Why Tesla removed radar and ultrasonic sensors [video] • Hacker News Board

Re: Why Tesla removed radar and ultrasonic sensors [video]

#401

Post by tophi » Mon, Oct 31, 2022, 1:33 PM UTC

hammock wrote: post #395

CharlesW wrote: post #11

I thought it was telling that Andrej immediately "reframed" the question because Lex asked the "wrong question". This is a classic evasion technique one learns from experience and/or media training. Lex's comment immediately after was a clever and gentle dig at Andrej's response. It seemed like all the "full cost" negatives Andrej mentioned were related to Tesla's ability to execute, and not what would actually produ…

Devils advocate, if the cost of working to improve cameras to the point where they eliminate that delta is lower than the cost of using the sensors instead, then it is a net benefit

Yes, the current delta was not massive and will shrink over time.

By getting rid of the extra sensors they eliminate a temporary crutch and focus resources on the simple solution.

Not a new concept by the way. Henry Ford was obsessed with simplifying and eliminating every part that wasn’t necessary on the model T for virtually all the same reasons.

Re: Why Tesla removed radar and ultrasonic sensors [video]

#402

Post by RC_ITR » Mon, Oct 31, 2022, 1:37 PM UTC

Reason077 wrote: post #257

RC_ITR wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, yes, cars that are programmed to have AEB: perform well at AEB and not other tasks. We are in agreement here. (I even agree with you that those cars use Radar for AEB). Now, where we disagree is you implying that cars with AEB-level radar (literally $10 off-the-shelf parts with whatever sensor fusion some MobilEye intern dreams ups) are somehow the same as self-driving cars (the goal of Tesla Autopilot). Every se…

> ”There is no one sensor that will do it. Full stop.” Yet somehow, humans can drive cars with just a pair of optical sensors (mounted on a swivelling gimbal, of sorts). In theory, a sufficiently capable AI should be able to drive a car at least as well as a human can using the same input: vision.

You seem to be fine with the 30k Americans per year who die in car crashes.

That number is probably too high for robots to do though.

Humans are weird like that.

Re: Why Tesla removed radar and ultrasonic sensors [video]

#403

Post by 7e » Mon, Oct 31, 2022, 1:40 PM UTC

tophi wrote: post #401

hammock wrote: post #395

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Devils advocate, if the cost of working to improve cameras to the point where they eliminate that delta is lower than the cost of using the sensors instead, then it is a net benefit

Yes, the current delta was not massive and will shrink over time. By getting rid of the extra sensors they eliminate a temporary crutch and focus resources on the simple solution. Not a new concept by the way. Henry Ford was obsessed with simplifying and eliminating every part that wasn’t necessary on the model T for virtually all the same reasons.

What crutch? What simplification? These sensors are widely deployed and have already been perfected. Systems which use only one modality are the crutch. Sensor fused systems will always be safer, and are the future.

This move is purely about screwing passenger safety for cost and sales.

Re: Why Tesla removed radar and ultrasonic sensors [video]

#404

Post by dotancohen » Mon, Oct 31, 2022, 1:40 PM UTC

codeflo wrote: post #366

Reason077 wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ”There is no one sensor that will do it. Full stop.” Yet somehow, humans can drive cars with just a pair of optical sensors (mounted on a swivelling gimbal, of sorts). In theory, a sufficiently capable AI should be able to drive a car at least as well as a human can using the same input: vision.

> In theory, a sufficiently capable AI should be able to drive a car at least as well as a human can using the same input: vision. In theory, cars should be use mechanical legs instead of wheels for transportation, that's how animals do it. In theory, plane wings should flap around, that's the way birds do it. My point being: the way biology solved something may not always be the best way to do it with technology.

GP was stating that "two cameras mounted 15cm apart on a swivel slightly left of the vehicle center of geometry" has proven to be a _sufficient_ solution, not necessarily the best solution.

Re: Why Tesla removed radar and ultrasonic sensors [video]

#405

Post by mensetmanusman » Mon, Oct 31, 2022, 1:44 PM UTC

Gigachad wrote: post #126

mensetmanusman wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Humanity doesn’t know how to solve this yet, so it’s hard to say whether it is helping or not.

