3 ms·
The causality goes the other way. The LIDAR claim was that Tesla's vision approach couldn't work. It did.
by ajross 4y ago
The causality goes the other way. The LIDAR claim was that Tesla's vision approach couldn't work. It did.
- fzeroracer 4y agoWho made this claim? You keep making these grand statements but without linking to people or providing any proof. Like there are going to be some environments where Tesla's vision is going to struggle, that's just a fact because you're relying on a more linear set of data. That's why you incorporate as many data points as possible for reasons other commentators have brought up. And I'm confused by how you qualify it as 'working', given we've seen multiple issues which are directly related to their vision approach.
- fooblaster 4y agoTesla has not solved self driving, and by all accounts never will with their existing compute and sensor stack.
- martindbp 4y agoLet's do a thought experiment: if Waymo could have seen 10 years ago how well FSD perception works today, would they have invested so heavily into LiDAR? Maybe the answer is still yes, because with the low volumes of vehicles they have they can afford to put it in, but it's not clear cut. If you could show FSD to ML/CV engineers 10 years ago their minds would have been completely blown. My mind is still blown by how well it actually works.
- ra7 4y agoTesla’s vision approach doesn’t work. There is a reason it requires a driver to actively prevent crashes and has a disengagement rate in the single digit miles [1]. All over this thread you keep making grand statements that “it works”, which is just completely false. It’s simple — if it worked, there would be no driver. [1] https://www.teslafsdtracker.com/ https://www.teslafsdtracker.com/