 automation. Tesla claims to be selling the required hardware, waiting only on the software and legislation allowing it. All other players in this field are focusing on a combination of cameras, radar and LIDAR. Since LIDAR is expensive and the self-driving hype is real, Tesla have a strong short term financial incentive to forgo the former while claiming to sell the later. Combine that with virtually every other expert in the field saying they're full of BS, and I think the picture becomes crystal clear. Elon covers for himself by promoting conspiracy theories about grand industry-wide plots to keep an underdog down, and that has worked very well for him so far. But like most conspiracy theories, this is one you should think critically about.
    - leesec 8y ago
      I work for an automotive tech company and have installed an L2 self driving system into my friends Camry, I don't think you've thought critically about this. LIDAR is currently a prohibitively expensive technology that provides a point map of the surrounding area. The LIDAR that Waymo uses is nearly as expensive as the car itself. This same point map can be done with computer vision/cameras, and good software. There are many other "experts" that think this is equally viable e.g. George Hotz at Comma AI or Anthony Levandowski at Pronto. I am not opposed to LIDAR. I just think it is unnecessary and that computer vision is likely to get good enough before LIDAR gets cheap enough.
      - darkpuma 8y ago
        The last time I looked into it (which was admittedly a few months ago) Comma.ai was by their own admission a Level 2 system, and a somewhat sketchy one at that. While it's obviously really cool, it's a long way off from Level 5. LIDAR currently being very expensive (and a bit bulky) is obviously the reason Tesla hasn't put LIDAR in their cars. I don't really fault them for that, I fault them for their deceptive advertising. The LIDAR industry has not yet progressed to the point where it makes sense to bring a car to market with hardware ready for Level 5 automation, so Tesla should stop claiming they've done so. Assuming the current Level 5 automation hype doesn't fizzle then smoulder for decades like the AI craze of the 60s, then it's success will coincide with rapid advances in size and price of LIDAR.

theptip 8y ago

They said > every expert in the field unconnected to Tesla

hndamien 8y ago
The edit button is a wonderful tool. Besides, the fact that I can drive my car relying primarily on two eyes and a brain suggests that it must be possible to extract and process the information to drive a car with stereo vision, and without LIDAR. LIDAR may become cheap and small enough that it should be added purely from a safety perspective - more better information is better. However, I think plenty of experts would agree that theoretically it is possible without. Here are some experts that think it works without LIDAR, so you may wish to edit “every”. https://arxiv.org/pdf/1708.09839.pdf https://arxiv.org/pdf/1708.09839.pdf
- darkpuma 8y ago
  Even if they can make it work, they note that Tesla's hardware is still inadequate. Tesla boast 8 cameras providing 360 degree coverage, but the authors of that paper are unimpressed: >"The autopilot feature [19] in cars produced by Tesla Motors enables autonomous driving on highways through a combination of a forward-looking camera and radar. Due to the limited field-of-view, these cars cannot execute autonomous driving in cities which require surround perception." So while you may have found some experts who think Level 5 automation can be done using only CV, you've only reinforced my main point that Elon Musk is not a trustworthy person.

