The article was pretty normal for its slightly crappy coverage of science/engineering. But the potential for extreme low cost of the mono-SLAM approach is actua

The article was pretty normal for its slightly crappy coverage of science/engineering. But the potential for extreme low cost of the mono-SLAM approach is actually the news here. It's almost all software. 1) You seem to be missing the important point - the approach they are using uses ordinary cameras and a computer. This really, truly can be very, very cheap to implement, once we have the (very expensive to develop but near-free-to-deploy) software. They are trying to see how much of the driving problem can be solved without using expensive laser rangefinders, etc. Your cellphone has all the hardware needed, but is not yet fast enough to do it in real time. OK, it needs more RAM too. 2) You have the prototype vs. production cost exactly inverted. For example, the iPad is much more expensive than the component cost of a dedicated touch display, which your new car already has installed for the GPS map anyway. 3) Your car's electronic traction control system is mission critical and uses very cheap electronics and near-zero-marginal-cost software. It did not add $5000 to either the build cost or purchase price of your car. 4) When an engineer talks about cost, she is not thinking about retail price.