3 ms·

Humans have more senses than just vision. Also a few cameras aren't completely covering the range of human vision.

bpodgursky 2y ago
? Do you use your sense of smell to drive a car? Are deaf people allowed to drive cars? No, the cameras we have now, or at least the data processing, is probably not there yet, but it's absurd to claim it's "never" possible. It's obviously either possible in a year or fifteen years, all basic hardware is advancing fast.
- tredre3 2y ago
  > it's absurd to claim it's "never" possible Absolutely correct. The problem is that Elon has been saying that for ten years and we're not really closer to it being true. So, in the meantime, would it kill him to admit that he was wrong about lidar?
- vel0city 2y ago
  > but it's absurd to claim it's "never" possible. I've never made such a claim. I use self driving features in my car a good bit. They use more than just cameras though. > Are deaf people allowed to drive cars? Sure, but I'd say someone unable to hear things would be disadvanted at driving and potentially less safe. But you've also completely ignored the sense of feeling, understanding the feedback you're feeling on the wheel. Ignoring the feeling of the wheels on the road. Ignoring the feeling of the g forces as the car moves. Ignoring the feeling of body sway when it's windy. You're also ignoring as others have mentioned the theory of mind of how other things actually behave around the streets. We're still not 100% sure these automated systems can actually comprehend these things. All things a computer could sense, no doubt. But it's far more than just a few cameras.
  - bpodgursky 2y ago
    > Camera feeds and a neural network are not enough for self driving, no matter how much they're training. Never ever. This is the OP claim I am saying is absurd.
intrasight 2y ago
Yes, but I don't think you could argue the point that the visual sense is probably 95% of it. But even so, it could be decades before computers achieve the sensory capabilities of the human visual system. Why not, during those hundred years, add some lidar to the sensory mix. Just because it didn't evolve in humans doesn't mean it's not a good thing. Bats and dolphins use the biological analogue very effectively.
- iknowstuff 2y ago
  Their cameras have better dynamic range than humans, not to mention the neural net can consume multiple exposures simultaneously. From surround video.
  - vel0city 2y ago
    > Their cameras have better dynamic range than humans This is obviously untrue if you've ever watched videos from sentry mode.
    - iknowstuff 2y ago
      Sentry mode videos are sdr
- bcrl 2y ago
  Vision isn't the only problem. Can computers do a decent job of theory-of-mind of other drivers? What about seeing a tire bouncing down off an overpass that's visible to the driver? Software developers love saying that it's the 95% that matters, but in safety critical systems, that simplification simply does not work.
  - intrasight 2y ago
    > Software developers love saying that it's the 95% that matters Perhaps if they're early in their career. But any who have done challenging projects know that it's the last 5% that's the hardest and that often matters the most.
aplummer 2y ago
Also humans suck at driving compared to what we expect of machines

? Do you use your sense of smell to drive a car? Are deaf people allowed to drive cars? No, the cameras we have now, or at least the data processing, is probably not there yet, but it's absurd to claim it's "never" possible. It's obviously either possible in a year or fifteen years, all basic hardware is advancing fast.

tredre3 2y ago
> it's absurd to claim it's "never" possible Absolutely correct. The problem is that Elon has been saying that for ten years and we're not really closer to it being true. So, in the meantime, would it kill him to admit that he was wrong about lidar?
vel0city 2y ago
> but it's absurd to claim it's "never" possible. I've never made such a claim. I use self driving features in my car a good bit. They use more than just cameras though. > Are deaf people allowed to drive cars? Sure, but I'd say someone unable to hear things would be disadvanted at driving and potentially less safe. But you've also completely ignored the sense of feeling, understanding the feedback you're feeling on the wheel. Ignoring the feeling of the wheels on the road. Ignoring the feeling of the g forces as the car moves. Ignoring the feeling of body sway when it's windy. You're also ignoring as others have mentioned the theory of mind of how other things actually behave around the streets. We're still not 100% sure these automated systems can actually comprehend these things. All things a computer could sense, no doubt. But it's far more than just a few cameras.
- bpodgursky 2y ago
  > Camera feeds and a neural network are not enough for self driving, no matter how much they're training. Never ever. This is the OP claim I am saying is absurd.

intrasight 2y ago

Yes, but I don't think you could argue the point that the visual sense is probably 95% of it. But even so, it could be decades before computers achieve the sensory capabilities of the human visual system. Why not, during those hundred years, add some lidar to the sensory mix. Just because it didn't evolve in humans doesn't mean it's not a good thing. Bats and dolphins use the biological analogue very effectively.

iknowstuff 2y ago
Their cameras have better dynamic range than humans, not to mention the neural net can consume multiple exposures simultaneously. From surround video.
- vel0city 2y ago
  > Their cameras have better dynamic range than humans This is obviously untrue if you've ever watched videos from sentry mode.
  - iknowstuff 2y ago
    Sentry mode videos are sdr
bcrl 2y ago
Vision isn't the only problem. Can computers do a decent job of theory-of-mind of other drivers? What about seeing a tire bouncing down off an overpass that's visible to the driver? Software developers love saying that it's the 95% that matters, but in safety critical systems, that simplification simply does not work.
- intrasight 2y ago
  > Software developers love saying that it's the 95% that matters Perhaps if they're early in their career. But any who have done challenging projects know that it's the last 5% that's the hardest and that often matters the most.

aplummer 2y ago

Also humans suck at driving compared to what we expect of machines