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.

  • elgordino@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    67
    ·
    8 hours ago

    May? This has been obvious for ages. There are Waymo taxis doing a reasonable job now thanks to, at least in part, having appropriate sensors. The Tesla approach of just video is never going to cut it, especially in more hazardous weather conditions.

      • Bezier@suppo.fi
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        5 hours ago

        I can honestly believe that he thought it’s gonna work. He knows fuck all about anything but he still makes his bad decisions with confidence and thinks he’s always right.

        • Dave.@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          18 minutes ago

          Thought process goes like this:

          “What’s slowing us down, hardware-wise? These lidars are expensive and a pain in the ass. Let’s disrupt the status quo and ditch them and just use cameras. People drive around just fine with just stereo vision, after all. It might be hard but once we do it we’ll be way ahead of the competition.”

        • Nastybutler@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          2 hours ago

          I can almost guarantee there was at least one engineer who tried to explain why ditching LIDAR was a bad idea, and he ignored them.

  • Alex@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 hours ago

    I can see the argument that visible light should be enough given we humans can drive with just two eyes and a few mirrors. However that argument probably misses the millions of years of evolution of our neural networks have gone through while hunting and tracking threats that happens to make predicting where other cars might be mostly fine.

    I have a feeling regulators aren’t going to be happy with a claim of driving better than the average human. FSD should be aiming to be at least 10x better than the best human drivers and we’re a long way off from that.

    • DarkSurferZA@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      27
      ·
      9 hours ago

      This is one of the comments that Elon Musk uses a lot when he says humans drive with their eyes, but its untrue. We actually have a wide array of sensory systems that help us drive. Firstly, we use our ears, eyes and body motion to drive. Secondly, unlike a fixed camera mounted on a car, our heads are in constant motion. This means that we cover blind spots better than a fixed camera, and we are able to determine if it’s a small deer really close by, and a large deer really far away. Our brains take multiple 3d images and stitch them together to determine size, distance and speed.

      The best way to explain the driving using your eyes fallacy is basically to look at fpv RC cars, and see how much sensory information you have been robbed of while trying to pilot the vehicle

      • magic_lobster_party@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        7 hours ago

        Not only are our heads in constant motion. Our eyes are also always in motion. We’re constantly, quickly and accurately shifting our attention to different points in our vision.

        • Alex@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 hours ago

          That’s mostly accounting for the resolution and motion sensitivity in different parts of the eye. With enough cameras a car should be able too “see” more than we could at any one time.

          • DarkSurferZA@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 hour ago

            No, not really true.

            The way AI systems have been implemented in cars produces a flat image which we run through some fancy AI and the arrive at a conclusion. But what if 1 camera sees a child and for whatever reason, the other sees a clear road? The AI is not trained to process vision the way we do, where we use all our various senses including the conflicting info we get from each eye to arrive at a conclusion. It just does a merge and then process. It should process from each sensor, then reprocess to arrive at a conclusion

          • FrederikNJS@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            4 hours ago

            To some extent you are correct, but also notice that the cameras in teslas are not installed in pairs, so they don’t have depth perception. And since they don’t have lidar or radar it doesn’t have alternate methods to measure depth and distance.

            • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              4 hours ago

              The cameras have overlaps which can be used to measure depth and distance.

              There are multiple front cameras

              The side pillar camera has overlap with the side rear facing

              The 2 side rear facing each have overlap with the rear.

              Edit: I imagine their weakest depth/ distance perception with the current set up would be their side pillar cameras. But they could also probably do some calculations with how fast it passes from front to rear.

      • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        5 hours ago

        Nothing you said there can’t be done by cameras other than sound and the car has a microphone inside. We just might not have the capabilities yet and need to keep improving them.

        All it really means is maybe the car needs more cameras and more microphones.

        Determining distance with images from multiple angles over time can provide accurate distances and velocity

    • Doom@ttrpg.network
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      9 hours ago

      Self driving cars should be flawless and personally, as someone who does not have any professional experience in tech, I do not understand why you’d ever rely on human senses to act as sensors for a machine. We can’t even see all the colors, why would you not give this thing like four different versions of detecting things? If I have a self driving car I want a fuckin radar on my windshield that knows where every object within 40 feet is.

      • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        4 hours ago

        Except the radar doesn’t know where every object is. It can’t detect stopped things while traveling at high speeds.

        You know, the things people keep having accidents with, with or without l2 semi-autonomous software.

      • originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 hours ago

        ha, naw. they only need to be better than humans. if the computers kill 10% less people, its a win. unless you want those 10% dead for some reason…

        • DarkSurferZA@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 hour ago

          Nope, not a legit argument. Augmented human driving is way safer than autonomous cars. Fun fact, the half assed approach to autonomy used in Tesla’s are pretty shit, even by human standards.

          Augmented driver assistance systems such as accident avoidance, preemptive braking and seatbelt tensioning systems still outperform current generation “fully” autonomous cars. The fact that we let billionaires develop their tech, for profit, in production (on the road), with a direct cost to human life, should always be a problem.

          If he really wants to change the world, pay for the damn R&D, then deploy to the roads.

          • originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 hour ago

            luckily we can do more than one thing at a time implementing where each makes the most sense.

            everyone keeps saying ‘no! its this one thing or dont bother!’ no, thats not how progress is made.

            im not arguing for tesla, tesla is objectively garbage.

        • Doom@ttrpg.network
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          8 hours ago

          If that’s the metric we are really aiming for 0 cars would be key then right? All trains and bikes and shit why we even bothering with this tech

          • originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            8 hours ago

            chasing perfect in lieu of the good is not how progress is ever made. its short-sighted, and honestly… stupid.

            if we only ever attempted to create perfect things nothing would ever get created.

              • originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                5 hours ago

                i agree public transport is where its at.

                reality and logistics show we will need both here in the u.s. due to societal and resource constraints.

    • MajorHavoc@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 hours ago

      Lol. Yep.

      Anyone want to jump in and confidently vouch that Musk’s moral code won’t allow him to harvest human brains from living humans, shove them in a bottle, and use them as a fake AI in his fleet?