5 ms·

This is exactly why Waymo and Cruise and such believe autonomy Level 3 or so is utterly dangerous and have intentionally skipped it entirely.

HeavenBanned 7y ago
Do you think Tesla's insistence that LIDAR is useless has a part in this case? To me it's telling that everyone in the ASD game _except_ Tesla is using LIDAR.
- ovao 7y ago
  Has Tesla actually asserted that LIDAR is “useless”? I know Musk has argued that LIDAR is not necessary, but “not necessary” and “useless” are very different things.
  - studentrob 7y ago
    Let's ask Elon - https://youtu.be/Ucp0TTmvqOE?t=6081 https://youtu.be/Ucp0TTmvqOE?t=6081 "Anyone who relies on LiDAR is doomed. Doomed. It's like having a whole bunch of expensive appendices. One is bad, and now you want to put in a whole bunch of them. That's ridiculous."
    - rcxdude 7y ago
      It's probably a bad idea if your plan is to sell self-driving cars to consumers. Waymo can afford a substantially higher cost premium on their self-driving cars because they are looking at providing a taxi service, not a car that people can buy.
      - studentrob 7y ago
        Tell that to Elon 5 years ago. I agree they'd have been better off focusing on luxury/sports EVs.
  - pauljurczak 7y ago
    Yes. Musk said that “Lidar is a fool’s errand” and "Anyone relying on lidar is doomed" at Tesla Autonomy PR event recently. See: https://techcrunch.com/2019/04/22/anyone-relying-on-lidar-is-doomed-elon-musk-says/ https://techcrunch.com/2019/04/22/anyone-relying-on-lidar-is...
lwansbrough 7y ago
Telsa's bet, and I think it's a really fair one, is that if humans only need two eyes to navigate as well as we do, a car with >2 eyes could eventually be as good or better than humans. On the other hand, humans do not have lidar systems in their head, and so lidar is the real unproven technology. It's also clear that lidar is especially lacking in situations which require seeing longer distances (like say, driving!) To be fair, lidar is winning in terms of problems vs. miles driven, but I believe their advancement will plateau far sooner (and perhaps permanently) than computer vision based systems.
- marmshallow 7y ago
  Sure, humans can drive with two eyes and a brain. But do Tesla's cameras have the amazing abilities of the human eye, and do his "FSD" chips have the power of the human brain? We'll find out in a few years...
  - toxictroller 7y ago
    Whilst you are driving you can think, talk notice non driving related thinks around, (an attractive person). So the part if the brain driving is not equal to the while brain. The Tesla chip is solely focused on driving
  - bloak 7y ago
    Humans can even drive with one eye and a brain.
unityByFreedom 7y ago
I wonder if AP is really 2x safer as Musk claims. Highway driving is already significantly safer per mile than local roads, > The grim statistics provided by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration also show that drivers on rural roads die at a rate 2.5 times higher per mile traveled than on urban highways. Urban drivers travel twice as many miles but suffer close to half the fatal accidents. [1] Could this explain away Musk's AP safety claims, given that it's mostly used on highways? [1] https://www.npr.org/2009/11/29/120716625/the-deadliest-roads-are-rural https://www.npr.org/2009/11/29/120716625/the-deadliest-roads...
- marmshallow 7y ago
  I would assume that Musk's claim was comparing manually driven Teslas on the highway with AP Teslas on the highway. But I don't think there's a way to verify.
  - mastware 7y ago
    He may have been using data from the flawed NHTSA study, https://www.thedrive.com/tech/26455/nhtsas-flawed-autopilot-safety-study-unmasked https://www.thedrive.com/tech/26455/nhtsas-flawed-autopilot-...
- sorokod 7y ago
  This x2.5 death rate is highly correlated to the speed the medics can arrive at the scene of the accident.
  - unityByFreedom 7y ago
    That may be. The point here is AP is mostly used on highways and that we are unable to verify Musk's claims without data from Tesla.
pbreit 7y ago
It’s almost certain they are wrong.
- marmshallow 7y ago
  Care to elaborate why?
  - FireBeyond 7y ago
    Unlikely. The only comments he's provided here are one sentence sound bites that channel Musk's purest essence. Companies using LIDAR? "They bet wrong". People describing how stereo cameras don't inherently see 3D? "Baloney. Based on eyesight". Companies that have spent years and billions developing and testing autonomy? "Almost certain they are wrong".
    - pbreit 7y ago
      Well, you forgot my lengthiest scribe: "Sure it’s laggier but with dedicated silicon that’s a non-issue. Fact is vision is more than adequate. And lidar is literally blind." There's no evidence that I have seen that suggests vision-based autonomy will not be sufficient. Tesla is not the only one using the approach. Lidar has its own problem with cost and that it literally cannot see.
    - pbreit 7y ago
      Here's a nice video: https://answerswithjoe.com/lidar-vs-computer-vision-waymo-better-strategy-tesla/ https://answerswithjoe.com/lidar-vs-computer-vision-waymo-be... It's a little more compelling on the data side but also goes into Lidar vs vision. It might be controversial at this point to assert that vision is better. But I don't think it's controversial any longer to assert that vision is sufficient. Given that driving and roads are currently set up for vision and Lidar will never be able to "see", it seems very reasonable to think vision could ultimately be better.
      - carlivar 7y ago

