Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Andrej Karpathy (Tesla): CVPR 2021 Workshop on Autonomous Vehicles [video]

youtube.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 214 posts

Re: Andrej Karpathy (Tesla): CVPR 2021 Workshop on Autonomous Vehicles [video]

#191

Post by _ea1k »

ra7 wrote: post #144
_ea1k wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> solving the last 1% of this using only vision likely requires a general artificial intelligence That is likely close to true with lidar as well. See also some of Waymo's recent struggles in unexpected construction zones. Maybe lidar helps in getting there, but I'm afraid they all hit a pretty tough ceiling without this.

> That is likely close to true with lidar as well. See also some of Waymo's recent struggles in unexpected construction zones. That example has nothing to do with lidar, but with planning. The car was able to detect the construction zone just fine.

That's what I said.

Re: Andrej Karpathy (Tesla): CVPR 2021 Workshop on Autonomous Vehicles [video]

#192

Post by marvin »

nickik wrote: post #181
justapassenger wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When was last time you looked at LIDAR tech? It's already cheap enough that it can be easily deployed in millions of cars.

Hi-def 360 LIDAR that companies like Waymo or Aurora are absolutely not ready to put into millions of vehicles for a price that makes it anywhere close to reasonable. Multiple companies that have announced Lidar have later removed it for the cars. The Lidar that are actually currently deployed that you can 'just' get from suppliers is of the not of the same quality and we have yet to actually see real high volume car…

Elon Musk is a lot of things, but stupid isn't one of them. I'd be willing to bet that Tesla continuously looks at the state of LIDAR tech and evaluates whether it's at the point where it will be feasible to put it in a mass-market car in two years.

People keep getting hung up on their vision strategy because it sharply diverges from that of all other players, but it's really just tackling the "no one knows how to do this and no one really tries" part of the problem first.

No level 5 autonomous driving system will ever ship without really good computer vision.

Re: Andrej Karpathy (Tesla): CVPR 2021 Workshop on Autonomous Vehicles [video]

#193

Post by dheera »

minhazm wrote: post #160
dheera wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> LiDAR doesn’t tell you that it’s a bag on the road vs a raccoon I think that's largely an issue with the early LIDAR devices today, but not necessarily what may be to come. There's something to be said about measuring actual data with solid physics vs. inferring distances with billions of operations on RGB data. If you were landing a commercial aircraft in fog, you most certainly don't rely on your eyes to do most…

It’s easy to add a few hundred thousand dollars of sensors to a $100 million plane. But $20k on a $40k car is too much and makes it cost prohibitive for most people. If vision alone can get you to say 1 crash in 10 million miles, that’s more than good enough to replace human drivers. If someone decides they want to go the extra mile and will pay for something rated for 1 in 20 million miles for 2x the cost, then they…

> As mentioned in this talk Tesla is taking an iterative approach

> You don’t need to do things in one shot and get to the finish line.

I think we agree on these things. I wasn't trying to dispute their approach, rather explain their rationale for their current method, which is focused at actually selling product now.

> But $20k on a $40k car is too much

Those sensors don't need to be 20K-40K, they just aren't mass produced yet. That's why I think Elon Musk will change his tune in some years when those sensors are 1/100 the cost and 10X more accurate than vision.

Re: Andrej Karpathy (Tesla): CVPR 2021 Workshop on Autonomous Vehicles [video]

#194

Post by rpmisms »

pokerhobo wrote: post #153
etrautmann wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The vision-only strategy only made a shred of sense before high performance / low cost LIDARs like the Ouster OS1 became available. Now it’s an indefensible position on safety or economic grounds.

LIDAR in a drizzly city like Seattle is of minimal value so the system has to fallback to vision only anyways

It's an anti-fragile approach, a term you'll recognize if you know of Nassim Taleb and his work. I think it will win in the long run, because not requiring HD Maps or specialized sensors is an advantage, and even if it takes more resources to make it work initially, it will save billions in the future, assuming, of course, it ever ships.

Obviously, pure vision is a viable system, as it's what we as humans use. The question remains as to whether or not it will be comparable to more precise LiDAR based systems in the near future.

Re: Andrej Karpathy (Tesla): CVPR 2021 Workshop on Autonomous Vehicles [video]

#195

Post by rpmisms »

villgax wrote: post #168

Even if FSD takes longer, I sure am glad about the active safety features to prevent dumb incidents. Hope that trickles to every other manufacturer petrol/electric

There's clip after clip of AP yanking people out of situations where they had no idea they were in danger. Wife and I are planning on kids soon, and we won't consider anything except a Tesla due to those safety features.

Re: Andrej Karpathy (Tesla): CVPR 2021 Workshop on Autonomous Vehicles [video]

#196

Post by jiofih »

ra7 wrote: post #178
jiofih wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What models on the market use 4D imaging radars? All info I can find shows products releases in the past 1-2 years for future vehicles.

https://arberobotics.com/product/ is one. It was rumored Tesla themselves wanted to use Arbe radars, but evidently they have ditched the plan and gone radar less. I think AutoX from China is planning to use Arbe as well. Waymo has its own custom developed 4D imaging radar and I imagine most of the other SDC players have their own versions.

Sounds like “none”.

