Camera vs. Lidar

Post by jjeaff » Sat, Aug 17, 2019, 4:48 AM UTC

Faark wrote: post #126

michaelt wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In that situation, what do you think would happen to customers who've paid $6000 for the 'Full Self-Driving Capability' ?

They get the upgrade for free, I'd hope? Kind of like they seem to feel the need to do regarding their new chip [0]. Less optimistic, people will probably be less eager to upgrade once those cars are several generations old by the point FSD will actually be available. [0] https://www.theverge.com/2019/7/8/20685873/tesla-fsd-chip-up...

And is the full self driving promise attached to the vehicle or the purchaser? In other words, if full self driving actually happens in 10 years, will the only people able to collect be original purchasers that still have that original car?

Seems like a great bet for Tesla either way. If they get to self driving soon, they'll make a mint and upgrading or even fully replacing those cars will be a drop in the bucket. If it takes them a decade, there probably won't be that many still around to make a claim.

Post by KaiserPro » Sat, Aug 17, 2019, 12:16 PM UTC

omilu wrote: post #91

KaiserPro wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With respect, thats not what they are claiming They are saying that lidar enhances the perception system to get more accurate dimensions and rotations of objects to a greater distance. this means that you can predict far better, allowing you, for example, to drive at night full speed. Weather affects visual systems as well. The "ooo rain kills lidar" is noise at best. Visual cameras are crap at night. There is a reas…

>>Visual cameras are crap at night. Mitigated somewhat with headlights

Not really. Most cameras don't have the dynamic range needed to either full see where the beam is pointing, or cope with near objects.

Infra-red cameras work, but RGB not so much (well not in the <$400 per CCD price point)

Re: Camera vs. Lidar

Re: Camera vs. Lidar