darkpuma 8y ago

> every expert in the field unconnected to Tesla I'm saying that when you ask people not getting a paycheck from Tesla, they say that LIDAR is required. Very notably including Mobileye, who severed their connection with Tesla over this disagreement. Mobileye is particularly notable since they invested heavily into camera-only solutions; Mobileye has a strong financial incentive to dismiss LIDAR, yet they don't. It's obvious why Tesla doesn't either put LIDAR in all their cars or remove the self driving hardware claims from their advertising; Elon wants to have his cake and eat it too. More from mobileye: > Level 3 – Autonomous Under Certain Circumstances [...] Mobileye expects this additional redundancy to be covered by additional sensors like radar and lidar (for shape and object detection) and by Mobileye’s REM™ localization map for identification of safe drivable paths and knowledge of intersections and other traffic signage or instructions. https://www.mobileye.com/future-of-mobility/history-autonomous-driving/ https://www.mobileye.com/future-of-mobility/history-autonomo... Harsher words than mine, from GM’s director of autonomous vehicle integration Scott Miller: >“The level of technology and knowing what it takes to do the mission, to say you can be a full Level 5 with just cameras and radars is not physically possible,” said Miller. He went on to add that Musk is “full of crap.” https://futurism.com/gm-expert-calls-elon-musk-full-of-crap-for-saying-teslas-can-achieve-level-5-autonomy/ https://futurism.com/gm-expert-calls-elon-musk-full-of-crap-... An article about the angular resolution limitations of radar (overcoming this is exactly what LIDAR is for): >Raj Rajkumar, who researches autonomous driving at Carnegie Mellon University, thinks those assumptions concern one of Tesla's key sensors. “The radars they use are apparently meant for detecting moving objects (as typically used in adaptive cruise control systems), and seem to be not very good in detecting stationary objects," he says. >That's not nearly as crazy as it may seem. Radar knows the speed of any object it sees, and is also simple, cheap, robust, and easy to build into a front bumper. But it also detects lots of things a car rolling down the highway needn't worry about, like overhead highway signs, loose hubcaps, or speed limit signs. So engineers make a choice, telling the car to ignore these things and keep its eyes on the other cars on the road: They program the system to focus on the stuff that's moving. https://www.wired.co.uk/article/tesla-fire-truck-crash-autopilot-accident https://www.wired.co.uk/article/tesla-fire-truck-crash-autop... If you search around for this, you'll find there are A LOT of people calling BS on Tesla's claims that cameras and radar are adequate sensors for Level 5 automation. Tesla's website hints at none of this. The only caveats I see from them are concerning software and regulation: >Please note that Self-Driving functionality is dependent upon extensive software validation and regulatory approval, which may vary widely by jurisdiction. It is not possible to know exactly when each element of the functionality described above will be available, as this is highly dependent on local regulatory approval. Please note also that using a self-driving Tesla for car sharing and ride hailing for friends and family is fine, but doing so for revenue purposes will only be permissible on the Tesla Network, details of which will be released next year.

leesec 8y ago
Required for what, the self driving cars that don't exist yet? Radar and computer vision is simply a separate approach, not a wrong one. Tesla is as much an expert in the field as anyone, given that, you know, they have the best self driving commercial product by far.
- darkpuma 8y ago
  >"Required for what, the self driving cars that don't exist yet?" Required for Level 5 automation. Tesla claims to be selling the required hardware, waiting only on the software and legislation allowing it. All other players in this field are focusing on a combination of cameras, radar and LIDAR. Since LIDAR is expensive and the self-driving hype is real, Tesla have a strong short term financial incentive to forgo the former while claiming to sell the later. Combine that with virtually every other expert in the field saying they're full of BS, and I think the picture becomes crystal clear. Elon covers for himself by promoting conspiracy theories about grand industry-wide plots to keep an underdog down, and that has worked very well for him so far. But like most conspiracy theories, this is one you should think critically about.
  - leesec 8y ago
    I work for an automotive tech company and have installed an L2 self driving system into my friends Camry, I don't think you've thought critically about this. LIDAR is currently a prohibitively expensive technology that provides a point map of the surrounding area. The LIDAR that Waymo uses is nearly as expensive as the car itself. This same point map can be done with computer vision/cameras, and good software. There are many other "experts" that think this is equally viable e.g. George Hotz at Comma AI or Anthony Levandowski at Pronto. I am not opposed to LIDAR. I just think it is unnecessary and that computer vision is likely to get good enough before LIDAR gets cheap enough.
    - darkpuma 8y ago
      The last time I looked into it (which was admittedly a few months ago) Comma.ai was by their own admission a Level 2 system, and a somewhat sketchy one at that. While it's obviously really cool, it's a long way off from Level 5. LIDAR currently being very expensive (and a bit bulky) is obviously the reason Tesla hasn't put LIDAR in their cars. I don't really fault them for that, I fault them for their deceptive advertising. The LIDAR industry has not yet progressed to the point where it makes sense to bring a car to market with hardware ready for Level 5 automation, so Tesla should stop claiming they've done so. Assuming the current Level 5 automation hype doesn't fizzle then smoulder for decades like the AI craze of the 60s, then it's success will coincide with rapid advances in size and price of LIDAR.