4 ms·

It's the camera-only mandate, and it's not Elon's but Karpathy's. Any engineering student can understand why LIDAR+Radar+RGB is better than just a single camer

It's the camera-only mandate, and it's not Elon's but Karpathy's. Any engineering student can understand why LIDAR+Radar+RGB is better than just a single camera; and any person moderately aware of tech can realize that digital cameras are nowhere as good as the human eye. But yeah, he's a genius or something.

xiphias2 8mo ago
Using only cameras is a business decision, not tech decision: will camera + NN be good enough before LIDAR+Radar+RGB+NN can scale up. For me it looks like they will reach parity at about the same time, so camera only is not totally stupid. What's stupid is forcing robotaxi on the road before the technology is ready.
- moralestapia 8mo ago
  >reach parity at about the same time Nah, Waymo is much safer than Tesla today, while Tesla has way-mo* data to train on and much more compute capacity in their hands. They're in a dead end. Camera-only was a massive mistake. They'll never admit to that because there's now millions of cars out there that will be perceived as defective if they do. This is the decision that will sink Tesla to the ground, you'll see. But hail Karpathy, yeah. * Sorry, I couldn't resist.
  - algo_trader 8mo ago
    Was Karpathy "fired" from Tesla because he could not make camera only work ? Or did he "resign" since Elon insists on camera-only and Karpathy says i cant do it?
- wstrange 8mo ago
  Clearly they have not reached parity, as evidenced by the crash rate of Tesla. It's far from clear that the current HW4 + sensor suite will ever be sufficient for L4.
cameldrv 8mo ago
Digital cameras are much worse than the human eye, especially when it comes to dynamic range, but I don't think that's all that widely known actually. There are also better and worse digital cameras, and the ones on a Waymo are very good, and the ones on a Tesla aren't that great, and that makes a huge difference. Beyond even the cameras themselves, humans can move their head around, use sun visors, put on sunglasses, etc to deal with driving into the sun, but AVs don't have these capabilities yet.
- CydeWeys 8mo ago
  > especially when it comes to dynamic range You can solve this by having multiple cameras for each vantage point, with different sensors and lenses that are optimized for different light levels. Tesla isn't doing this mind you, but with the use of multiple cameras, it should be easy enough to exceed the dynamic range of the human eye so long as you are auto-selecting whichever camera is getting you the correct exposure at any given point.
- tzs 8mo ago
  Tesla claims that their cameras use "photon counting" and that this lets them see well in the dark, in fog, in heavy rain, and when facing bright lights like the sun. Photon counting is a real thing [1] but that's not what Tesla claims to be doing. I cannot tell if what they are doing is something actually effective that they should have called something other than "photon counting" or just the usual Musk exaggerations. Anyone here familiar with the relevant fields who can say which it is? Here's what they claim, as summarized by whatever it is Google uses for their "AI Overview". > Tesla photon counting is an advanced, raw-data approach to camera imaging for Autopilot and Full Self-Driving (FSD), where sensors detect and count individual light particles (photons) rather than processing aggregate image intensity. By removing traditional image processing filters and directly passing raw pixel data to neural networks, Tesla improves dynamic range, enabling better vision in low light and high-contrast scenarios. It says these are the key aspects: > Direct Data Processing: Instead of relying on image signal processors (ISPs) to create a human-friendly picture, Tesla feeds raw sensor data directly into the neural network, allowing the system to detect subtle light variations and near-IR (infrared) light. > Improved Dynamic Range: This approach allows the system to see in the dark exceptionally well by not losing information to standard image compression or exposure adjustments. > Increased Sensitivity: By operating at the single-photon level, the system achieves a higher signal-to-noise ratio, effectively "seeing in the dark". > Elimination of Exposure Limitations: The technique helps mitigate issues like sun glare, allowing for better visibility in extreme lighting conditions. > Neural Network Training: The raw, unfiltered data is used to train Tesla's neural networks, allowing for more robust, high-fidelity perception in complex, real-world driving environments. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photon_counting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photon_counting
epistasis 8mo ago
I have enjoyed Karpathy's educational materials over the years, but somehow missed that he was involved with Tesla to this degree. This was a very insightful comment from 9 years ago on the topic: > What this really reflects is that Tesla has painted itself into a corner. They've shipped vehicles with a weak sensor suite that's claimed to be sufficient to support self-driving, leaving the software for later. Tesla, unlike everybody else who's serious, doesn't have a LIDAR. > Now, it's "later", their software demos are about where Google was in 2010, and Tesla has a big problem. This is a really hard problem to do with cameras alone. Deep learning is useful, but it's not magic, and it's not strong AI. No wonder their head of automatic driving quit. Karpathy may bail in a few months, once he realizes he's joined a death march. > ... https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14600924 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14600924 Karpathy left in 2022. Turns out that the commenter, Animats, is John Nagle!

