4 ms·

lex's comment did not strike me as a dig. i am actually concerned by your comment because it makes me wonder if i am missing other things too? it just doesnt se

lex's comment did not strike me as a dig. i am actually concerned by your comment because it makes me wonder if i am missing other things too? it just doesnt seem like a dig. it seems like he thought of something funny and wanted to share it. am i alone in this? and also i dont understand your assertion that it was some kind of cynical maneuver to re-frame the question. he could have also said "yes, more sensors are always better but you can add an arbitrary number of sensors and so we had to decide where to draw the line. the cameras we use are capable of meeting our goal of full self driving that is significantly safer than a human driver. and this also streamlines the production and software which has a material impact on our ability to actually produce the cars which is of course necessary to meet the goal of making self driving cars. bloat could actually kill tesla." this is logically the same thing that he said in the interview, so whats cynical about it? how is it underhanded? also is there some intrinsic limitation of the dynamic range of cameras? people are talking about problems with dynamic range being intrinsic to cameras but im pretty sure that cameras and especially camera suites that do not have more problems with dynamic range than a human eye are possible to make and probably already on the market.

JumpCrisscross 4y ago
> did not strike me as a dig It wasn't a dig. It was calling out a bullshit move that, in my opinion, Andrej deployed out of panic more than strategically. (My evidence for this being Andrej eventually gave a good answer.)
- ion_fury 4y ago
  i just dont get it. lex says "lets re-frame the question: can a language model drive a car?" this doesnt have any insinuations about andrej's intentions or motives. if it were calling out bullshit it would be "lets re-frame the question: why is elon musk never wrong?" lex kisses elon musks ass, last time i checked hes on musks side in the lidar debate and also lex has a record of listening patiently no matter what and i have never known him to check people or "call out their bullshit." lastly, what andrej did wasnt a bullshit move. re-framing a question has never been known as something people do only when they are being deceptive and it is very common in intellectually honest answers/explanations in my experience. im still shocked because usually i see what other people see. but people calling this a dig/bullshit came out of left field for me. i hope i dont miss stuff like that more than i realize... edit: i read your comment again and i didnt read it right. he panics, gives himself some more room, lex acknowledges this but in a prickly way. it makes sense but im still upset because when i watch it all i see is lex making a joke. i guess i have severe autism.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - jholman 4y ago
    See my sibling comment, but I agree with you, especially about Lex's track record, and I think the other commenters are projecting. And you're right, reframing a question is like THE MOVE for academics, so it's completely not evidence that Andrej was making "a bullshit move" (although it's also a classic move for PR flaks, so it's possible he was making a bullshit move).
    - ion_fury 4y ago
      i looked at your account and, were you ever involved in real estate?
      - jholman 4y ago
        I've read the fine-print terms of a mortgage perhaps half a dozen times.
- jholman 4y ago
  I don't think it was calling out a bullshit move (and definitely not a dig) a) Saying "I wonder when language models will do this" is a total Lex thing to say. That's what he's into. b) Lex is almost always a softball interviewer, though one with interestingly deep knowledge. He interviews experts, and he errs on the side of respect. If you're looking for hardball, don't listen to Lex, it's not what he does. He almost never calls out bullshit, and he especially doesn't call out evasion. Now, it's still possible that it was a panic-deployed evasion on Andrej's part, and whether or not that was his mentality, I agree that he gained nothing by it, and did not in fact reframe the question at all.
tsimionescu 4y ago
> also is there some intrinsic limitation of the dynamic range of cameras? people are talking about problems with dynamic range being intrinsic to cameras but im pretty sure that cameras and especially camera suites that do not have more problems with dynamic range than a human eye are possible to make and probably already on the market. I think it's possible that professional movie cameras (with the appropriate lenses) may have higher dynamic range than human vision. Good luck getting those cheaper than a lidar.
- ion_fury 4y ago
  just take some cameras, set each one at a different exposure via something like smoked glass and composite the images in real time. i dont know, it just seems pretty easy.
  - tsimionescu 4y ago
    Well, that increases the expenses from the sensors several fold (at least 2x of course, but I would guess closer to 3x-4x, depending on how many you need to cover the whole range).

JumpCrisscross 4y ago

> did not strike me as a dig It wasn't a dig. It was calling out a bullshit move that, in my opinion, Andrej deployed out of panic more than strategically. (My evidence for this being Andrej eventually gave a good answer.)

ion_fury 4y ago
i just dont get it. lex says "lets re-frame the question: can a language model drive a car?" this doesnt have any insinuations about andrej's intentions or motives. if it were calling out bullshit it would be "lets re-frame the question: why is elon musk never wrong?" lex kisses elon musks ass, last time i checked hes on musks side in the lidar debate and also lex has a record of listening patiently no matter what and i have never known him to check people or "call out their bullshit." lastly, what andrej did wasnt a bullshit move. re-framing a question has never been known as something people do only when they are being deceptive and it is very common in intellectually honest answers/explanations in my experience. im still shocked because usually i see what other people see. but people calling this a dig/bullshit came out of left field for me. i hope i dont miss stuff like that more than i realize... edit: i read your comment again and i didnt read it right. he panics, gives himself some more room, lex acknowledges this but in a prickly way. it makes sense but im still upset because when i watch it all i see is lex making a joke. i guess i have severe autism.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- jholman 4y ago
  See my sibling comment, but I agree with you, especially about Lex's track record, and I think the other commenters are projecting. And you're right, reframing a question is like THE MOVE for academics, so it's completely not evidence that Andrej was making "a bullshit move" (although it's also a classic move for PR flaks, so it's possible he was making a bullshit move).
  - ion_fury 4y ago
    i looked at your account and, were you ever involved in real estate?
    - jholman 4y ago
      I've read the fine-print terms of a mortgage perhaps half a dozen times.
jholman 4y ago
I don't think it was calling out a bullshit move (and definitely not a dig) a) Saying "I wonder when language models will do this" is a total Lex thing to say. That's what he's into. b) Lex is almost always a softball interviewer, though one with interestingly deep knowledge. He interviews experts, and he errs on the side of respect. If you're looking for hardball, don't listen to Lex, it's not what he does. He almost never calls out bullshit, and he especially doesn't call out evasion. Now, it's still possible that it was a panic-deployed evasion on Andrej's part, and whether or not that was his mentality, I agree that he gained nothing by it, and did not in fact reframe the question at all.

tsimionescu 4y ago

> also is there some intrinsic limitation of the dynamic range of cameras? people are talking about problems with dynamic range being intrinsic to cameras but im pretty sure that cameras and especially camera suites that do not have more problems with dynamic range than a human eye are possible to make and probably already on the market. I think it's possible that professional movie cameras (with the appropriate lenses) may have higher dynamic range than human vision. Good luck getting those cheaper than a lidar.

ion_fury 4y ago
just take some cameras, set each one at a different exposure via something like smoked glass and composite the images in real time. i dont know, it just seems pretty easy.
- tsimionescu 4y ago
  Well, that increases the expenses from the sensors several fold (at least 2x of course, but I would guess closer to 3x-4x, depending on how many you need to cover the whole range).