▲ 884 ▼ Tesla’s Autopilot and Full Self-Driving linked to hundreds of crashes, dozens of deaths (www.theverge.com) submitted 2 years ago by jorge@feddit.cl to c/technology@lemmy.world 265 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[+] TypicalHog@lemm.ee -47 points 2 years ago (14 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 14 child comments replies: [–] piecat@lemmy.world 19 points 2 years ago (8 children) Obviously? Why wouldn't we want other types of sensors...? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 8 child comments replies: [+] TypicalHog@lemm.ee -34 points 2 years ago (7 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 7 child comments replies: [–] AdrianTheFrog@lemmy.world 10 points 2 years ago (4 children) Because that’s expensive and can be done with a camera. Expensive, as in probably less than $600? Compared to the $35000 cost of a tesla? (comparing the cost of the iPhone 12 (without lidar) and iPhone 12 pro (with lidar), we can guess that the sensor probably costs less than $200, so 3 of them (for left, right, and front) would cost probably less than $600) lidar can actually be very cheap and small. Unfortunately, Apple bought the only company that seems to make sensors like that (besides some other super high end models) There have been a lot of promising research papers on the technology lately though, so I expect more, higher resolution and cheaper lidar sensors to be available relatively soon (next couple years probably). permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [+] Grippler@feddit.dk 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent [+] TypicalHog@lemm.ee -4 points 2 years ago (2 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] BURN@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago (1 child) To get the same resolution and quality of image in all lighting scenarios, cameras are actually going to be more expensive than LiDAR. Cameras suffer in low light, low contrast situations due to the physical limitations of bending light. More light = bigger lenses = higher cost, when LiDAR works better and is cheaper permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [+] TypicalHog@lemm.ee 0 points 2 years ago [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent [–] Zink@programming.dev 6 points 2 years ago (1 child) My eyes are decent, but if I had a sixth sense that gave me full accurate 3D 360 spatial awareness regardless of visibility, I would probably not turn it off just to use my eyes. I’d use both. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] TypicalHog@lemm.ee 0 points 2 years ago Alright. permalink fedilink source parent [–] MedicPigBabySaver@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago Idiot permalink fedilink source parent [–] mojofrododojo@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago (1 child) Camera only should obviously be the endgame goal for all robots. I can't tell if you're a moron or attempting sarcasm but this is the least informed opinion I've seen in ages. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [+] TypicalHog@lemm.ee -3 points 2 years ago [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent [–] howrar@lemmy.ca 6 points 2 years ago (1 child) I've heard Elon Musk (or was it Karpathy?) talking about how camera should be sufficient for all scenarios because humans can do it on vision alone, but that's poor reasoning IMO. Cars are not humans, so there's no reason to confine them to the same limitations. If we want them to be safer and more capable than human drivers, one way to do that is by providing them with more information. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] KingThrillgore@lemmy.ml 5 points 2 years ago We built things like Lidars and ultrasound because we want better than our eyes at depth and sight. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] piecat@lemmy.world 19 points 2 years ago (8 children) Obviously? Why wouldn't we want other types of sensors...? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 8 child comments replies: [+] TypicalHog@lemm.ee -34 points 2 years ago (7 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 7 child comments replies: [–] AdrianTheFrog@lemmy.world 10 points 2 years ago (4 children) Because that’s expensive and can be done with a camera. Expensive, as in probably less than $600? Compared to the $35000 cost of a tesla? (comparing the cost of the iPhone 12 (without lidar) and iPhone 12 pro (with lidar), we can guess that the sensor probably costs less than $200, so 3 of them (for left, right, and front) would cost probably less than $600) lidar can actually be very cheap and small. Unfortunately, Apple bought the only company that seems to make sensors like that (besides some other super high end models) There have been a lot of promising research papers on the technology lately though, so I expect more, higher resolution and cheaper lidar sensors to be available relatively soon (next couple years probably). permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [+] Grippler@feddit.dk 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent [+] TypicalHog@lemm.ee -4 points 2 years ago (2 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] BURN@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago (1 child) To get the same resolution and quality of image in all lighting scenarios, cameras are actually going to be more expensive than LiDAR. Cameras suffer in low light, low contrast situations due to the physical limitations of bending light. More light = bigger lenses = higher cost, when LiDAR works better and is cheaper permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [+] TypicalHog@lemm.ee 0 points 2 years ago [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent [–] Zink@programming.dev 6 points 2 years ago (1 child) My eyes are decent, but if I had a sixth sense that gave me full accurate 3D 360 spatial awareness regardless of visibility, I would probably not turn it off just to use my eyes. I’d use both. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] TypicalHog@lemm.ee 0 points 2 years ago Alright. