10 ms·

What I found interesting as well is that they (him and Elon) hated the idea of using high definition maps, saying that if you need them you don't do self-drivin

What I found interesting as well is that they (him and Elon) hated the idea of using high definition maps, saying that if you need them you don't do self-driving cars really. For example, when driving condition change (roadblock or anything) you're done.

RivieraKid 7y ago
If this is true, why do Waymo (or any of the top 10 self-driving companies besides Tesla) use Lidar? Two facts: 1. Tesla can't use Lidar because of cost and aesthetics. 2. Elon has a strong incentive to oversell their approach to self-driving.
- wrs 7y ago
  From what I can see, overselling is Elon’s standard strategy for whatever technical approach he’s decided is the right one. (And I can’t really say that doesn’t work for him.)
- krzkaczor 7y ago
  As far as I understood HD maps are static data obtained by many various ways (not only lidar)[1]. AFAIR they claimed that Lidar itself provides some value (teaching neural networks how to measure the distance to various objects etc) but the gist is that image recognition is an absolute must-have for self-driving cars (which seems right to me). 1 - https://medium.com/@LyftLevel5/https-medium-com-lyftlevel5-rethinking-maps-for-self-driving-a147c24758d6 https://medium.com/@LyftLevel5/https-medium-com-lyftlevel5-r...
  - salty_biscuits 7y ago
    Apart from the map data going stale as it gets out of date, you always have the problem of registration of the vehicles position within the map. GNSS data can have a really long tailed error distribution (particularly within urban canyons and in tunnels). So you always need some way of making a local map and placing it within the high detail global map. There is a pragmatic argument saying if you already have a detailed local map, do you really need the global map apart from high level navigation tasks.
    - cromwellian 7y ago
      That's not how maps are used, and the map can be used as purely negative signal if you want, as in "no go" areas instead of "yes, this is safe". As it stands, Tesla's vision only system has no other backup system to tell us what is off limits.
      - salty_biscuits 7y ago
        Can you elaborate a little about how the maps are used? The "go/no go" is basically the sort of thing I mean by "high level navigation", the sort of thing a satnav system would provide help with. If they have nothing like that it seems insane. I guess there is an ambiguity around how high detail is "high detail".
        cromwellian 7y ago
        Neural networks are probabilistic. They output predictions and are rarely 100% confident. So when Tesla's visual neutral networks are assigning inferred labels to things like cars, bikes, pedestrians, road barriers, etc, there is always some chance, say, 0.1% that it's wrong. If you have other sensors, like LIDAR, radar, and high resolution maps, then you can corroborate your predictions, so for example, if the visual system predicts a 99.9% chance you can make a safe right turn, checking the LIDAR and map will provide additional checks, even if your map is out of date. Consider: 1) camera system predicts you can make a right turn. You have no map, so you make it. 2) camera system predicts you can make a right turn, you have a map, the map says there's a wall there. You don't make the turn. If the map is wrong, you're still safe, you just missed your turn off. 3) camera system predicts you can make a right turn, you have a map, the map is out of date and says there's no wall there, but a new barrier has been erected and the map doesn't contain it. This is equivalent to situation #1 4) Same as #3 but you have SIDE RADAR, so you sense the barrier 5) Same as #3, but you have SIDE LIDAR, so you sense the barrier The problem is, Tesla is not only going "all in" with their "we only need video cameras", but Elon Musk was asked directly at intersections if the lack of side radar was a problem, and he again fell back on "video is all you need", but if that's