We already have the solution. LiDAR.

If LiDAR was a solution, we would have driverless LiDAR based vehicles. No one has solved driverless though.

Re: Why Tesla removed radar and ultrasonic sensors [video]

#406

Post by itsoktocry » Mon, Oct 31, 2022, 1:44 PM UTC

hammock wrote: post #395

CharlesW wrote: post #11

I thought it was telling that Andrej immediately "reframed" the question because Lex asked the "wrong question". This is a classic evasion technique one learns from experience and/or media training. Lex's comment immediately after was a clever and gentle dig at Andrej's response. It seemed like all the "full cost" negatives Andrej mentioned were related to Tesla's ability to execute, and not what would actually produ…

Devils advocate, if the cost of working to improve cameras to the point where they eliminate that delta is lower than the cost of using the sensors instead, then it is a net benefit

>f the cost of working to improve cameras to the point where they eliminate that delta is lower than the cost of using the sensors instead

In a vacuum, how can cameras ever be better than cameras + other sensors?

Re: Why Tesla removed radar and ultrasonic sensors [video]

#407

Post by adolph » Mon, Oct 31, 2022, 1:55 PM UTC

CharlesW wrote: post #11

I thought it was telling that Andrej immediately "reframed" the question because Lex asked the "wrong question". This is a classic evasion technique one learns from experience and/or media training. Lex's comment immediately after was a clever and gentle dig at Andrej's response. It seemed like all the "full cost" negatives Andrej mentioned were related to Tesla's ability to execute, and not what would actually produ…

> Regarding results, the best Andrej can do is, "In this case, we looked at using it and not using it, and the delta was not massive." In other words, the results are better, but not enough to make up for the fact that Telsa can't support additional sensors without incurring a prohibitive amount of additional risk to Tesla. Risk to passengers doesn't appear to be a consideration.

I think this mischaracterizes Andrej's response. If anything he is referring to a wholistic view of the vehicle, which includes but doesn't entirely consist of Tesla. For example, 5-10 years down the road, when sensors start going bad, consumers will appreciate fewer things to go wrong with a vehicle--that is one of the advantages of electric over ICE after all.

If anything this is an acknowledgement that George Hotz was right in focusing on optical sensors with Comma.ai.

Re: Why Tesla removed radar and ultrasonic sensors [video]

#408

Post by freejazz » Mon, Oct 31, 2022, 2:28 PM UTC

Nomentatus wrote: post #352

freejazz wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are doing exactly what Tesla isn't willing to do and are being responsible in exactly the way Tesla isn't.

But it's an expensive dead-end for most purposes, esp re the insane mapping. Ok for city robo-taxis. Doesn't solve the real problem to be solved.

Cars drive in cities, last I checked.

Re: Why Tesla removed radar and ultrasonic sensors [video]

#409

Post by freejazz » Mon, Oct 31, 2022, 2:28 PM UTC

Nomentatus wrote: post #355

freejazz wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's especially amusing considering how if you view Go as a visual problem, it's beyond trivial compared to what is required to safely operate a motor vehicle (even just visually).

Yikes. I'd be a lot better Go player if it was just a matter of seeing the board.

It is yikes - what's shocking is that you seem to be advocating for that same exact perspective for... driving a car???

Re: Why Tesla removed radar and ultrasonic sensors [video]

#410

Post by eigenrick » Mon, Oct 31, 2022, 2:29 PM UTC

ClumsyPilot wrote: post #356

eigenrick wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think it was your intent, but your statement makes it seems like all Tesla engineers are looking at Twitter code. I bet this number is closer to 4. Tesla has ca. 1000 software engineers working in various capacities. The ca. 300 that work on car firmware and autonomous driving are probably not participating in the Twitter drama.

4 people is enough to review source that was written by thousands of engineers at twitter? thats not even enough for architecture review

I don't think the goal is to review all Twitter source. That should be the job of the (new?) development team. I think the goal was to look at the last 6 months of code, especially the last few weeks, for anything devious.