3 ms·

I still find it funny that Google, with the advantage of having millions of Internet users train their AI like galley slaves for free, hasn’t yet been able to c

by leobg 3y ago

I still find it funny that Google, with the advantage of having millions of Internet users train their AI like galley slaves for free, hasn’t yet been able to crack vision driven self driving. Tesla had no such advantage when training their FSD to recognize traffic lights, bicycles, motorcycles, etc.

mike_d 3y ago
> hasn’t yet been able to crack vision driven self driving But they have? For years Google Street view has read signs, house numbers, phone numbers of businesses, etc. from the environment. It is safe to assume they have this built into Waymo as well. I assume you might be trying to reference "vision only" self-driving, which is a fantasy made up by Elon Musk because nobody would sell him LiDAR sensors cheaply. https://www.thedrive.com/tech/43779/this-tesla-model-y-dummy-crash-shows-exactly-why-lidar-matters https://www.thedrive.com/tech/43779/this-tesla-model-y-dummy...
- leobg 3y ago
  This is a meme. “Sour grape Elon, touting vision because no one will sell him LiDAR sensors. Which are the gold standard sensors that solve self driving.” How exactly does LiDAR tell you whether the thing in question can move (dog) or not (trash can)? How does it allow a neural net to infer intent? You’ll actually have to solve vision. Even if you had LiDAR. There’s no way around it. And once you’ve solved it, LiDAR becomes superfluous. Chesterton’s fence.
  - mike_d 3y ago
    > How exactly does LiDAR tell you whether the thing in question can move LIDAR is continuously scanning, usually multiple times a second. It is irrelevant if the object is a trash can or a dog if it has a trajectory into the street. > And once you’ve solved it, LiDAR becomes superfluous. Only if you have the low Musk level standards of simply being equal to a human. There are plenty of jobs robots can do better than humans and driving is one of them. But it does require LIDAR and/or radar. https://abc7news.com/tesla-s-autopilot-self-driving-car-officials-investigating-teslas-autopilot-feature-after-fatal-crash/1410042/ https://abc7news.com/tesla-s-autopilot-self-driving-car-offi...
eviks 3y ago
It's a much harder problem, and Tesla is nowhere close to the solution
noduerme 3y ago
Tesla, the company that just recalled 2 million self driving cars? In fairness, the company best positioned to harness user input to an AI that avoids crashes would probably be Rockstar. OTOH, that AI would definitely not obey stop signs or pedestrians.
- hehhehaha 3y ago
  "recall"
- bheadmaster 3y ago
  Tesla recalled two million vehicles after federal officials said it had not done enough to make sure that drivers remained attentive when using the system. Not because their self-driving system sucks, or whatever you were trying to imply.
  - diputsmonro 3y ago
    If the self driving system were worth it's salt, it wouldn't matter if the drivers weren't paying attention. Ergo, the system sucks, or is at the very least not nearly as good as Tesla likes to tout.
    - rezonant 3y ago
      Well it's not like there's a self driving car system in operation today that does not require a human in the driver seat at all. Waymo has so much catching up to do.
      - deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
    - FergusArgyll 3y ago
      It can be "worth it's salt" but the government still doesn't see it as such (for many possible reasons). I don't know if it is or isn't, I never drove one, but those are two completely different standards
NotSammyHagar 3y ago
The tesla system is exciting and dangerous, because it does identify many things in the environment, but it's extremely unsafe because on city driving it will not make the right choice most of the time. On the freeway it does much better, but then that's a more restricted environment. I have an older tesla S with the pre-ai so called autopilot. It has one camera in the front and a radar and the system detects a few things like speed limit signs. The main extent of what it can do is follow the current lane pretty wall, even when it curves, slows down if it comes up to a car going slower than its preset speed. The good thing is it works on any road. It does a shockingly good job. The later systems with onboard special processors are like a crazy beginning driver to has way too much confidence and drives in dangerous situations willy nilly. There are many other people who have explored it and written long posts. It's not safe. You can try to use it be you have to be constantly paying extreme attention. It's like watching your kid drive the first time. I know you should be watching the stupid ai all the time, but it's far from being safe.
- pixl97 3y ago
  Yea, that's the problem with self driving, especially in cities/dense areas. We really need AGI first. There are so many issues that humans react to before there is identifiable danger. "Good" drivers see questionable situations and slow down or position themselves farther from potential issues before they get to the issue so they don't have to react at the last minute.

