Google's self-driving car gathers almost 1 GB/sec • Hacker News Board

Re: Google's self-driving car gathers almost 1 GB/sec

#41

Post by conductor » Tue, Apr 30, 2013, 9:12 PM UTC

piyush_soni wrote: post #36

conductor wrote: post #32

Computers get hacked evey now and then, I predict software assassinations in the future, i.e. somebody hacks into a self-driving car, installs a software component which will be activated at some point (i.e. when it identifies a specific car/human and crash into it). Then it can auto-destruct, no evidence left. I ask, who will be responsible?

Probably find the hacker? Just like what we do right now ...

Here are my analyses:

When somebody hacks into one's computer, he can't do any physical harm, he sure can steal money, spy on the victim, but he can't make the computer burn or somehow harm the victim.

The computers that can be used for doing real damage (i.e. bomb activation, drone command and control centre, etc.) are well protected from the hackers (not connected to the internet and physicall inaccessable).

Controrary to this, the self-driving cars are potentially dangerous and will be widely accessable and hackable, I see this as a real problem. We should not allow a computer to do things that can kill people, and a computer-driven car can kill people.

Re: Google's self-driving car gathers almost 1 GB/sec

#42

Post by roc » Tue, Apr 30, 2013, 9:12 PM UTC

croddin wrote: post #25

How much data does a human driver gather per second?

From what I've seen on the highway? About 160 characters.

Re: Google's self-driving car gathers almost 1 GB/sec

#43

Post by deftnerd » Tue, Apr 30, 2013, 9:15 PM UTC

salman89 wrote: post #11

What are things city planners can do from an infrastructure perspective so that we can drop the amount of data that needs to analyzed in real time? For example, can we use special paint for road lines in order to make the cost of detection of road lanes lower?

They should let every electronic light have some infrared LEDs and come up with a standard communications protocol to allow for fast transfers of alerts without the overhead of image processing.

For example, emergency vehicles could be broadcasting their presence and speed.

Schoolbuses could be doing the same and also broadcast when they are letting children out. same with the blinking light on school zone signs.

Re: Google's self-driving car gathers almost 1 GB/sec

#44

Post by Game_Ender » Tue, Apr 30, 2013, 9:17 PM UTC

vowelless wrote: post #39

beambot wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If other robots I've worked with (eg. the PR2) are any indication... 1GB/sec. is probably on the low end for the total data throughput. The PR2 had a high-res camera (GigE?), quad stereo cams in head (narrow and wide FoV), dual "wrist" cameras, a Kinect (usually), dual Hokuyo UTM LRF's, full 14+ DoF kinematics at 1KHz, and lots and lots of diagnostic info (eg. "heartbeat", system diagnostics, localization signals, IM…

Agree. The point cloud in the self-driving car itself is probably on the order of 1/4 to 1/2 gig a second.

No, the Velodyne only has a 100 Mbit connection. It sends about 5000, 1206 byte packets per second [1]. Giving a data rate of ~50 Mbit/s (1/20 a gig).

1 - http://velodynelidar.com/lidar/products/manual/63-HDL64ES2h%...

Re: Google's self-driving car gathers almost 1 GB/sec

#45

Post by shreyansj » Tue, Apr 30, 2013, 9:19 PM UTC

conductor wrote: post #41

piyush_soni wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably find the hacker? Just like what we do right now ...

Here are my analyses: When somebody hacks into one's computer, he can't do any physical harm, he sure can steal money, spy on the victim, but he can't make the computer burn or somehow harm the victim. The computers that can be used for doing real damage (i.e. bomb activation, drone command and control centre, etc.) are well protected from the hackers (not connected to the internet and physicall inaccessable). Contro…

> We should not allow a computer to do things that can kill people

Should we not allow computers (auto-pilot) to fly airplanes?

Re: Google's self-driving car gathers almost 1 GB/sec

#46

Post by Game_Ender » Tue, Apr 30, 2013, 9:26 PM UTC

VikingCoder wrote: post #28

Game_Ender wrote: post #23

He is off by an order of magnitude. The Velodyne 64 on that car only has a 100 Mbit connection [1]. Each of the 5-10 radars on that vehicle is connected over a 1MBit CAN bus [2]. The front facing is almost definitely a Gigi-E or Firewire camera so it's at most 1000MBit. Doing the math: 100 + 10*1 + 1000 = 1100MBit != 8192Mbit (1 GB) 1. http://velodynelidar.com/lidar/products/brochure/HDL-64E%20S... 2. http://www.kvas…

Doesn't it also know about Google Maps data? Meaning, it can look at a lot more data than just its raw sensors, every second. Also, why do you assume the front-facing camera is the only one?