Re: Andrej Karpathy (Tesla): CVPR 2021 Workshop on Autonomous Vehicles [video]

#197

Post by ra7 »

jiofih wrote: post #196
ra7 wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://arberobotics.com/product/ is one. It was rumored Tesla themselves wanted to use Arbe radars, but evidently they have ditched the plan and gone radar less. I think AutoX from China is planning to use Arbe as well. Waymo has its own custom developed 4D imaging radar and I imagine most of the other SDC players have their own versions.

Sounds like “none”.

None what? I just gave you an example of Waymo using 4D imaging radar [1]. Aurora also uses imaging radar [2], Mobileye as well [3]. AutoX is going to start using Arbe radars. All of them are leading players in SDC industry.

[1] https://blog.waymo.com/2020/03/introducing-5th-generation-wa...

[2] https://aurora.tech/technology/driver

[3] https://www.mobileye.com/blog/radar-lidar-next-generation-ac...

Re: Andrej Karpathy (Tesla): CVPR 2021 Workshop on Autonomous Vehicles [video]

#198

Post by nexuist »

aimkey wrote: post #189
watt wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry at (1) yield means yield. Maybe it shouldn't have stuck the nose so far out, but yeah you have to wait until proper gap in the traffic. The non-accelerating to highway speed is the real bug though.

There WAS a proper gap in traffic if the car used its accelerator on the ramp. The car would not have impeded the truck at all if it drove the ramp faster. This is an incredibly common issue with autonomous systems: anticipation of other vehicles with an awkward angle of attack, which is common while merging or while other cars are merging. Also, autonomous systems also tend to be way too cautious, which is incredibl…

> A good driver accelerates on that ramp on beats the truck by 2-3 car lengths and merges at speed

No. A good driver stops at the yield sign if an approaching vehicle is 2-3 car lengths away. It is dangerous to play guessing games with your car's engine and another driver's attention. If anything goes wrong (tire puncture, engine dies, slippery road, truck driver slams the gas) you have successfully managed to put yourself into the direct path of a speeding brick wall 5x as heavy as you. There is never a safe merging scenario where the right choice is to slam the gas pedal to beat another driver to the punch, especially not when merging onto an active freeway.

If there is a yield sign at the end of the onramp, that means prepare to yield. If there is not a yield sign, then the expectation is to keep merging. There wouldn't be a point to the yield sign if everyone treated it as if it didn't exist.

> leaves its front end sticking out into the oncoming traffic,

I also agree with you but this may be a byproduct of the camera's perspective and maybe it would look normal in the driver's seat. We don't really have a great view but the truck could also have been hugging the curb which would have brought it closer to the car than it should be.

> dangerously merges sheepishly without accelerating fast enough

Fully agree here. If you merge you have to commit to matching the speed of nearby vehicles or else you're creating a dangerous situation. Mobileye should have sped up much faster than it did.

I'm not a neural network, fwiw.

Re: Andrej Karpathy (Tesla): CVPR 2021 Workshop on Autonomous Vehicles [video]

#199

Post by dang »

ketamine__ wrote: post #182
dang wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't even see this comment before you edited it. Please don't pull tricks like this.

Tricks? You detached a perfectly valid thread. Kathpathy only responded to this thread with a shallow dismissal and none of the other critiques. That should tell you something.

By "trick" I mean posting whatever you posted and then deleting it and claiming that it was "censored by dang" when you had zero basis for saying that. That's obviously abusive.

If you have a problem with, or a question about, why I moderated the thread a certain way, that's of course fine, but a different issue.

Re: Andrej Karpathy (Tesla): CVPR 2021 Workshop on Autonomous Vehicles [video]

#200

Post by aimkey »

nexuist wrote: post #198
aimkey wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There WAS a proper gap in traffic if the car used its accelerator on the ramp. The car would not have impeded the truck at all if it drove the ramp faster. This is an incredibly common issue with autonomous systems: anticipation of other vehicles with an awkward angle of attack, which is common while merging or while other cars are merging. Also, autonomous systems also tend to be way too cautious, which is incredibl…

> A good driver accelerates on that ramp on beats the truck by 2-3 car lengths and merges at speed No. A good driver stops at the yield sign if an approaching vehicle is 2-3 car lengths away. It is dangerous to play guessing games with your car's engine and another driver's attention. If anything goes wrong (tire puncture, engine dies, slippery road, truck driver slams the gas) you have successfully managed to put yo…

I think you should watch the scenario again. The car is only beat to the junction by the truck towing the trailer because the Mobileye car takes the wide-radius ramp at sub 22 km/h (13 mph). Normal human driver takes that ramp at 40-50 km/h, follows the hatchback out of the junction at flow of traffic speed, with 2-3 seconds of distance behind them for the truck to have a safe braking distance. The truck would have no need to modify speed, and the Mobileye car would satisfy the yield sign (not forcing another car to hit the brakes).

https://i.imgur.com/irkHBxc.png

I think people lower their expectations for autonomous systems. Driving the ramp at a speed a human would and taking that obvious gap to zipper-merge is the correct maneuver for a human. Perhaps you want the autonomous system to err on the side of caution, but I'm actually trying to hold it to a human standard.

But yeah, at the very least, don't get confused and sit there with your nose out in traffic. What's really scary is that this is the take Mobileye chose to go with. They probably had dozens more, with even worse blunders.

Post reply on HN