the case, why even have front radar? Clearly, video is not enough, and if you have front radar, there's no reason to argue against side or rear radar, and by proxy, against LIDAR. All of this comes down to the Tesla is shipped with a cheap and fixed sensor suite, they can't change it now, it's too late, and so they are trying to justify their previous design decisions with overconfident sales tactics and PR, and I think this is somewhat reckless and dangerous to the entire AV industry because the more Tesla's that crash and kill people, the more all AVs will be tarnished as dangerous by the public. Musk is acting like Tesla is SpaceX and they can afford to blow up rockets or astronauts during iteration, but these are consumer products. People will trust these things to be safe, not to be "beta"
- trixie_ 7y ago
  From the presentation they mention that Lidar is good at developing tech demos quickly, but they've found it is insufficient in reality. Which of those 10 companies you reference have moved far beyond tech demos?
  - RivieraKid 7y ago
    Waymo operates the first autonomous taxi service in Phoenix with plans to expand geographically, no info about the others.
    - slg 7y ago
      Phoenix basically provides perfect conditions for self driving cars. There is very little precipitation. It gets more daylight and sunlight than any other major city in the US. There is little to no vehicle endangering wildlife. The city was mostly designed post-cars meaning there are lots of big newish straight roads and there isn't much pedestrian culture. To put it simply there is a lot of "reality" that exists in other markets that isn't very present in Phoenix. I'm not saying Waymo can't handle it, but there is a pretty big difference between being able to handle Phoenix and its suburbs compared to Boston and its suburbs for example.
      - mrep 7y ago
        Is tesla able to perform at Waymos level in phoenix because I would expect them to be showing that off if they could? Let's be real, there has got to be some teslas with autopilot in Phoenix and the fact that they aren't trying to upshow Waymo with their Phoenix autopilot stats shows they cannot beat Waymo.
        slg 7y ago
        Autopilot isn't trying to compete with Waymo and therefore any comparison there is irrelevant. Tesla hasn't rolled out FSD publicly so it is unclear whether Tesla would have any data about it performs in Phoenix.
- kermitismyhero 7y ago
  In most legal jurisdictions, lidar in consumer devices requires special permits from health and safety agencies. It's such a new tech in consumer devices that regulatory approval timelines can be highly unpredictable. And if there's one thing that Elon Musk loathes, it's unpredictable regulatory approval timelines. Plain old videocameras don't require any sort of special licensing in the vast majority of legal jurisdictions.
- leesec 7y ago
  A better question is, how come any of the companies using Lidar haven't shipped anything as good as Autopilot given that it's so much better?
zaroth 7y ago
That is very interesting. High definition maps perhaps not, but I do hope maps of some kind are an integral part of the logic. For example on a country road near my house, the road veers left while a side street continues perfectly straight. The current auto-pilot has a very hard time staying on the main road and almost always disengages before putting enough left-steer to stay in lane. A human who didn’t know about the road (no knowledge of the left bend ahead), and who missed the big yellow “left curved arrow” sign, would likewise probably end up going straight onto the side street. This is a hierarchy of stateful awareness which I believe is essential for successful self-driving — the only way to increase NN weighting to the point where the car will convincingly execute the left bend to stay on the main road is some awareness that a left bend is upcoming. This is a case where you can’t drive the road by staring at the lines. And there are many, many others.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

