4 ms·
the issue is, more of these sensors costs a lot of money, so can you get to the point that it's a business and not a science experiment if each vehicle costs a
by vasilipupkin 3y ago
the issue is, more of these sensors costs a lot of money, so can you get to the point that it's a business and not a science experiment if each vehicle costs a massive amount? if you can get away with some sensors and not others, you have lower costs. Of course, if cost is not a factor, more sensors is better.
- saurik 3y ago"The argument only makes sense if you want to save money, but then say you are being cheap up front."
- vasilipupkin 3y agowell, you aren't being cheap. If you can get to where you want to go without lidar, why would you want to spend more money on lidar. If you can't it's a different matter.
- saurik 3y agoGreat! In some sense, then, you are agreeing rather than arguing ;P. The point was if they want to say that, they can say that, and the people in this thread (including me, FWIW) would sigh with casual acceptance; but, instead, they make the argument that it is somehow better NOT to have the lidar, as they supposedly are now (as opposed to a while back?...) claiming that it is so difficult to "fuse" the knowledge of the various sensors that you are better off picking only one.
- vasilipupkin 3y agosure, but I think Musk has said it multiple times as well.