81–90 of 187 posts
Also interesting to see how focused they are still on pure vision input to construct the vector space instead of just using LIDAR, but I wonder how limited they are by existing models already being out there with set hardware.
No one here talking about the freaking humanoid bot?!? Also interesting to see how focused they are still on pure vision input to construct the vector space instead of just using LIDAR, but I wonder how limited they are by existing models already being out there with set hardware.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> We are being asked to close our eyes, take a leap of faith Actually, you're being asked to "Always watch the road in front of you and be prepared to take corrective action at all times. Failure to do so can result in serious injury or death.", until FSD gets released :) Do you trust cab drivers to "be trained on every edge case under the sun"? Self driving only needs to beat humans, who have some serious flaws, not…
> Self driving only needs to beat humans, who have some serious flaws, not achieve perfection. In particular, though, it needs to beat good human drivers, not average ones.
Do sensible people really take this seriously?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think you're right that the bar of "average human on the road's driving skills" is very low. However, I think one of the reasons there's such an inherent distrust of Tesla's FSD is that when it fails, it fails in scenarios in which people can easily see themselves succeeding. Say, on average, human drivers crash into barricades once out of every 500,000 miles driven. And say Tesla's FSD can beat that number by cras…
> My example is contrived. Pretty much. I think if you're going to make an argument like "accidents by teenagers, senior citizens and drunks don't matter" you need to put some numbers behind that. I mean, if you had a teenager or a family member with a substance problem, would you feel safer with them in a Tesla? If so, then I really don't think I understand your point. Basically you're just saying that you, personal…
Right. Rationally, we all want folks who are worse than the state-of-the-art FSD AI to be using FSD. But thinking that the "very low bar" that has to be cleared is drunk drivers misses the point that most drivers are not drunk. So it's much less impressive to a "safe" human driver to clear the low bar.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Would QA solve that problem? As in, "we replayed 1.4 trillion accident scenarios and our AI behaved correctly on all of them". Safety in numbers.
"We trained a model, overfit on 1.4 trillion accident scenarios, and if behaved correctly on all of them."
No one here talking about the freaking humanoid bot?!? Also interesting to see how focused they are still on pure vision input to construct the vector space instead of just using LIDAR, but I wonder how limited they are by existing models already being out there with set hardware.
He's slowly building out the roadmap for the labor pool, transportation, communications system and so on for the colonization of Mars.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think originally it was because of the cost of the equipment. Elon and team saw how expensive lidar was and thought they needed to be able to solve the problem without it. However lidar has dropped drastically in price, so at this point I think they aren't using it just for ego reasons (i.e., we claimed it was possible to get self driving without lidar in the past, so we have to continue down that path)
Also they marketed autonomous driving features as future software updates (including a discount/price hike for early/later adopters). Early adopters would be unhappy if future features required additional hardware.
"Human-level hands" Do sensible people really take this seriously?