xiphias2 8mo ago

Using only cameras is a business decision, not tech decision: will camera + NN be good enough before LIDAR+Radar+RGB+NN can scale up. For me it looks like they will reach parity at about the same time, so camera only is not totally stupid. What's stupid is forcing robotaxi on the road before the technology is ready.

moralestapia 8mo ago
>reach parity at about the same time Nah, Waymo is much safer than Tesla today, while Tesla has way-mo* data to train on and much more compute capacity in their hands. They're in a dead end. Camera-only was a massive mistake. They'll never admit to that because there's now millions of cars out there that will be perceived as defective if they do. This is the decision that will sink Tesla to the ground, you'll see. But hail Karpathy, yeah. * Sorry, I couldn't resist.
- algo_trader 8mo ago
  Was Karpathy "fired" from Tesla because he could not make camera only work ? Or did he "resign" since Elon insists on camera-only and Karpathy says i cant do it?
wstrange 8mo ago
Clearly they have not reached parity, as evidenced by the crash rate of Tesla. It's far from clear that the current HW4 + sensor suite will ever be sufficient for L4.

cameldrv 8mo ago

Digital cameras are much worse than the human eye, especially when it comes to dynamic range, but I don't think that's all that widely known actually. There are also better and worse digital cameras, and the ones on a Waymo are very good, and the ones on a Tesla aren't that great, and that makes a huge difference. Beyond even the cameras themselves, humans can move their head around, use sun visors, put on sunglasses, etc to deal with driving into the sun, but AVs don't have these capabilities yet.

CydeWeys 8mo ago
> especially when it comes to dynamic range You can solve this by having multiple cameras for each vantage point, with different sensors and lenses that are optimized for different light levels. Tesla isn't doing this mind you, but with the use of multiple cameras, it should be easy enough to exceed the dynamic range of the human eye so long as you are auto-selecting whichever camera is getting you the correct exposure at any given point.
tzs 8mo ago
Tesla claims that their cameras use "photon counting" and that this lets them see well in the dark, in fog, in heavy rain, and when facing bright lights like the sun. Photon counting is a real thing [1] but that's not what Tesla claims to be doing. I cannot tell if what they are doing is something actually effective that they should have called something other than "photon counting" or just the usual Musk exaggerations. Anyone here familiar with the relevant fields who can say which it is? Here's what they claim, as summarized by whatever it is Google uses for their "AI Overview". > Tesla photon counting is an advanced, raw-data approach to camera imaging for Autopilot and Full Self-Driving (FSD), where sensors detect and count individual light particles (photons) rather than processing aggregate image intensity. By removing traditional image processing filters and directly passing raw pixel data to neural networks, Tesla improves dynamic range, enabling better vision in low light and high-contrast scenarios. It says these are the key aspects: > Direct Data Processing: Instead of relying on image signal processors (ISPs) to create a human-friendly picture, Tesla feeds raw sensor data directly into the neural network, allowing the system to detect subtle light variations and near-IR (infrared) light. > Improved Dynamic Range: This approach allows the system to see in the dark exceptionally well by not losing information to standard image compression or exposure adjustments. > Increased Sensitivity: By operating at the single-photon level, the system achieves a higher signal-to-noise ratio, effectively "seeing in the dark". > Elimination of Exposure Limitations: The technique helps mitigate issues like sun glare, allowing for better visibility in extreme lighting conditions. > Neural Network Training: The raw, unfiltered data is used to train Tesla's neural networks, allowing for more robust, high-fidelity perception in complex, real-world driving environments. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photon_counting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photon_counting

epistasis 8mo ago

I have enjoyed Karpathy's educational materials over the years, but somehow missed that he was involved with Tesla to this degree. This was a very insightful comment from 9 years ago on the topic: > What this really reflects is that Tesla has painted itself into a corner. They've shipped vehicles with a weak sensor suite that's claimed to be sufficient to support self-driving, leaving the software for later. Tesla, unlike everybody else who's serious, doesn't have a LIDAR. > Now, it's "later", their software demos are about where Google was in 2010, and Tesla has a big problem. This is a really hard problem to do with cameras alone. Deep learning is useful, but it's not magic, and it's not strong AI. No wonder their head of automatic driving quit. Karpathy may bail in a few months, once he realizes he's joined a death march. > ... https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14600924 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14600924 Karpathy left in 2022. Turns out that the commenter, Animats, is John Nagle!