4 ms·

> i thought LIDAR has high cost barrier to be in consumer vehicles. Ok, so you save a few bucks, kill a few people... then eventually come to the same conclusi

by Alupis 8y ago

> i thought LIDAR has high cost barrier to be in consumer vehicles. Ok, so you save a few bucks, kill a few people... then eventually come to the same conclusion every other Autonomous Driving company already has... you need LIDAR for this work reliably?

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
gpm 8y ago
Or, you know, you get it working without LIDAR and make boatloads of money. Humans don't rely on any sort of LIDAR to drive, I don't see how you could be so certain that computers need to.
- trhway 8y ago
  >Humans don't rely on any sort of LIDAR to drive, I don't see how you could be so certain that computers need to. 1. using that logic we would still be trying to build airplanes with flapping wings like birds. 2. humans aren't that good of a drivers.
  - shaklee3 8y ago
    Humans are GREAT drivers compared to anything else out there. Especially self-driving cars.
- andrewmunsell 8y ago
  Humans don't need LIDAR, but we rely on the massive amount of compute power available to us in our brains and a variety of other sensory inputs that go beyond simple vision. Of course, we're easily distracted, which is one reason why we aren't perfect drivers. I really believe you can make a vision+radar only self driving car, but not without a lot of compute power. LIDAR just makes it easier. Will HW3 be enough? Probably for a lot of scenarios, but it's definitely not going to be level 4/5 anytime soon.
- Alupis 8y ago
  > I don't see how you could be so certain that computers need to We're nowhere close to emulating what goes on in a human brain... neural networks are an absurdly simplified approximation of simple life-forms... it took the K supercomputer (having 705,024 cores and 1.4 Petabytes of RAM) 40 minutes to emulate 1 second of 1 percent of human brain activity.[1] Since we cannot come close to sensory input processing a human can do... we need to augment our systems with better sensors. LIDAR is a better sensor, and can help "see" things that would otherwise go missed. > you get it working without LIDAR and make boatloads of money And why can't you make "boatloads of money" while using LIDAR? Killing people is bad for business... no? Before you jump on it, no LIDAR is no silver bullet... but it's available technology that can help quite a bit. Why not use it? Unless you've overpromised what your price point will be for technology that is yet to exist? [1] https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/10567942/Supercomputer-models-one-second-of-human-brain-activity.html https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/10567942/Supercompute...
  - darkpuma 8y ago
    > "Before you jump on it, no LIDAR is no silver bullet... but it's available technology that can help quite a bit. Why not use it?" Because Elon wanted to advertise his cars as having all the hardware necessary, because the automotive automation hype is very real. He wanted to sell luxury cars to tech enthused idealists, but he didn't want to cut down on his profit margins by actually delivering what he was selling. The fact that he always admitted the software was lacking gave him plenty of cover. It allows his customers to continue to believe, even though their car can't actually drive itself. That's the beauty of selling hopes and dreams instead of anything concrete.
erbium 8y ago
And every other "Autonomous Driving" company has zero real revenue.

by Alupis 8y ago

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

gpm 8y ago

Or, you know, you get it working without LIDAR and make boatloads of money. Humans don't rely on any sort of LIDAR to drive, I don't see how you could be so certain that computers need to.

trhway 8y ago
>Humans don't rely on any sort of LIDAR to drive, I don't see how you could be so certain that computers need to. 1. using that logic we would still be trying to build airplanes with flapping wings like birds. 2. humans aren't that good of a drivers.
- shaklee3 8y ago
  Humans are GREAT drivers compared to anything else out there. Especially self-driving cars.
andrewmunsell 8y ago
Humans don't need LIDAR, but we rely on the massive amount of compute power available to us in our brains and a variety of other sensory inputs that go beyond simple vision. Of course, we're easily distracted, which is one reason why we aren't perfect drivers. I really believe you can make a vision+radar only self driving car, but not without a lot of compute power. LIDAR just makes it easier. Will HW3 be enough? Probably for a lot of scenarios, but it's definitely not going to be level 4/5 anytime soon.
Alupis 8y ago
> I don't see how you could be so certain that computers need to We're nowhere close to emulating what goes on in a human brain... neural networks are an absurdly simplified approximation of simple life-forms... it took the K supercomputer (having 705,024 cores and 1.4 Petabytes of RAM) 40 minutes to emulate 1 second of 1 percent of human brain activity.[1] Since we cannot come close to sensory input processing a human can do... we need to augment our systems with better sensors. LIDAR is a better sensor, and can help "see" things that would otherwise go missed. > you get it working without LIDAR and make boatloads of money And why can't you make "boatloads of money" while using LIDAR? Killing people is bad for business... no? Before you jump on it, no LIDAR is no silver bullet... but it's available technology that can help quite a bit. Why not use it? Unless you've overpromised what your price point will be for technology that is yet to exist? [1] https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/10567942/Supercomputer-models-one-second-of-human-brain-activity.html https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/10567942/Supercompute...
- darkpuma 8y ago
  > "Before you jump on it, no LIDAR is no silver bullet... but it's available technology that can help quite a bit. Why not use it?" Because Elon wanted to advertise his cars as having all the hardware necessary, because the automotive automation hype is very real. He wanted to sell luxury cars to tech enthused idealists, but he didn't want to cut down on his profit margins by actually delivering what he was selling. The fact that he always admitted the software was lacking gave him plenty of cover. It allows his customers to continue to believe, even though their car can't actually drive itself. That's the beauty of selling hopes and dreams instead of anything concrete.

erbium 8y ago

And every other "Autonomous Driving" company has zero real revenue.