4 ms·

>A few days ago @karpathy presented their workflow with PyTorch and also said some numbers, to train the Autopilot system with all it neural networks you would

by daenz 7y ago

>A few days ago @karpathy presented their workflow with PyTorch and also said some numbers, to train the Autopilot system with all it neural networks you would have to spend 70,000 hours with a decent gpu - that is around 8 years (depending on which GPU you are using). In total the Autopilot is a system of 48 Neural Networks. When we compare this to what I will show you, you are gonna see that this is insane. I'm very confident that it is not insane, for reasons that you have yet to discover, and the arrogance of calling insane inspires a fear in me considering what you appear to be doing on roads with other people. Your project is very cool, but also very irresponsible. Are you using this on the road with other drivers? For the love of all things good, what are you thinking? Please clarify this. It's one thing to trust your own life to your creations, it's another thing to endanger everyone else's.

serf 7y ago
one could argue that what the corporations are offering is also very irresponsible. I have a hard time faulting an individual for taking on the effort while everyone seems to want to cheer on the big dogs in the same field -- the big dogs that have been routinely shown to make irresponsible decisions with regards to pedestrian and driver safety. imo : until everyone is more regulated with regards to sensor-driven driving, have a ball. The carnage will probably fuel the legislation that's needed to stabilize the field, sadly.
- FpUser 7y ago
  "one could argue that what the corporations are offering is also very irresponsible." Well they paid needed bribes/insurance and bought the rights to kill some people for the good of all the rest
WrtCdEvrydy 7y ago
I'd argue there's a requirement of more than 48 neural networks in order for a self driving system to be able to drive. As the number of actors in a scene (cars, motorcycles, signs, and pedestrians) increase, I'd be surprised if you wouldn't need something in the neighborhood of 100+ neural networks that have varying levels of importance triggering on the car.
- littlemtman 7y ago
  Yes for higher autonomy levels more and more networks are needed
maldeh 7y ago
Whoa, before we start pulling out the pitchforks, I think this may be terribly distorting OP's words and intent. - My reading of it was that OP was in awe at the immense scale of engineering that went into Autopilot to make it production-ready in contrast to his own project which gives a perspective into what it takes for a HelloWorld in this space (he comments on its limitations: "That is just lane keeping so far but it does quite a good job at doing it. It is still a bit weak when wanting to predict the angle when there is an intersection and it doesn’t see the next road and say there is an highway exit.") - The github project looks to be using an existing recording of a car driving from the comma2k19 dataset and predicting the expected vehicular response. No pedestrians endangered. - Not that this should matter in an ideal world, but it appears the author is a talented young programmer who's still in school. It feels a bit much to admonish a newcomer to the space for perceived arrogance and irresponsibility; and even if there were at all real critiques to be made here, I'm sure there's a less rude way to make that argument that wouldn't discourage students from their learning journey.
- daenz 7y ago
  >The github project looks to be using an existing recording of a car driving from the comma2k19 dataset and predicting the expected vehicular response. No pedestrians endangered. You sure? Yes, he's using a dataset for training, but nothing about his post indicates he's not running it the trained model on real roads. He claims to be testing the trained models: >I did a few tests where pedestrians where suddenly crossing the road and the model gave it’s best job to not hit the human crossing the road. How is he running these feedback tests? If the angle of the steering wheel changes the video input that is produced, how can he test that the AI would avoid hitting the human, unless he's testing in real life? >My reading of it was that OP was in awe at the immense scale of engineering that went into Autopilot He said how impossibly-long Autopilot's models take to train, and then goes on to say "When we compare this to what I will show you, you are gonna see that this is insane." It sounds like we're reading this differently, but to me, that sounds like "what they're doing is so over the top, you can achieve pretty good results in this space at a fraction of that, and I can prove it." >It feels a bit much to admonish a newcomer to the space for perceived arrogance and irresponsibility I don't care about what he's pursuing, and if you took it that way, then understand it is not my intention. I care that he is essentially putting a drunk AI driver behind the wheel of a car on roads shared by everyone, and endangering their lives. Apparently that's an unpopular opinion, given some of the responses ("big tech companies do it and bribe politicians to get away with killing people"). But I think it's the responsible opinion.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
littlemtman 7y ago
No, I am not testing this on real roads only testing with videos so far. So no real cars only videos in cars

