4 ms·
Musk used to argue that since humans can drive without Lidar, cars could as well.
by amadeuspagel 2y ago
Musk used to argue that since humans can drive without Lidar, cars could as well.
- stetrain 2y agoAs far as I know Musk and Tesla's position on this hasn't changed. They use Lidar for validation during R&D, they don't ship it on production vehicles.
- tensor 2y agoThat must clearly be true, but I'd like cars to driver better than humans and make use of all the tech that we can't. Academically vision only is an interesting feat, and as a backup mode for when sensors fail it makes sense to pursue vision only operation, but it seems to me that having more sensors should be superior.
- grecy 2y ago> but it seems to me that having more sensors should be superior. What do you do when the sensors disagree?
- kirubakaran 2y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sensor_fusion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sensor_fusion
- neom 2y agoIt's an interesting argument, I'm sure there are lots of reasons why it's a bad argument, but the one I think about is that depth perception isn't actually fully understood, mostly, but not fully, and, an important system that is always overlooked in that argument is that the vestibular system (among others) is also involved in depth perception. You can say binocular vision is just LIDAR, but that's not the whole story.
- ryandvm 2y agoThat was always a stupid argument because if you replicate how humans do it, you're going to replicate our failure modes too. Things like being crappy at night driving, subject to optical illusions, etc. I can assure you that a human with LIDAR and RADAR built in would get around even better than without.