HeavenBanned 7y ago

Do you think Tesla's insistence that LIDAR is useless has a part in this case? To me it's telling that everyone in the ASD game _except_ Tesla is using LIDAR.

ovao 7y ago
Has Tesla actually asserted that LIDAR is “useless”? I know Musk has argued that LIDAR is not necessary, but “not necessary” and “useless” are very different things.
- studentrob 7y ago
  Let's ask Elon - https://youtu.be/Ucp0TTmvqOE?t=6081 https://youtu.be/Ucp0TTmvqOE?t=6081 "Anyone who relies on LiDAR is doomed. Doomed. It's like having a whole bunch of expensive appendices. One is bad, and now you want to put in a whole bunch of them. That's ridiculous."
  - rcxdude 7y ago
    It's probably a bad idea if your plan is to sell self-driving cars to consumers. Waymo can afford a substantially higher cost premium on their self-driving cars because they are looking at providing a taxi service, not a car that people can buy.
    - studentrob 7y ago
      Tell that to Elon 5 years ago. I agree they'd have been better off focusing on luxury/sports EVs.
- pauljurczak 7y ago
  Yes. Musk said that “Lidar is a fool’s errand” and "Anyone relying on lidar is doomed" at Tesla Autonomy PR event recently. See: https://techcrunch.com/2019/04/22/anyone-relying-on-lidar-is-doomed-elon-musk-says/ https://techcrunch.com/2019/04/22/anyone-relying-on-lidar-is...

lwansbrough 7y ago

Telsa's bet, and I think it's a really fair one, is that if humans only need two eyes to navigate as well as we do, a car with >2 eyes could eventually be as good or better than humans. On the other hand, humans do not have lidar systems in their head, and so lidar is the real unproven technology. It's also clear that lidar is especially lacking in situations which require seeing longer distances (like say, driving!) To be fair, lidar is winning in terms of problems vs. miles driven, but I believe their advancement will plateau far sooner (and perhaps permanently) than computer vision based systems.

marmshallow 7y ago
Sure, humans can drive with two eyes and a brain. But do Tesla's cameras have the amazing abilities of the human eye, and do his "FSD" chips have the power of the human brain? We'll find out in a few years...
- toxictroller 7y ago
  Whilst you are driving you can think, talk notice non driving related thinks around, (an attractive person). So the part if the brain driving is not equal to the while brain. The Tesla chip is solely focused on driving
- bloak 7y ago
  Humans can even drive with one eye and a brain.

unityByFreedom 7y ago

I wonder if AP is really 2x safer as Musk claims. Highway driving is already significantly safer per mile than local roads, > The grim statistics provided by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration also show that drivers on rural roads die at a rate 2.5 times higher per mile traveled than on urban highways. Urban drivers travel twice as many miles but suffer close to half the fatal accidents. [1] Could this explain away Musk's AP safety claims, given that it's mostly used on highways? [1] https://www.npr.org/2009/11/29/120716625/the-deadliest-roads-are-rural https://www.npr.org/2009/11/29/120716625/the-deadliest-roads...

marmshallow 7y ago
I would assume that Musk's claim was comparing manually driven Teslas on the highway with AP Teslas on the highway. But I don't think there's a way to verify.
- mastware 7y ago
  He may have been using data from the flawed NHTSA study, https://www.thedrive.com/tech/26455/nhtsas-flawed-autopilot-safety-study-unmasked https://www.thedrive.com/tech/26455/nhtsas-flawed-autopilot-...
sorokod 7y ago
This x2.5 death rate is highly correlated to the speed the medics can arrive at the scene of the accident.
- unityByFreedom 7y ago
  That may be. The point here is AP is mostly used on highways and that we are unable to verify Musk's claims without data from Tesla.

pbreit 7y ago

It’s almost certain they are wrong.

marmshallow 7y ago
Care to elaborate why?
- FireBeyond 7y ago
  Unlikely. The only comments he's provided here are one sentence sound bites that channel Musk's purest essence. Companies using LIDAR? "They bet wrong". People describing how stereo cameras don't inherently see 3D? "Baloney. Based on eyesight". Companies that have spent years and billions developing and testing autonomy? "Almost certain they are wrong".
  - pbreit 7y ago
    Well, you forgot my lengthiest scribe: "Sure it’s laggier but with dedicated silicon that’s a non-issue. Fact is vision is more than adequate. And lidar is literally blind." There's no evidence that I have seen that suggests vision-based autonomy will not be sufficient. Tesla is not the only one using the approach. Lidar has its own problem with cost and that it literally cannot see.
  - pbreit 7y ago
    Here's a nice video: https://answerswithjoe.com/lidar-vs-computer-vision-waymo-better-strategy-tesla/ https://answerswithjoe.com/lidar-vs-computer-vision-waymo-be... It's a little more compelling on the data side but also goes into Lidar vs vision. It might be controversial at this point to assert that vision is better. But I don't think it's controversial any longer to assert that vision is sufficient. Given that driving and roads are currently set up for vision and Lidar will never be able to "see", it seems very reasonable to think vision could ultimately be better.
    - carlivar 7y ago