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] TypicalHog@lemm.ee -34 points 2 years ago (7 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 7 child comments replies: [–] AdrianTheFrog@lemmy.world 10 points 2 years ago (4 children) Because that’s expensive and can be done with a camera. Expensive, as in probably less than $600? Compared to the $35000 cost of a tesla? (comparing the cost of the iPhone 12 (without lidar) and iPhone 12 pro (with lidar), we can guess that the sensor probably costs less than $200, so 3 of them (for left, right, and front) would cost probably less than $600) lidar can actually be very cheap and small. Unfortunately, Apple bought the only company that seems to make sensors like that (besides some other super high end models) There have been a lot of promising research papers on the technology lately though, so I expect more, higher resolution and cheaper lidar sensors to be available relatively soon (next couple years probably). permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [+] Grippler@feddit.dk 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent [+] TypicalHog@lemm.ee -4 points 2 years ago (2 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] BURN@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago (1 child) To get the same resolution and quality of image in all lighting scenarios, cameras are actually going to be more expensive than LiDAR. Cameras suffer in low light, low contrast situations due to the physical limitations of bending light. More light = bigger lenses = higher cost, when LiDAR works better and is cheaper permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [+] TypicalHog@lemm.ee 0 points 2 years ago [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent [–] Zink@programming.dev 6 points 2 years ago (1 child) My eyes are decent, but if I had a sixth sense that gave me full accurate 3D 360 spatial awareness regardless of visibility, I would probably not turn it off just to use my eyes. I’d use both. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] TypicalHog@lemm.ee 0 points 2 years ago Alright. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] AdrianTheFrog@lemmy.world 10 points 2 years ago (4 children) Because that’s expensive and can be done with a camera. Expensive, as in probably less than $600? Compared to the $35000 cost of a tesla? (comparing the cost of the iPhone 12 (without lidar) and iPhone 12 pro (with lidar), we can guess that the sensor probably costs less than $200, so 3 of them (for left, right, and front) would cost probably less than $600) lidar can actually be very cheap and small. Unfortunately, Apple bought the only company that seems to make sensors like that (besides some other super high end models) There have been a lot of promising research papers on the technology lately though, so I expect more, higher resolution and cheaper lidar sensors to be available relatively soon (next couple years probably). permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [+] Grippler@feddit.dk 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent [+] TypicalHog@lemm.ee -4 points 2 years ago (2 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] BURN@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago (1 child) To get the same resolution and quality of image in all lighting scenarios, cameras are actually going to be more expensive than LiDAR. Cameras suffer in low light, low contrast situations due to the physical limitations of bending light. More light = bigger lenses = higher cost, when LiDAR works better and is cheaper permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [+] TypicalHog@lemm.ee 0 points 2 years ago [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[+] Grippler@feddit.dk 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[+] TypicalHog@lemm.ee -4 points 2 years ago (2 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] BURN@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago (1 child) To get the same resolution and quality of image in all lighting scenarios, cameras are actually going to be more expensive than LiDAR. Cameras suffer in low light, low contrast situations due to the physical limitations of bending light. More light = bigger lenses = higher cost, when LiDAR works better and is cheaper permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [+] TypicalHog@lemm.ee 0 points 2 years ago [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] BURN@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago (1 child) To get the same resolution and quality of image in all lighting scenarios, cameras are actually going to be more expensive than LiDAR. Cameras suffer in low light, low contrast situations due to the physical limitations of bending light. More light = bigger lenses = higher cost, when LiDAR works better and is cheaper permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [+] TypicalHog@lemm.ee 0 points 2 years ago [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Zink@programming.dev 6 points 2 years ago (1 child) My eyes are decent, but if I had a sixth sense that gave me full accurate 3D 360 spatial awareness regardless of visibility, I would probably not turn it off just to use my eyes. I’d use both. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] TypicalHog@lemm.ee 0 points 2 years ago Alright. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] mojofrododojo@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago (1 child) Camera only should obviously be the endgame goal for all robots. I can't tell if you're a moron or attempting sarcasm but this is the least informed opinion I've seen in ages. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [+] TypicalHog@lemm.ee -3 points 2 years ago [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] howrar@lemmy.ca 6 points 2 years ago (1 child) I've heard Elon Musk (or was it Karpathy?) talking about how camera should be sufficient for all scenarios because humans can do it on vision alone, but that's poor reasoning IMO. Cars are not humans, so there's no reason to confine them to the same limitations. If we want them to be safer and more capable than human drivers, one way to do that is by providing them with more information. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] KingThrillgore@lemmy.ml 5 points 2 years ago We built things like Lidars and ultrasound because we want better than our eyes at depth and sight. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] KingThrillgore@lemmy.ml 5 points 2 years ago We built things like Lidars and ultrasound because we want better than our eyes at depth and sight. permalink fedilink source parent