401–410 of 658 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why can't they just whack it with some kind of Bayesian latent space model. A big jump should have to require more evidence than the history of the previous posterior
"Just". Pro tip, these guys work on these problems all day every day. If you think you've solved one of their major problems after 18 seconds of consideration then you're probably missing a large amount of context.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not sure I'd trust humans since their crude visual systems lead to reaction times of over one second: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233039156_Brake_Rea... 17x faster is an impressive improvement
Human beings visual systems are far faster than once per second. Your reference is complete reaction time to both process visual information and decide on an appropriate action and actuate a control surface given a state model of the world. Your brain most certainly processes visual information faster than 17 fps doing novel segmentation and odometry.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>I thought fully autonomous driving was meant to be done by now? Musk was bullshitting when he made that prediction. Maybe he did it because he had bought his own bullshit. Personally I think what's more likely is that he was cynically conning people. In reality, I think no-one is anywhere close to fully self driving cars. I would be surprised if we saw fully self driving cars any time in the next 50 years. The whole…
This has been my take too. The whole hackathon and hiring effort screams to me of "we have finally concluded that a LIDAR-less implementation is impossible within our lifetimes. We hope one of you has at least a Hail Mary that we can burn money on so we can at least pretend that it may still be done. Anything to keep us from having to refund millions, dealing with a huge class action, seeing the stock halve, and Elon…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> the piles of local regulation that restrict mass transit Yes, that's what's stopping local governments building more mass transit, it's all those regulations imposed by the pesky local government!
Yes. Take SF, for instance. EDIT: Rate-limited, so read response to request to elaborate below San Francisco has multiple entities involved in the process of policy relating to transit. So, while the SF MTA and Jeffrey Tumlin may want more rail (perhaps underground), more buses, and fewer car thoroughfares there are also supervisors in charge of local districts who may oppose construction on grounds that they will hu…
Not sure I'd trust an autopilot based on crude visual odometry and segmentation that can only achieve a paltry 17 fps.
Not sure I'd trust humans since their crude visual systems lead to reaction times of over one second: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233039156_Brake_Rea... 17x faster is an impressive improvement
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> computers are any better at driving than humans Does it matter though? If it drives like my grandma, I can still do other things while in a car and hate commuting/traffic jams a bit less.
The problem is that all these so-called "self-driving" systems expect you to be alert and ready because at any moment they might decide that the human needs to be in control again. So you can't do other things while in the car.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Human beings visual systems are far faster than once per second. Your reference is complete reaction time to both process visual information and decide on an appropriate action and actuate a control surface given a state model of the world. Your brain most certainly processes visual information faster than 17 fps doing novel segmentation and odometry.
Tesla's system is also doing much more than simple segmentation and visual odometry. Tesla's latency around actuating the control surface is quite insignificant (a few ms) so I'd argue it is a fair comparison.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Tesla uses only cameras (some color and some black and white I believe) along with a radar system and perhaps sonar? But Tesla is controversial in their approach - essentially all other self driving systems use depth sensors. Tesla makes the argument that you can actually calculate depth from moving cameras, which is true. The technique is called structure from motion and it is well understood. However a lidar is a m…
> So Tesla has the advantage of collecting a huge data set of real world data now Do Tesla owners know about this? Is this an opt-in feature?
By the way, they don’t collect all driving data. It’s too much data to transmit back home. They load test algorithms on to the car in “shadow mode” where they don’t control anything, then check for failures and send the car data from the failures back to Tesla. So very little data per car is actually shared.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Isn't that exactly what the federal government has done to extrodinary success with the interstate system? The interstates follow very strict and powerful standards that make us all so much safer. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Association_of_State_...
If it worked so well, why isn't it good enough for self driving cars?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm pretty sure that they "fixed" the dancing cars problem by applying a low pass filter to the data before sending it to the visualization, just so people would stop complaining about it. I think there's still a lot of jitter in the underlying data.
That's a good fix, but they should apply the filter to the data used in the driving logic also.