RivieraKid 7y ago

If this is true, why do Waymo (or any of the top 10 self-driving companies besides Tesla) use Lidar? Two facts: 1. Tesla can't use Lidar because of cost and aesthetics. 2. Elon has a strong incentive to oversell their approach to self-driving.

wrs 7y ago
From what I can see, overselling is Elon’s standard strategy for whatever technical approach he’s decided is the right one. (And I can’t really say that doesn’t work for him.)
krzkaczor 7y ago
As far as I understood HD maps are static data obtained by many various ways (not only lidar)[1]. AFAIR they claimed that Lidar itself provides some value (teaching neural networks how to measure the distance to various objects etc) but the gist is that image recognition is an absolute must-have for self-driving cars (which seems right to me). 1 - https://medium.com/@LyftLevel5/https-medium-com-lyftlevel5-rethinking-maps-for-self-driving-a147c24758d6 https://medium.com/@LyftLevel5/https-medium-com-lyftlevel5-r...
- salty_biscuits 7y ago
  Apart from the map data going stale as it gets out of date, you always have the problem of registration of the vehicles position within the map. GNSS data can have a really long tailed error distribution (particularly within urban canyons and in tunnels). So you always need some way of making a local map and placing it within the high detail global map. There is a pragmatic argument saying if you already have a detailed local map, do you really need the global map apart from high level navigation tasks.
  - cromwellian 7y ago
    That's not how maps are used, and the map can be used as purely negative signal if you want, as in "no go" areas instead of "yes, this is safe". As it stands, Tesla's vision only system has no other backup system to tell us what is off limits.
    - salty_biscuits 7y ago
      Can you elaborate a little about how the maps are used? The "go/no go" is basically the sort of thing I mean by "high level navigation", the sort of thing a satnav system would provide help with. If they have nothing like that it seems insane. I guess there is an ambiguity around how high detail is "high detail".
      - cromwellian 7y ago
        Neural networks are probabilistic. They output predictions and are rarely 100% confident. So when Tesla's visual neutral networks are assigning inferred labels to things like cars, bikes, pedestrians, road barriers, etc, there is always some chance, say, 0.1% that it's wrong. If you have other sensors, like LIDAR, radar, and high resolution maps, then you can corroborate your predictions, so for example, if the visual system predicts a 99.9% chance you can make a safe right turn, checking the LIDAR and map will provide additional checks, even if your map is out of date. Consider: 1) camera system predicts you can make a right turn. You have no map, so you make it. 2) camera system predicts you can make a right turn, you have a map, the map says there's a wall there. You don't make the turn. If the map is wrong, you're still safe, you just missed your turn off. 3) camera system predicts you can make a right turn, you have a map, the map is out of date and says there's no wall there, but a new barrier has been erected and the map doesn't contain it. This is equivalent to situation #1 4) Same as #3 but you have SIDE RADAR, so you sense the barrier 5) Same as #3, but you have SIDE LIDAR, so you sense the barrier The problem is, Tesla is not only going "all in" with their "we only need video cameras", but Elon Musk was asked directly at intersections if the lack of side radar was a problem, and he again fell back on "video is all you need", but if that's the case, why even have front radar? Clearly, video is not enough, and if you have front radar, there's no reason to argue against side or rear radar, and by proxy, against LIDAR. All of this comes down to the Tesla is shipped with a cheap and fixed sensor suite, they can't change it now, it's too late, and so they are trying to justify their previous design decisions with overconfident sales tactics and PR, and I think this is somewhat reckless and dangerous to the entire AV industry because the more Tesla's that crash and kill people, the more all AVs will be tarnished as dangerous by the public. Musk is acting like Tesla is SpaceX and they can afford to blow up rockets or astronauts during iteration, but these are consumer products. People will trust these things to be safe, not to be "beta"
trixie_ 7y ago
From the presentation they mention that Lidar is good at developing tech demos quickly, but they've found it is insufficient in reality. Which of those 10 companies you reference have moved far beyond tech demos?
- RivieraKid 7y ago
  Waymo operates the first autonomous taxi service in Phoenix with plans to expand geographically, no info about the others.
  - slg 7y ago
    Phoenix basically provides perfect conditions for self driving cars. There is very little precipitation. It gets more daylight and sunlight than any other major city in the US. There is little to no vehicle endangering wildlife. The city was mostly designed post-cars meaning there are lots of big newish straight roads and there isn't much pedestrian culture. To put it simply there is a lot of "reality" that exists in other markets that isn't very present in Phoenix. I'm not saying Waymo can't handle it, but there is a pretty big difference between being able to handle Phoenix and its suburbs compared to Boston and its suburbs for example.
    - mrep 7y ago
      Is tesla able to perform at Waymos level in phoenix because I would expect them to be showing that off if they could? Let's be real, there has got to be some teslas with autopilot in Phoenix and the fact that they aren't trying to upshow Waymo with their Phoenix autopilot stats shows they cannot beat Waymo.
      - slg 7y ago
        Autopilot isn't trying to compete with Waymo and therefore any comparison there is irrelevant. Tesla hasn't rolled out FSD publicly so it is unclear whether Tesla would have any data about it performs in Phoenix.
kermitismyhero 7y ago
In most legal jurisdictions, lidar in consumer devices requires special permits from health and safety agencies. It's such a new tech in consumer devices that regulatory approval timelines can be highly unpredictable. And if there's one thing that Elon Musk loathes, it's unpredictable regulatory approval timelines. Plain old videocameras don't require any sort of special licensing in the vast majority of legal jurisdictions.
leesec 7y ago
A better question is, how come any of the companies using Lidar haven't shipped anything as good as Autopilot given that it's so much better?

zaroth 7y ago

That is very interesting. High definition maps perhaps not, but I do hope maps of some kind are an integral part of the logic. For example on a country road near my house, the road veers left while a side street continues perfectly straight. The current auto-pilot has a very hard time staying on the main road and almost always disengages before putting enough left-steer to stay in lane. A human who didn’t know about the road (no knowledge of the left bend ahead), and who missed the big yellow “left curved arrow” sign, would likewise probably end up going straight onto the side street. This is a hierarchy of stateful awareness which I believe is essential for successful self-driving — the only way to increase NN weighting to the point where the car will convincingly execute the left bend to stay on the main road is some awareness that a left bend is upcoming. This is a case where you can’t drive the road by staring at the lines. And there are many, many others.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]