this post was submitted on 02 Nov 2024
135 points (93.5% liked)

Technology

1421 readers
842 users here now

Which posts fit here?

Anything that is at least tangentially connected to the technology, social media platforms, informational technologies and tech policy.


Rules

1. English onlyTitle and associated content has to be in English.
2. Use original linkPost URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.
3. Respectful communicationAll communication has to be respectful of differing opinions, viewpoints, and experiences.
4. InclusivityEveryone is welcome here regardless of age, body size, visible or invisible disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender identity and expression, education, socio-economic status, nationality, personal appearance, race, caste, color, religion, or sexual identity and orientation.
5. Ad hominem attacksAny kind of personal attacks are expressly forbidden. If you can't argue your position without attacking a person's character, you already lost the argument.
6. Off-topic tangentsStay on topic. Keep it relevant.
7. Instance rules may applyIf something is not covered by community rules, but are against lemmy.zip instance rules, they will be enforced.


Companion communities

[email protected]
[email protected]


Icon attribution | Banner attribution

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

The probe hones in on one of Tesla's most eyebrow-raising decisions when it comes to its driver assistance package: the insistence on exclusively relying on camera sensors instead of LiDAR and radar like its competitors, which CEO Elon Musk has long derided as a "crutch."

In 2022, the company went all-in on cameras, ditching ultrasonic sensors in its vehicles altogether — a decision that could prove to be a major mistake as it struggles to catch up with its competition and has now promised robust self-driving capabilities to owners who may lack the necessary sensor hardware.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Their stance is that by using lidar OEMs are hamstringing themselves on solving vision because they are so reliant on it.

i get that… but… vision is kinda shit. why not use all the tools at your disposal? like literally “x ray vision” is something that we see as a super power because it’d be so useful - radar gives us that

vision is an approximation of things like lidar. can you get a depth map out of vision? sure by why not just measure it directly and then you’re not introducing error by your model literally hallucinating

The more sensors you deal with, the more your attention gets divided. You aren't laser focused on one thing.

kinda but also the last 20% takes 80% of the effort… solving a lot of easy problems with more information will lead to a better short term outcome, and then when you’re getting good results then you can solve from 80% to 85% then 85 to 90 etc across your whole sensor suite

The extra sensors also cost a lot of money

so they though? you can buy hobbyist ultrasonic sensors for literally a couple of bucks, lidar for a few hundred - sure that’s not at the grade that you’d use for cars, but at some point it’s an economies of scale problem. they’re not actually that expensive for a commodity “good enough” sensor package

You might not like the reasons, or their stance

correct - i understand them, but as an engineer it’s just wrong when you’re talking about one of the most dangerous activities that humanity collectively engages in (driving)

What happens when they keep seeing improvements in vision and now radar isn't needed?

i think this could be the sticking point - i don’t think any extra sensors are needed, just like i don’t think seatbelts or air bags etc are needed… but… they’re helpful and improve the safety of people in and around the car

all the crazy headlines you see about it are idiots in cars being idiots

agree, and i totally think driverless is the way to go - humans are far worse drivers than machines are right now without any improvement

… however, better isn’t perfect, and when it comes to safety simply ignoring tools because of some belief that eventually it’ll be fine is misguided at best, and negligent at worst

If people wanna blame Elon for convincing people to be idiots, sure, you can do that

absolutely that too! their systems aren’t “drives itself no problemo” and that’s how they’re marketing it

[–] NotMyOldRedditName 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

I don't really have much more to add, but just wanted to say I appreciated the conversation we had. This topic can often devolve and it's nice that it didn't.