Hacker News Reader

Comment by iabacu | Hacker News Reader

Not using lidar for self driving cars is a giant premature optimization (just like premature automation, etc)

Maybe, but where are all the lidar cars that drive significantly better than a Tesla?

Tesla cars, with the sensor packages they currently have, do not have a path forward to Level 5, despite the marketing claims of Tesla. Claiming that their cars have all the hardware required for Level 5 is a flagrant lie, which they can get away with for now because they've given themselves plenty of outs to avoid ever having to deliver Level 5 capabilities (when they fail they can blame inadequate software or an unsuitable regulatory environment.)

A word on that software: As it currently stands, they are delivering software that enables Level 2 capabilities. This is sometimes called "hands on", as in your hands should remain on the steering wheel and your eyes on the road, ready to take control in an instant. According to Tesla, drivers are to keep their hands on the wheel and pay attention to the road; if the driver fails to do so then they are at fault for any accident. However Elon Musk contradicts this company policy and has promoted the system as hands off on national television. Why would he do something so irresponsible? Because misrepresenting the hardware and software capabilities of his cars helps him sell cars. He knows the hype for self driving cars is at a fever pitch, and stretching the truth helps him profit from that hype.

https://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-breaks-tesla-autop...

Why can't the hardware deliver Level 5? The one area that he is saying they'll upgrade is their inference engine – is that what you're referring to?

Well no one knows how to get to level 5 since it doesn't exist yet. But there doesn't seem to be any theoretical reason why maps+vision+radar can't scale to level 5.

Their radar doesn't have the angular resolution to do anything other than adaptive cruise control, and while they boast 360˚ camera coverage, whatever stereoscopic data they are getting from those cameras is evidently insufficient to detect a large firetruck parked in the middle of the street.

Now consider MobilEye, a subsidiary of Intel and a major player in the field of camera/radar driver assist technology. Tesla was using MobilEye tech, until MobilEye terminated that relationship because they believed Tesla was being irresponsible with how far they were pushing MobilEye's tech. MobilEye had a financial incentive to see Tesla succeed with a camera/radar only solution, and continues to have a financial incentive to downplay the necessity of LIDAR. But do they? No. Instead you've got MobilEye's CEO Amnon Shashua talking about the virtues of a combined LIDAR/radar and camera/radar solution, while trash talking Elon Musk for being irresponsible.

When you consider who is saying what and what their financial incentives are, it becomes clear that Amnon Shashua is an ethical person and Elon is a car salesman who is making technically unfalsifiable claims about the capabilities of the hardware in Tesla cars to profit from automation hype.

Waymo, Cruise, Zoox, Apple, a LOT of teams really, Tesla is only really good at marketing SDCs, what they have is really little more than an ADAS.

But you don't know this for sure since you can't use any of these cars, right?

The point being Tesla has actually shipped a product that's pretty good, and therefore, is currently the best in the market. Sure maybe Waymo's system is better but since I can't use a Waymo I don't think we should be counting it just yet.

You can get a ride with Waymo if you head down to Phoenix.

If you're on a list[1].

"Waymo One is only available to a small group of consumers who also participated in the early rider program."

[1] https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/281776-waymo-launches-co...

What makes you think that Tesla is the best implementation of a self-driving car today?

I've not tried them all, in fact I've only driven a Tesla on autopilot for a few 100 miles.

However with 1 billion miles driven on autopilot and (IMO) relatively few problems it seems like it must be pretty good. I hear about accidents involving uber, waymo, and similar just about as often as Tesla, despite Tesla shipping 5000 cars a week or more. Granted only a faction of those are likely to have the $5,000 enhanced autopilot, still radically more miles driven than anyone else.

Well, all of them are still in extensive testing with bug reports from small-event disengagement, not in customer bought cars involved in fatal crashes.

I'm interested in what anybody has to say something about this. Tesla has been reckless in their release and marketing of their 'Autopilot' software that lead to fatal crashes. Other companies (even Uber) are more responsible that that. The Uber fatal accident happened in a test vehicle, not customer bought cars. I'm not saying what Tesla has done in the self-driving arena trivial (it is not). But that does not mean their conduct is responsible.

Except for the lidar equipped uber that killed a woman you mean?

Sure, watching a Disney movie while a Telsa drives is stupid and got someone killed. Seems like a pretty poor proof that lidar is superior. Not to mention Tesla hardware and software has some pretty far since then.

The lidar detected the woman.

However, the car was programmed not to brake...

The problem was the software, not the hardware.

How's this a good argument? The entire point in favor of lidar is that the hardware gives more data to software which can in turn be used to make decisions. There is no hardware/software distinction here. Nobody claims that lidar isn't capable of detecting objects. (Note that this is not a comment against lidar, I agree with you but I don't think your argument is sufficient)

The non-lidar system detected the woman too.

Got someone killed? There has been multiple crashes caused by Tesla's system not registering an object that would have been registered by a Lidar.

Sure, but there's also cases of Tesla's acting to save lives in cases where Lidar wouldn't have helped. For instance reacting to brake lights. Or slowing when a car on front of another car, not visible, had an accident.

Sure Lidar + camera would be ideal, but if picking one or another it's far from clear where would be safer.

Lidar has 3D of course, but a MUCH lower data rate, and of course no color.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com