by leobg 3y ago

mike_d 3y ago

> hasn’t yet been able to crack vision driven self driving But they have? For years Google Street view has read signs, house numbers, phone numbers of businesses, etc. from the environment. It is safe to assume they have this built into Waymo as well. I assume you might be trying to reference "vision only" self-driving, which is a fantasy made up by Elon Musk because nobody would sell him LiDAR sensors cheaply. https://www.thedrive.com/tech/43779/this-tesla-model-y-dummy-crash-shows-exactly-why-lidar-matters https://www.thedrive.com/tech/43779/this-tesla-model-y-dummy...

leobg 3y ago
This is a meme. “Sour grape Elon, touting vision because no one will sell him LiDAR sensors. Which are the gold standard sensors that solve self driving.” How exactly does LiDAR tell you whether the thing in question can move (dog) or not (trash can)? How does it allow a neural net to infer intent? You’ll actually have to solve vision. Even if you had LiDAR. There’s no way around it. And once you’ve solved it, LiDAR becomes superfluous. Chesterton’s fence.
- mike_d 3y ago
  > How exactly does LiDAR tell you whether the thing in question can move LIDAR is continuously scanning, usually multiple times a second. It is irrelevant if the object is a trash can or a dog if it has a trajectory into the street. > And once you’ve solved it, LiDAR becomes superfluous. Only if you have the low Musk level standards of simply being equal to a human. There are plenty of jobs robots can do better than humans and driving is one of them. But it does require LIDAR and/or radar. https://abc7news.com/tesla-s-autopilot-self-driving-car-officials-investigating-teslas-autopilot-feature-after-fatal-crash/1410042/ https://abc7news.com/tesla-s-autopilot-self-driving-car-offi...

eviks 3y ago

It's a much harder problem, and Tesla is nowhere close to the solution

noduerme 3y ago

Tesla, the company that just recalled 2 million self driving cars? In fairness, the company best positioned to harness user input to an AI that avoids crashes would probably be Rockstar. OTOH, that AI would definitely not obey stop signs or pedestrians.

hehhehaha 3y ago
"recall"
bheadmaster 3y ago
Tesla recalled two million vehicles after federal officials said it had not done enough to make sure that drivers remained attentive when using the system. Not because their self-driving system sucks, or whatever you were trying to imply.
- diputsmonro 3y ago
  If the self driving system were worth it's salt, it wouldn't matter if the drivers weren't paying attention. Ergo, the system sucks, or is at the very least not nearly as good as Tesla likes to tout.
  - rezonant 3y ago
    Well it's not like there's a self driving car system in operation today that does not require a human in the driver seat at all. Waymo has so much catching up to do.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
  - FergusArgyll 3y ago
    It can be "worth it's salt" but the government still doesn't see it as such (for many possible reasons). I don't know if it is or isn't, I never drove one, but those are two completely different standards

NotSammyHagar 3y ago

The tesla system is exciting and dangerous, because it does identify many things in the environment, but it's extremely unsafe because on city driving it will not make the right choice most of the time. On the freeway it does much better, but then that's a more restricted environment. I have an older tesla S with the pre-ai so called autopilot. It has one camera in the front and a radar and the system detects a few things like speed limit signs. The main extent of what it can do is follow the current lane pretty wall, even when it curves, slows down if it comes up to a car going slower than its preset speed. The good thing is it works on any road. It does a shockingly good job. The later systems with onboard special processors are like a crazy beginning driver to has way too much confidence and drives in dangerous situations willy nilly. There are many other people who have explored it and written long posts. It's not safe. You can try to use it be you have to be constantly paying extreme attention. It's like watching your kid drive the first time. I know you should be watching the stupid ai all the time, but it's far from being safe.

pixl97 3y ago
Yea, that's the problem with self driving, especially in cities/dense areas. We really need AGI first. There are so many issues that humans react to before there is identifiable danger. "Good" drivers see questionable situations and slow down or position themselves farther from potential issues before they get to the issue so they don't have to react at the last minute.