3 ms·

I'm not sure you know what lidar is. It gives you 3D images while telling you exactly how far away things are. In fact you can much more easily determine what a

I'm not sure you know what lidar is. It gives you 3D images while telling you exactly how far away things are. In fact you can much more easily determine what an object is from Lidar data. That is not to say Lidar doesn't have its issues (and there are quite a few), we likely will need a combination of sensors including cameras, lidar and radar.

lstodd 4y ago
IDK what Tesla uses, but what difference there is between LIDAR and a SAR, some zeroes on the wavelength?
- upbeat_general 4y ago
  The wavelength difference has big implications in terms of the detail that can be resolved due to the surface interactions. Tesla doesn’t use their radar anymore in any case. Only monocular cameras.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- ClumsyPilot 4y ago
  The same change, in the other direction, turns LIDAR into a source of lethal ionising radiation that goes straight through a dozen cars without attenuation.
JoshCole 4y ago
Some better examples of his point are how do you determine the color of lights (stoplights, blinkers, brake lights, cop car lights, and so on) so as to make legally correct driving decisions with LIDAR? Some other things LIDAR won't give you: the need to read signs (parking legality, stop signs, speed limits, construction crews with flashing detour directions, painted information on the road like lane markers and speed limits, wrong way signs, and so on). In general, you can't, because the sensor doesn't give you enough information - like color - to let you solve the problem. If you have LIDAR, but not vision you literally can't make a legally correct driving decision in the general case, because you lack the relevant data to make that decision.
- threeseed 4y ago
  Nobody is saying it will be LiDAR only. Every self driving car company (except for Tesla) uses both LiDAR and vision. But they all rely on LiDAR for bounding box detection which is exactly the main problem Tesla FSD has.
  - JoshCole 4y ago
    cycomanic is claiming that leobg is ignorant. They do this despite leobg displaying accurate historical knowledge and stating the way that the sensor works in a way which does not fundamentally disagree with the correction that cycomanic implied leobg needed. As a reader of the comment chain, I have to ask why cycomanic thinks leobg is ignorant - he failed to articulate why. It seems to me that the most contentious and debatable claim that leobg made was the claim that full self driving requires solving vision regardless of whether or not you have LiDAR. If this was the reason - maybe it isn't, but if it was, the fact that everyone uses vision isn't evidence for cycomanic's position - it is evidence for leobg's position. You've retreated from this as the reason that leobg is frightfully ignorant on behalf of cycomanic. That means the next most contentious claim is the claim that builds upon the foundation of the first claim - that vision being required makes LiDAR irrelevant. The problem for you though is that when you make the concession that vision is necessary, you run into a problem. The sensor situations under which LiDAR is much better than vision tend to involve a vision failure through a lack of light or due to heavy occlusion. There is definitely and necessarily a cut off point at which leobg's claim becomes somewhat true. This denies the right to call him ignorant, because the law of charity demands that his point be the thing that maximizes the truth of his comments. So the claim of ignorance - which amounts to a character attack - becomes unjustified.
    - cycomanic 4y ago
      the OP claimed: >of which LIDAR tells you is exactly 12.327 ft away, you still need to figure out whether it is a trashcan or a child. And if it is a child, whether it is about to jump on the road or walking away from the road. LIDAR does not tell you these things. That is ignorant, because LIDAR together with processing obviously can tell you if the thing is a trashcan or a child. The post by is ignorant, because to my understanding it implies that LIDAR does not provide enough information to make that determination, which is untrue and not how LIDAR works. Now if they mean we still need some way to process this information and make decisions of what the different things are, that's a bit disingenuous because that's completely orthogonal to LIDAR vs cameras vs RADAR and using that argument we could dismiss any of the other technologies ignoring the fact that more (and different) data typically allows you to make better decisions.

lstodd 4y ago

IDK what Tesla uses, but what difference there is between LIDAR and a SAR, some zeroes on the wavelength?

upbeat_general 4y ago
The wavelength difference has big implications in terms of the detail that can be resolved due to the surface interactions. Tesla doesn’t use their radar anymore in any case. Only monocular cameras.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
ClumsyPilot 4y ago
The same change, in the other direction, turns LIDAR into a source of lethal ionising radiation that goes straight through a dozen cars without attenuation.

JoshCole 4y ago

Some better examples of his point are how do you determine the color of lights (stoplights, blinkers, brake lights, cop car lights, and so on) so as to make legally correct driving decisions with LIDAR? Some other things LIDAR won't give you: the need to read signs (parking legality, stop signs, speed limits, construction crews with flashing detour directions, painted information on the road like lane markers and speed limits, wrong way signs, and so on). In general, you can't, because the sensor doesn't give you enough information - like color - to let you solve the problem. If you have LIDAR, but not vision you literally can't make a legally correct driving decision in the general case, because you lack the relevant data to make that decision.

threeseed 4y ago
Nobody is saying it will be LiDAR only. Every self driving car company (except for Tesla) uses both LiDAR and vision. But they all rely on LiDAR for bounding box detection which is exactly the main problem Tesla FSD has.
- JoshCole 4y ago
  cycomanic is claiming that leobg is ignorant. They do this despite leobg displaying accurate historical knowledge and stating the way that the sensor works in a way which does not fundamentally disagree with the correction that cycomanic implied leobg needed. As a reader of the comment chain, I have to ask why cycomanic thinks leobg is ignorant - he failed to articulate why. It seems to me that the most contentious and debatable claim that leobg made was the claim that full self driving requires solving vision regardless of whether or not you have LiDAR. If this was the reason - maybe it isn't, but if it was, the fact that everyone uses vision isn't evidence for cycomanic's position - it is evidence for leobg's position. You've retreated from this as the reason that leobg is frightfully ignorant on behalf of cycomanic. That means the next most contentious claim is the claim that builds upon the foundation of the first claim - that vision being required makes LiDAR irrelevant. The problem for you though is that when you make the concession that vision is necessary, you run into a problem. The sensor situations under which LiDAR is much better than vision tend to involve a vision failure through a lack of light or due to heavy occlusion. There is definitely and necessarily a cut off point at which leobg's claim becomes somewhat true. This denies the right to call him ignorant, because the law of charity demands that his point be the thing that maximizes the truth of his comments. So the claim of ignorance - which amounts to a character attack - becomes unjustified.
  - cycomanic 4y ago
    the OP claimed: >of which LIDAR tells you is exactly 12.327 ft away, you still need to figure out whether it is a trashcan or a child. And if it is a child, whether it is about to jump on the road or walking away from the road. LIDAR does not tell you these things. That is ignorant, because LIDAR together with processing obviously can tell you if the thing is a trashcan or a child. The post by is ignorant, because to my understanding it implies that LIDAR does not provide enough information to make that determination, which is untrue and not how LIDAR works. Now if they mean we still need some way to process this information and make decisions of what the different things are, that's a bit disingenuous because that's completely orthogonal to LIDAR vs cameras vs RADAR and using that argument we could dismiss any of the other technologies ignoring the fact that more (and different) data typically allows you to make better decisions.