As far as I know the "google maps" data is used for things like road locations, stop signs, and other traffic marker information. Their primary mapping data source is based on Velodyne data itself. You also have to think storage needs, would it really have 4-6TB storage array for just a few hour drive?

I saw the tech lead of the project talk about 1.5 years ago. He said the primary sensor was the Velodyne, followed by radars. The only use for the camera mentioned is detecting stop light colors. At that time their main computer was a quad core machine, processing that much data sounds beyond it's limits as well.

Re: Google's self-driving car gathers almost 1 GB/sec

#47

Post by hammock » Tue, Apr 30, 2013, 9:27 PM UTC

ari_elle wrote: post #21

hammock wrote: post #4

Dear moderator, why did you change the title? I worked hard to abbreviate it to 80 characters without changing the wording or editorializing. And it's not the fact that I found interesting, it was the picture. Thanks. For the record I had GOOG Self-Driving Car gathers almost 1 GB/sec.What it "sees" making L turn [pic]

I can't believe that you were willing to abbr. "Google" with "GOOG" but had to use "almost" in this sentence (utterly redundant word here) or "1 GB/sec" instead of "1 GB/s" Sorry, i don't know how much "effort" you put into your abbreviation but your title looks like a dirty hack, i would never want on the front page. Google Car gathers 1GB/sec. What it "sees" making Left turn That would have been better in my opinio…

The word almost was not kept for accuracy's sake (could have said ~1GB/sec), but for the word's storytelling quality. Imagine if we had said the car "collects barely 1 GB/sec." Without "almost," it becomes more difficult, however so slightly, to grasp that 1 GB/sec is an impressive amount of data.

Re: Google's self-driving car gathers almost 1 GB/sec

#48

Post by Game_Ender » Tue, Apr 30, 2013, 9:29 PM UTC

dsl wrote: post #26

spellboots wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's likely far cheaper to store it than it would be to run the test again. This is Google, they can certainly afford it – I'd be incredibly surprised if they weren't storing it.

Having developed autonomous vehicles in a previous career, I can tell you that raw sensor data is far less useful than you think. By the time you are starting to hand over controls to the system itself you are pretty damn confident that your pipeline up to the control logic is all very solid. Also, i'm not entirely sure what you think the costs involved in a test are? We purchased about 20 acres of land for a test tr…

The true data rates (see my other posts) are most likely around 5-10 MB/s. Which is so low the benefits out weigh the costs. After all, what if their is an issue with the software? How are you going to reproduce without the logs, especially on a R&D system like Google has (yes it's still R&D, they can't even drive in the rain).

Re: Google's self-driving car gathers almost 1 GB/sec

#49

Post by signed0 » Tue, Apr 30, 2013, 9:33 PM UTC

conductor wrote: post #41

piyush_soni wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably find the hacker? Just like what we do right now ...

Here are my analyses: When somebody hacks into one's computer, he can't do any physical harm, he sure can steal money, spy on the victim, but he can't make the computer burn or somehow harm the victim. The computers that can be used for doing real damage (i.e. bomb activation, drone command and control centre, etc.) are well protected from the hackers (not connected to the internet and physicall inaccessable). Contro…

While we're at it, we should probably prevent people from doing things that can kill people.

Re: Google's self-driving car gathers almost 1 GB/sec

#50

Post by ceejayoz » Tue, Apr 30, 2013, 9:35 PM UTC

conductor wrote: post #41

piyush_soni wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably find the hacker? Just like what we do right now ...

Here are my analyses: When somebody hacks into one's computer, he can't do any physical harm, he sure can steal money, spy on the victim, but he can't make the computer burn or somehow harm the victim. The computers that can be used for doing real damage (i.e. bomb activation, drone command and control centre, etc.) are well protected from the hackers (not connected to the internet and physicall inaccessable). Contro…

> We should not allow a computer to do things that can kill people, and a computer-driven car can kill people.

Your car's computer already has control of throttle, brakes, door locks, etc.