4 ms·

> Musk's argument has always been that you don't need Lidar because humans don't need Lidar, but since the goal is to do better than humans this might not reall

by a-dub 5y ago

> Musk's argument has always been that you don't need Lidar because humans don't need Lidar, but since the goal is to do better than humans this might not really work out in the end. aren't auto manufacturers that don't have features like autopilot currently adding things like lidar and automatic breaking to improve safety? why wouldn't you add the thing that will make your system as safe as possible? what's the goal here? some aspirational tech challenge that competes on arbitrary merits in some humans vs. machines challenge problem or building the best and safest way to move vehicles around?

ModernMech 5y ago
The issue is that the guy who runs the company and controls everything doesn't know what he doesn't know. He made the uninformed decision years ago to go all-in on camera technology because he thought that he would be able to throw a bunch of money and engineers at the problem, and solve Full Self Driving in essentially 5 years. That was more than 5 years ago and the technology seems to have plateaued at a place where it runs frequently into parked or stationary objects. They have since taken untold sums of cash from people (millions? tens of millions?) who they promised would get access to "Full Self Driving" with the hardware on board. Now they're in the situation where they cannot admit that the problem requires more hardware. The hardware is a fixed property here, a design requirement; they have to achieve actual full self driving with the hardware in place, or they're going to face refunds and lawsuits. So now it's a delay game. I think it's clear now that short of AGI, Tesla will never get to "full" self driving with the sensor suit they have. Nonetheless they can't switch to a new sensor suit because that will admit defeat. Instead, they have to show continual improvement of the current sensor suite, while promising that "Full" self driving is just around the corner so they can continue the charade.
- avereveard 5y ago
  > they have to achieve actual full self driving with the hardware in place, or they're going to face refunds and lawsuits. they since retrofitted the hardware twice since the claim was made, last retrofit being to the tune of 10k$.

by a-dub 5y ago

ModernMech 5y ago

The issue is that the guy who runs the company and controls everything doesn't know what he doesn't know. He made the uninformed decision years ago to go all-in on camera technology because he thought that he would be able to throw a bunch of money and engineers at the problem, and solve Full Self Driving in essentially 5 years. That was more than 5 years ago and the technology seems to have plateaued at a place where it runs frequently into parked or stationary objects. They have since taken untold sums of cash from people (millions? tens of millions?) who they promised would get access to "Full Self Driving" with the hardware on board. Now they're in the situation where they cannot admit that the problem requires more hardware. The hardware is a fixed property here, a design requirement; they have to achieve actual full self driving with the hardware in place, or they're going to face refunds and lawsuits. So now it's a delay game. I think it's clear now that short of AGI, Tesla will never get to "full" self driving with the sensor suit they have. Nonetheless they can't switch to a new sensor suit because that will admit defeat. Instead, they have to show continual improvement of the current sensor suite, while promising that "Full" self driving is just around the corner so they can continue the charade.

avereveard 5y ago
> they have to achieve actual full self driving with the hardware in place, or they're going to face refunds and lawsuits. they since retrofitted the hardware twice since the claim was made, last retrofit being to the tune of 10k$.