3 ms·

OP claimed that Comma's approach would be able to handle edge cases better, but I don't think it's fundamentally a solution to that problem. Tesla is struggling

by sho_hn 4y ago

OP claimed that Comma's approach would be able to handle edge cases better, but I don't think it's fundamentally a solution to that problem. Tesla is struggling with the same tech limitations certainly.

gamegoblin 4y ago
I think it will handle edges better because it's explicitly not trying to classify everything into objects (for the purpose of loading into their virtual representation). So it doesn't need to "understand" a situation in terms of what is physically true, it just needs to understand what information is valuable for the task of driving. Consider this edge case: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/kM-xBgz26pE https://www.youtube.com/shorts/kM-xBgz26pE A utility truck carrying a load of new traffic lights. Tesla correctly identifies them as traffic lights and loads virtual representations into its world model. It doesn't seem to cause any weird behavior (thankfully), but this demonstrates a case where doing this fancy classification actually makes your system less robust.
- sho_hn 4y ago
  I'd be interested in a direct comparison of how Comma's models handle the same situation. Has someone tried?
moralestapia 4y ago
I know, and I'm saying that whatever Tesla is doing, along with those "mitigations" you mentioned, is crap because of the several crashes where it has failed to detect big stationary objects in front of the car. I haven't seen comma doing stuff as dumb as that, so I'm also betting on comma's approach.
- sho_hn 4y ago
  I have no stake in the Comma vs. Tesla, I just don't think the Comma approach can get us all the way to a full solution either. What I think is interesting is that if you assume that there's still a couple of new ideas left before the whole thing can work, it matters who is the most poised to adopt (or even to have) the new ideas and turn them around into a product. I also don't know who that will be. A vertically integrated company like Tesla? A tech supplier like Waymo? A nimble startup like Comma?

by sho_hn 4y ago

gamegoblin 4y ago

I think it will handle edges better because it's explicitly not trying to classify everything into objects (for the purpose of loading into their virtual representation). So it doesn't need to "understand" a situation in terms of what is physically true, it just needs to understand what information is valuable for the task of driving. Consider this edge case: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/kM-xBgz26pE https://www.youtube.com/shorts/kM-xBgz26pE A utility truck carrying a load of new traffic lights. Tesla correctly identifies them as traffic lights and loads virtual representations into its world model. It doesn't seem to cause any weird behavior (thankfully), but this demonstrates a case where doing this fancy classification actually makes your system less robust.

sho_hn 4y ago
I'd be interested in a direct comparison of how Comma's models handle the same situation. Has someone tried?

moralestapia 4y ago

I know, and I'm saying that whatever Tesla is doing, along with those "mitigations" you mentioned, is crap because of the several crashes where it has failed to detect big stationary objects in front of the car. I haven't seen comma doing stuff as dumb as that, so I'm also betting on comma's approach.

sho_hn 4y ago
I have no stake in the Comma vs. Tesla, I just don't think the Comma approach can get us all the way to a full solution either. What I think is interesting is that if you assume that there's still a couple of new ideas left before the whole thing can work, it matters who is the most poised to adopt (or even to have) the new ideas and turn them around into a product. I also don't know who that will be. A vertically integrated company like Tesla? A tech supplier like Waymo? A nimble startup like Comma?