Live data from Hacker News

Sub-$200 Lidar could reshuffle auto sensor economics

spectrum.ieee.org

121–130 of 582 posts

Re: Sub-$200 Lidar could reshuffle auto sensor economics

#121
post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's an incredibly bullshit argument to defend the indefensible.

Your reaction actually proves the point. Aggression thrives in anonymous spaces because the lack of oversight removes the weight of accountability. When people feel unobserved, they quickly abandon the social friction that once held tribes and clans together. You are essentially providing a live demonstration of why a society without any form of monitoring inevitably slides into the Hobbesian trap.

I don't think a random internet comment proves anything about society at large.

People don't hesitate to be aggressive even when they're not anonymous and there's a threat of accountability - see, all crime, or people just acting shitty toward others.

Mass surveillance does not cause everyone to magically get along.

Re: Sub-$200 Lidar could reshuffle auto sensor economics

#122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> comma.ai proves that lidar is red herring I mean it doesn't. If you actually look at it comma.ai proves that level two doesn't require lidar. Thats not the same as full speed safe autonomy. whilst it is possible to drive vision only (assuming the right array of cameras (ie not the way tesla have done it) lidar gives you a low latency source of depth that can correct vision mistakes. Its also much less energy intens…

It's fair to point out that comma.ai is SAE level two system, however it's not geofenced at all, which is an SAE level 5 requirement. But really that brings up the fact that SAE's levels aren't the right ones, merely the ones they chose to define since they're the standards body. A better set of levels are the seven I go into more detail about on my blog. As far as distinguishing shadows on the road, that's what rada…

Your autonomy scale is pretty arbitrary and encodes assumptions about the underlying technology and environments the vehicle is supposed to implement and operate in.

The SAE autonomy scale is about dividing responsibility between the driver and the assistance system. The lowest revel represents full responsibility on the driver and the highest level represents full responsibility on the system.

If there is a geofenced transportation system like the Vegas loop and the cars can drive without a human driver, then that is a level 5 system. By the way, geofencing is not an "SAE level 5" requirement. Geofencing is a tool to make it easier to reach requirements by reducing the scope of what full autonomy represents.

Re: Sub-$200 Lidar could reshuffle auto sensor economics

#123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your conclusion from a single incident is a bad inference. One vehicle getting confused by a puddle (likely a sensor fusion edge case or mapping artifact, not a fundamental LIDAR failure) doesn't indict the technology. Tesla's cameras have produces vastly more failures. Waymo has driven tens of millions of autonomous miles with a serious injury/fatality rate dramatically lower than human drivers. The actual data show…

A Tesla wouldn't stop for a puddle. Also its not locked to a small geofenced area (people have driven coast to coast without a single intervention on FSD including parking spot to parking spot) when I can buy a Waymo vehicle that does this then Waymo would have caught up with Tesla.

Wow, so it can cope with driving on the highway. That's the easy part.

Re: Sub-$200 Lidar could reshuffle auto sensor economics

#124
post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GDPR_fines_and_notices Top 5 fines: 1 - Meta - Ireland - €1.2 billion 2 - Amazon Europe - Luxembourg - €746 millions 3 - WhatsApp - Ireland - €225 millions 4 - British Airway - UK - £183 millions 5 - Google - France - €60 millions I wish every law barely got enforced this way.

I'd say the numbers listed here prove the GPs point of poor enforcement. The largest fine is roughly 0.97% of Meta's 2023 revenue, the equivalent of a $600 fine for somebody making 60k / year. It's a tiny-tiny cost of doing business at best, definitely not a deterrent, given Meta's blatant disregard for GDPR since then.

> the equivalent of a $600 fine for somebody making 60k / year

I don't know about you, but on that income I would certainly not brush off such a fine as a "cost of doing business". Would it cause me financial trouble, or would it force me to sacrifice other expenses? Absolutely not. But would I feel frustrated at having to pay it, feel stupid for my mistake, and do my best to avoid it in the future? Absolutely yes.

Re: Sub-$200 Lidar could reshuffle auto sensor economics

#126
post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some lidar units simply use the wavelength that the human eye is opaque to. The grandparent comment is about camera lenses with little to no near infrared cutoff filter. Some older iPhones were like that and that was the original breaking story.

> human eye is opaque to Absorbing the laser isn't necessarily any good. Very hypothetically it could lead to cataracts.

Sun emits much stronger IR, near-IR, UV

Re: Sub-$200 Lidar could reshuffle auto sensor economics

#127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your conclusion from a single incident is a bad inference. One vehicle getting confused by a puddle (likely a sensor fusion edge case or mapping artifact, not a fundamental LIDAR failure) doesn't indict the technology. Tesla's cameras have produces vastly more failures. Waymo has driven tens of millions of autonomous miles with a serious injury/fatality rate dramatically lower than human drivers. The actual data show…

A Tesla wouldn't stop for a puddle. Also its not locked to a small geofenced area (people have driven coast to coast without a single intervention on FSD including parking spot to parking spot) when I can buy a Waymo vehicle that does this then Waymo would have caught up with Tesla.

Your puddle example is utterly irrelevant. Tesla's are notorious for phantom breaking. Robotaxis are very much locked to tiny geofenced areas. Some even shaped like a penis because Musk is such a child.

"people have driven coast to coast without a single intervention on FSD including parking spot to parking spot"

I find this claim very dubious. Prove it. Teslas never drive empty for a very good reason.

Re: Sub-$200 Lidar could reshuffle auto sensor economics

#128
post #79

The mind salivates at the idea of sub-$100 and soon after sub-$10 Lidar. We could build spatial awareness into damn near everything. It'll be a cambrian explosion of autonomous robots.

RIP to every single camera in existence if that happens. Lidar is awful with damaging camera lenses.

TIL!

Thanks! What a headache

Re: Sub-$200 Lidar could reshuffle auto sensor economics

#129
post #79

The mind salivates at the idea of sub-$100 and soon after sub-$10 Lidar. We could build spatial awareness into damn near everything. It'll be a cambrian explosion of autonomous robots.

RIP to every single camera in existence if that happens. Lidar is awful with damaging camera lenses.

Could be a gain for privacy ;-)

Re: Sub-$200 Lidar could reshuffle auto sensor economics

#130
post #87
post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

RIP to every single camera in existence if that happens. Lidar is awful with damaging camera lenses.

I had to look this up, because I had never heard of it. How could a lens be damaged by infrared lasers? It turns out it’s the sensors that are easily damaged by high powered lidar lasers. https://spectrum.ieee.org/amp/keeping-lidars-from-zapping-ca...

There is complains that some Volvo cars damaged iPhone cameras. It’s not even clear if Apple takes those under warranty. We’ve seen car review YouTubers that got their iPhone camera sensors damaged captured (by a second camera) while reviewing
Post reply on HN