Earlier quoted context omitted.
> lidars don't work well in rain/snow/fog. Neither do cameras, or eyeballs.
When it's not safe to drive, it's not safe to drive. I've been in zero-road-speed whiteout conditions several times. The only move to make is to the side of the road without getting stuck, and turning on your flashers. Low-light cameras would not have worked. Sonar would not have worked. Infrared would not have worked.
Sub-$200 Lidar could reshuffle auto sensor economics
231–240 of 582 posts
Re: Sub-$200 Lidar could reshuffle auto sensor economics
#232Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just say Tesla, why censor yourself.
I have a suspicion here on HN. When criticizing big tech, especially Google and FB, at a certain time of the day a specific cohort comes online and downvotes. Suspiciously, that is a time when one could conclude, that now people in the US start working or come online. Either fanboys, employees or an organized group of users trying to silence big tech criticism. I have no proof of course and it might be coincidence, o…
Re: Sub-$200 Lidar could reshuffle auto sensor economics
#233Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Err they have lots of Model Ys in Austin as Robotaxis right now with no drivers. I guess this is also 'dubious'. Look it's clear you have a huge bias I would urge you to read up on https://grokipedia.com/page/List_of_fallacies otherwise your emotional responses will blind you to reality.
Writing this and linking to fake Wikipedia is actually hilarious.
Re: Sub-$200 Lidar could reshuffle auto sensor economics
#234Earlier quoted context omitted.
One such review where Marques shows how it happened to his phone https://youtube.com/shorts/oeHtfMFdzIY?si=cANJDT5BLfdd9ZUT
One highlight from the video, he says most cameras are fine, it's just iphones that don't have a very good IR filter. Which sounds correct, in my experience most cameras have pretty substantial IR filters that have to be removed if you want to photograph IR. I also wonder if the smaller sensor size on phones contributes, since the energy is being focused onto a smaller spot. Either way, for that to happen he was film…
Laptops aren't generally being used in the same areas as cars though, so you wouldn't expect to see as many cases involving Windows Hello compatible laptops/cameras.
Re: Sub-$200 Lidar could reshuffle auto sensor economics
#235Since lidar has distance information and cameras do not, it was always a ridiculous idea by a certain company to use cameras only. Lidar using cars are going to replace at least the ones that don't make use of this obvious answer to obstacle detection challenges.
Re: Sub-$200 Lidar could reshuffle auto sensor economics
#236Re: Sub-$200 Lidar could reshuffle auto sensor economics
#237Since lidar has distance information and cameras do not, it was always a ridiculous idea by a certain company to use cameras only. Lidar using cars are going to replace at least the ones that don't make use of this obvious answer to obstacle detection challenges.
I'm not an expert on ML vision, but I do have a Tesla and it seems to be able to tell how far away things are just fine. I'm not sure what would be wrong with the vision system that lidar needs to fix.
“Just buy FSD” isn’t a reasonable answer to a problem literally no other automaker suffers from.
Re: Sub-$200 Lidar could reshuffle auto sensor economics
#238Interestingly, there have been people in the LIDAR industry predicting costs like this for many years. I heard numbers like $250 per vehicle back in 2012 [1] Of course, ambitious pricing like this is all about economies of scale - sensors that are used in production vehicles are ordered by the million, and that lowers the costs massively. When the huge orders didn't materialise, the economies of scale and low prices…
Re: Sub-$200 Lidar could reshuffle auto sensor economics
#239Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Musk miscalculated on 1) cost reduction in LIDAR and 2) how incredible the human brain is compared to computers. And, less excusable, ignorant of how incredible human eyes are compared to small sensor cameras. In particular high DR in low light, with fast motion. Every photographer knows this.
And also ignorant about how those two eyes have binocular vision, adjustable positions, and can look in multiple mirrors for full spatial awareness.
Re: Sub-$200 Lidar could reshuffle auto sensor economics
#240Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why does this matter? You have to slow down in rain/snow/fog anyway, so only having cameras available doesn't hurt you all that much. But then in clear weather lidar can only help.
If your vision is good enough to drive in rain/snow/fog, you don't need lidar in clear conditions. If you planned to spend $10B on vision and $10B on lidar — you would be better off spending $20B on better vision.
Tesla is spending upwards of $6B/year to Waymo’s $1.5B. Only one of these companies makes an autonomous robotaxi that’s actually autonomous.