Tesla Live Stream – Autonomy Day [video]

Post by sytelus » Mon, Apr 22, 2019, 9:15 PM UTC

gambiting wrote: post #168

sytelus wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would expect autonomous cars to be have doubled down security against tinkering although I personally don't like that. The reason is purely public safety. If someone could re-program autonomous cars to slam into public crowds and places, imagine the havoc it can cause. A malicious actors can just walk in to parking garage, put in some wires and reprogram every vehicle they can get their hands on - imagine those sce…

You can already do that with existing cars(pretty much anything that has power steering, so last 30 years of cars) and yet you don't see people hijacking vehicles left and right this way(or any other way, you can cut someone's brakes in 5 seconds and yet it's extremely rare). I think this is a made up problem.

Post by maccam94 » Mon, Apr 22, 2019, 9:17 PM UTC

Fricken wrote: post #173

sairahul82 wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think any one is doing this. This is the point Karpathy is making. Vision is essential and needs to be perfect and also has all the information to recreate the 3d environment. That's why lidar is not required and is expensive.

Vision is probablistic. You can improve your probabilities with more data and deeper nets, but the probability is never 100%. Inferring depth using triangulation of extracted features using vision is also probabilistic. Lidar gives you very rudimentary depth and positional data, but it is precise, and reliable, and the false positives are low. Lidar is not seeing the world as a series of probabilistic phantasms that…

Post by Fricken » Mon, Apr 22, 2019, 9:20 PM UTC

gamblor956 wrote: post #147

gonehome wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They pair it with a forward facing radar which is inexpensive and good at depth perception. Elon predicts all competitors will eventually drop lidar. He mentions it's expensive, but also not as good in a lot of cases (and all roads/signs are designed for vision). He argues that getting vision to work is a prerequisite for getting self-driving to work and once you have it working, lidar is worthless (and unnecessary).

Elon Musk is noted for his premature optimization. Case in point: both the Gigafactory (vastly overbuilt for the quantity of batteries actually produced) and the Alien Dreadnought (vastly overbuilt for the number of cars Tesla current produces...assuming that Tesla is ever able to get the fancy automation working). Boring Co digging a two-mile tunnel in West LA without bothering to learn how to pour concrete smoothly…

Post by DeonPenny » Mon, Apr 22, 2019, 9:22 PM UTC

gamblor956 wrote: post #163

grey-area wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They explain it in the software talk. In short, I think his thesis is: Lidar is expensive, and gives surprisingly limited data (just points of depth) and is like a crutch that will only get so far. It will not get you to full autonomy so why not spend the time and money on vision which will (as proven by humans). They also do use radar and ultrasonics (not visual spectrum). At some point your machine must be good eno…

One thing LIDAR can do that Tesla's ML vision software cannot is identify freeway dividers and trucks turning in front of the car. Once Tesla can actually handle those two extremely basic tasks maybe they can start talking about how vision is better than LIDAR. Until then, it's just more hot air, and that's not even taking into account Tesla's claims of using ML to predict the actions of uncontrolled independent agen…

Post by joshlegs » Mon, Apr 22, 2019, 9:24 PM UTC

dforrestwilson wrote: post #62

jacquesm wrote: post #41

The thing I don't get about Tesla is why they keep heaping more on their plate rather than just (for large values of just) re-doing the motive power bit. That alone is a massive challenge and it is not something they've licked at economies of scale that allow a $10K vehicle to be brought to market, which is what it will take to really make this a success. Every extra they tack on to the base product is one they will…

“diverting attention from the main problem they are dealing with, which may in the longer term leave open enough room for the competition to wiggle through.” Perhaps this is the intent rather than a side-effect.