3 ms·
> It's grossly irresponsible of Tesla to ship a system that can't detect big, solid obstacles. I think this is a case of something that seems grossly irrespons
by spuz 6y ago
> It's grossly irresponsible of Tesla to ship a system that can't detect big, solid obstacles.
I think this is a case of something that seems grossly irresponsible because it's a task that humans can do extremely easily. Clearly, if LIDAR cost nothing then Tesla would happily use it in their cars. The reality is that a technology that can perform as well as a human at static object detection is cost prohibitive which is why you don't see it in any mass market vehicles. I would imagine in some cases a human driver i.e. a taxi still costs less than LIDAR.
So it becomes a question of how responsible should we make Tesla for the expectations that some of their customers may have when they release any kind of driver assistant technology? You can argue both ways that it would be irresponsible of them to release the technology that they have now without guaranteeing that every driver will fully understand its limits but also that it would be irresponsible of them not to release such technology given the number of lives it can save in its current form.
- michaelmrose 6y agoPresumably it would cost even less not to include this feature at all. I think a reasonable question is if this feature avoids more collisions in more average conditions or causes more in extraordinary ones. Even if it saves more than it costs it might cost more in pr and court costs than is earned from selling the feature. It is probably impractical to sell something that saves 2 people that we cannot innumerate or name if it kills one person with a name, address, next of kin, and lawyer.