8 ms·
> To me, it indicates that they haven't solved even the easiest part: there is something in a static setting, don't crash into it, stop. That turns out to be a
by eschneider 3y ago
> To me, it indicates that they haven't solved even the easiest part: there is something in a static setting, don't crash into it, stop.
That turns out to be a harder problem than most people think, and it gets in the way of the 'driving' part. "Are we looking at some big, blank object or are we looking at the sky? It's probably the sky, so we'll just drop it from the model." Which is how Teslas drive into big trucks. :/
- mnau 3y agoEven if visuals failed, Tesla has a sonar, radar and Tesla is moving at snail pace. Hell, my vacuum stops moving when it detects it crashed into something (likely torque required to move wheels is larger than expected). Edit: at the end of the day, it doesn't matter why it happened. The result is a crash in a super simple environment and is (to me) quite indicative to the state of things. They are supposed to come up with solutions, not excuses (also, Elon hates lidar, but that is still on Tesla).
- Anarch157a 3y agoTesla dropped radar, lidar and ultra-sound from their cars a while ago [0]. This was another childish decision by Musk, who personally overruled the engineers [1]. [0] https://www.tesla.com/support/transitioning-tesla-vision https://www.tesla.com/support/transitioning-tesla-vision [1] https://insideevs.com/news/658439/elon-musk-overruled-tesla-autopilot-engineers-radar-removal/ https://insideevs.com/news/658439/elon-musk-overruled-tesla-...
- yreg 3y agoAndrej Karpathy claims to stand by that decision: https://youtu.be/_W1JBAfV4Io?si=QUceD5ZG0j_hclHP&t=39 https://youtu.be/_W1JBAfV4Io?si=QUceD5ZG0j_hclHP&t=39
- tsimionescu 3y ago"Did you agree with your egomaniacal boss who thinks he is a brilliant engineer and programmer when he made one of the biggest blunders, or did you know better?"
- valval 3y ago0 projection or prejudice being done here, you come across as perfectly rational.
- doublespanner 3y agoThey are trialing a radar again in the S, but from their marketing it doesn't look like it's a clear benifit yet
- acdha 3y agoI would compare them to other companies: they’re not going to lightly outshow their own products since that both affects sales and increases the odds of a lawsuit on behalf of everyone who bought the older models under false advertising. It’s more likely to end badly in court if the lawyer can say everyone else in the industry got this right but their clients vehicles will never get the promised features because they lack the necessary hardware.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- malfist 3y agoDoes Tesla still have sonar and radar? I thought everything but cameras were removed a few years ago
- me_me_me 3y ago> Hell, my vacuum stops moving when it detects it crashed into something (likely torque required to move wheels is larger than expected). Ha ha, that's a good take. Maybe you could help musk and point him to that vacuum :D On a serious note self driving sounds like a near impossible problem due to deadly corner cases that take intuition of a general purpose AI. Driving in California is probably the easiest level of complexity. How do you drive in inner EU town and cities? I will believe when I see it. Otherwise any claims of 'we almost have it working' are lies to me
- Tempest1981 3y ago> my vacuum stops moving when it detects it crashed into something In the home, fewer objects are in motion near the vacuum. But maybe if you have a lot of cats...
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- numpad0 3y agoProblems involved being hard doesn't make it okay to willfully sell an unfinishable product. I know for the fact that making a flying carpet is hard. Doesn't mean you should be greatful for life to be able to pay me $1M for a non-flying flying carpet that sets itself on fire.
- mrpopo 3y agoIt's not a difficult problem as long as you have radar/lidar and not just computer vision as input. I understand computer vision could be used as primary input, but IMO it should be mandatory to have some kind of proximity sensor as backup input. Proximity sensor senses something, speed vector indicates collision in X seconds => stop
- mensetmanusman 3y agoIt's not a difficult problem for humans with no lidar and 100W operating budget.
- suoduandao3 3y agoNot a computer vision engineer here - do we just not know how the human brain recognizes objects or does it do so in a way that's hard to reproduce in silicon?
- tsimionescu 3y agoWe don't know how it works, and the parts that we do know are very hard to implement. In particular, our vision is very very tied to our model of the world, and is clearly an evolutionarily derived trait, not something we learn from scratch as children. We are basically born with a model that can augment the raw sensory input with basic physics (object permanence, but also we have an intuition for things like "heavy = large momentum even at slow speeds", and for "what goes up will come down", some basic optics of how objects cast shadows, and others). In addition, we learn to recognize objects and we know their actual sizes from past experience, so we typically estimate distance this way far better than relying on parallax. "Small image of car" is automatically "car far away", even if seen with one eye, because we know what size a car is. In fact, much of our brilliant vision starts going awry immediately in an artifical setting with misleading sized objects.
- jampekka 3y agoWe don't have much idea of what "our model of the world" is. Probably quite little of it is genetically encoded. E.g. object permanence has to be learned (takes around 7 months). What you describe is largely the classical "cognitivist" model, which is more or less dead in the contemporary tought. We don't even have a very good account of depth estimation, apart from "bunch of things seem to affect it".
- asylteltine 3y agoIt’s actually not hard, like at all. Every other manufacturer solved it. The problem is that Elon dropped all sane forms of “vision” like lidar because he wants to squeeze out profits at the cost of consumer safety (not to mention Tesla kills motorcyclists hand over fist) He’s hell bent on machine vision which can’t even identify a cyclist for fucks sake! And somehow this is legal to deploy on public roads!
- badpun 3y agoAre they just doing object detection, or are they also doing 3d scene reconstruction (visual SLAM)? My bet is on the latter, and the SLAM reconstruction should show them that there's something dangerously close to the car. Of course, vSLAM is notoriously finnicky in corner cases, lighting conditions etc., so it might have just not noticed the plane at all.