by daenz 7y ago

serf 7y ago

one could argue that what the corporations are offering is also very irresponsible. I have a hard time faulting an individual for taking on the effort while everyone seems to want to cheer on the big dogs in the same field -- the big dogs that have been routinely shown to make irresponsible decisions with regards to pedestrian and driver safety. imo : until everyone is more regulated with regards to sensor-driven driving, have a ball. The carnage will probably fuel the legislation that's needed to stabilize the field, sadly.

FpUser 7y ago
"one could argue that what the corporations are offering is also very irresponsible." Well they paid needed bribes/insurance and bought the rights to kill some people for the good of all the rest

WrtCdEvrydy 7y ago

I'd argue there's a requirement of more than 48 neural networks in order for a self driving system to be able to drive. As the number of actors in a scene (cars, motorcycles, signs, and pedestrians) increase, I'd be surprised if you wouldn't need something in the neighborhood of 100+ neural networks that have varying levels of importance triggering on the car.

littlemtman 7y ago
Yes for higher autonomy levels more and more networks are needed

maldeh 7y ago

Whoa, before we start pulling out the pitchforks, I think this may be terribly distorting OP's words and intent. - My reading of it was that OP was in awe at the immense scale of engineering that went into Autopilot to make it production-ready in contrast to his own project which gives a perspective into what it takes for a HelloWorld in this space (he comments on its limitations: "That is just lane keeping so far but it does quite a good job at doing it. It is still a bit weak when wanting to predict the angle when there is an intersection and it doesn’t see the next road and say there is an highway exit.") - The github project looks to be using an existing recording of a car driving from the comma2k19 dataset and predicting the expected vehicular response. No pedestrians endangered. - Not that this should matter in an ideal world, but it appears the author is a talented young programmer who's still in school. It feels a bit much to admonish a newcomer to the space for perceived arrogance and irresponsibility; and even if there were at all real critiques to be made here, I'm sure there's a less rude way to make that argument that wouldn't discourage students from their learning journey.

daenz 7y ago
>The github project looks to be using an existing recording of a car driving from the comma2k19 dataset and predicting the expected vehicular response. No pedestrians endangered. You sure? Yes, he's using a dataset for training, but nothing about his post indicates he's not running it the trained model on real roads. He claims to be testing the trained models: >I did a few tests where pedestrians where suddenly crossing the road and the model gave it’s best job to not hit the human crossing the road. How is he running these feedback tests? If the angle of the steering wheel changes the video input that is produced, how can he test that the AI would avoid hitting the human, unless he's testing in real life? >My reading of it was that OP was in awe at the immense scale of engineering that went into Autopilot He said how impossibly-long Autopilot's models take to train, and then goes on to say "When we compare this to what I will show you, you are gonna see that this is insane." It sounds like we're reading this differently, but to me, that sounds like "what they're doing is so over the top, you can achieve pretty good results in this space at a fraction of that, and I can prove it." >It feels a bit much to admonish a newcomer to the space for perceived arrogance and irresponsibility I don't care about what he's pursuing, and if you took it that way, then understand it is not my intention. I care that he is essentially putting a drunk AI driver behind the wheel of a car on roads shared by everyone, and endangering their lives. Apparently that's an unpopular opinion, given some of the responses ("big tech companies do it and bribe politicians to get away with killing people"). But I think it's the responsible opinion.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

littlemtman 7y ago

No, I am not testing this on real roads only testing with videos so far. So no real cars only videos in cars