I am not claiming that Tesla FSD is at this point, but it is obviously possible to use cameras and neural networks to drive a car, because that is literally how humans drive.
I don't think they build a 3D model of the world around them at all, while humans do (not only based on our stereo vision) and largely rely on that to drive.
Instead of stereoscopic vision, Tesla's neural net processes the data from the cameras to create a 3D view of the surroundings.
https://electrek.co/2021/07/07/hacker-tesla-full-self-drivin...
Although I think it's interesting that even in his demo there are cars popping in and out of existence in the 3D visualization of the environment. I don't think that makes much sense, if a car is observed and then occluded the logical conclusion should be that it's probably still there, maybe add an increasing uncertainty to its location, instead of assuming it disappeared.
The "but they've patched that failure!" excuse has ALSO been around, and while the cars are definitely getting better, they're still also definitely killing people in ridiculous ways.
If they were serious about patching issues, they would have added LiDAR already. They're trying to software patch their way out of the fact their perception stack is essentially blind to huge classes of objects drivers encounter every day.
No, the cameras we have now, or at least the data processing, is probably not there yet, but it's absurd to claim it's "never" possible. It's obviously either possible in a year or fifteen years, all basic hardware is advancing fast.
Absolutely correct. The problem is that Elon has been saying that for ten years and we're not really closer to it being true.
So, in the meantime, would it kill him to admit that he was wrong about lidar?
I've never made such a claim. I use self driving features in my car a good bit. They use more than just cameras though.
> Are deaf people allowed to drive cars?
Sure, but I'd say someone unable to hear things would be disadvanted at driving and potentially less safe. But you've also completely ignored the sense of feeling, understanding the feedback you're feeling on the wheel. Ignoring the feeling of the wheels on the road. Ignoring the feeling of the g forces as the car moves. Ignoring the feeling of body sway when it's windy.
You're also ignoring as others have mentioned the theory of mind of how other things actually behave around the streets. We're still not 100% sure these automated systems can actually comprehend these things.
All things a computer could sense, no doubt. But it's far more than just a few cameras.
This is the OP claim I am saying is absurd.
This is obviously untrue if you've ever watched videos from sentry mode.
Perhaps if they're early in their career. But any who have done challenging projects know that it's the last 5% that's the hardest and that often matters the most.
2. This might be obvious question but: Humans have two eyes and they are few centimeters apart so that we could use stereoscopic vision to estimate the distance. Does Tesla FSD even attempt to do something similar?
Humans have many ways of modeling distances in the real world that do not rely on stereoscopic depth.
As it is, AI just isn't smart enough to rely on only vision and they ought to be taking advantage of every economically viable sensor to make up for the difference. Hell, I thought the goal was to do better than humans?
The goal is to reduce accident and fatalities not eliminate jobs .
If LiDAR has 1/10th the fatality rate of camera setup and is less costlier than 10x the value of human life(as used in legal proceedings) then it still the only viable option
That said, I'm not sure that's what the barrier is. I think humans would have trouble driving with a fixed low resolution camera too.
I would add that it would require not only AGI, but real-time AGI!