Tesla Autopilot • Hacker News Board

Re: Tesla Autopilot

#261

Post by myko » Sat, Jun 17, 2017, 2:59 PM UTC

taf2 wrote: post #243

EngineerBetter wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It will use the Autopilot cameras (there are no additional sensors), and the Tesla Vision software on AP2 hardware does not support detection of rain on the windscreen. The driver has to turn the wipers on manually. My Renault Zoe, which costs about 25% of my Model X, does this automatically. Tesla Autopilot is cool, but the software is very limited at present. The original link is essentially what Tesla think they c…

My version 1 tesla does rain detection

Right, those have actual rain sensors. AP2 vehicles will eventually rely on the camera to detect rain. AP2 cars are waiting on a future software update to make this happen.

Re: Tesla Autopilot

#262

Post by dsfyu404ed » Sat, Jun 17, 2017, 3:00 PM UTC

jacquesm wrote: post #217

Animats wrote: post #64

Watch this at 0.25x speed or slower to see what's going on. This is a carefully chosen environment. Every place it drives has very clear highway centerline markings. It seems to be highly dependent on those for guidance. Sometimes it can't quite identify the road edge, but the centerline provides a position reference. The inputs seem to be road line recognition, optical flow for the road, and solid object recognition…

One day some joker with two pots of paint (one white, one gray) is going to have a field day causing cars to run off the road.

I drive through a construction zone once a week where the old lane shift lines and the new ones are close enough in quality to make following the lines instead of the traffic around you a very bad idea.

Re: Tesla Autopilot

#263

Post by dsfyu404ed » Sat, Jun 17, 2017, 3:04 PM UTC

thejerz wrote: post #258

quotemstr wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think our legal system should allow car manufacturers to impose these kinds of restrictions on cars fully owned by their operators. If I have the title on my vehicle, I should be able to use it in any legal capacity. This restriction is an attack on the fundamental ideas of ownership and property.

No one is forcing you to buy the car. If you don't like the terms of the license, don't buy it.

Do you work for Deere or something? That's exactly the opinion that most people are against when applied to hardware as evidenced by the support (among people aware of them) for "right to repair" movements.

The "you don't actually own the hardware you paid for" model is slowly becoming untenable for hardware sold to individuals.

Re: Tesla Autopilot

#264

Post by nkozyra » Sat, Jun 17, 2017, 3:06 PM UTC

TeMPOraL wrote: post #228

nkozyra wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Robustness is a key property of the methods and models used in self driving cars. For a human, the noise isn't bad recognition, it's corrupted sensor data via distraction. It's one of the most common causes of accidents. For the AI agent an elephant will never appear unless it's been trained to be recognized. More likely it's recognized as an obstacle, which is ok. But keep in mind that years of Google's autonomous v…

I'm not trying to express a fear that comes from humans losing control. I don't fear that - in fact, I can't wait until the day comes no humans are allowed to drive on public roads. I was just answering about the concerns of self-driving systems relying solely (or primarily) on visual data from cameras. It's true this is how humans drive, but human visual system is much more complicated than what the current (publish…

While I'm sure more sensors gives a better chance at consensus I don't think relying solely on visual data is a problem if done well (low false positive false negative rate, comprehensive trained, fault tolerant)

Re: Tesla Autopilot

#265

Post by arcticfox » Sat, Jun 17, 2017, 3:07 PM UTC

eddyg wrote: post #222

willvarfar wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It terrifies me to think of relying on image recognition software to correctly determine (... snip) Do you not drive using only your eyes? If you are not terrified of the sensors, then software? Turing's central belief was that the human brain was 'just' a computer. Regards doing things like embedding reflectors in roads and other ways to simplify lane holding, completely agree. But we can't forego the cameras etc…

Is the "computer vision" on Tesla good enough to ignore this false "lane marker" and use the actual yellow lane marker, not the "fake" one caused by the sun/shadow/pavement interaction? http://i.imgur.com/fk3OvEW.jpg This situation generated constant lane departure warnings for the driver.

Not sure but that's pretty confusing to me too tbh without close inspection. The car in front seems to be treating it as a fog line too.

Re: Tesla Autopilot

#266

Post by heimatau » Sat, Jun 17, 2017, 3:09 PM UTC

Animats wrote: post #64

Watch this at 0.25x speed or slower to see what's going on. This is a carefully chosen environment. Every place it drives has very clear highway centerline markings. It seems to be highly dependent on those for guidance. Sometimes it can't quite identify the road edge, but the centerline provides a position reference. The inputs seem to be road line recognition, optical flow for the road, and solid object recognition…

> .25x speed?

That's a bit of an overkill.

Regardless, there was two points in the video ~48 sec, and ~1.40 min/sec mark. The car stopped AFTER turning... I thought that was really strange behavior. Then when it passes the pedestrians, it almost went to a complete stop, instead of going slightly to the left and mildly slowly down.

Overall, it's a great case study. I think your criticism is technical snobbery instead of what this means for the average person. The future is here, get ready. When techies complain that someone is doing something with 'x tool' and not 'y tool'...I think those people are just throwing mud around and not actually contributing to the conversation. Build something better if you're going to nitpik over the technical details. It would serve you better and all of humanity.

Re: Tesla Autopilot

#267

Post by Silhouette » Sat, Jun 17, 2017, 3:09 PM UTC

blazespin wrote: post #94

throwaway-1209 wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lidar is not "necessary" hardware. Humans drive just fine without lidar.

Not really, humans are horrible drivers with miserably slow reaction times.

Some humans are horrible drivers. Some humans are good drivers. The biggest difference is often how proactive the driver is.

It's true that a careful, experienced driver will typically recognise a rapidly emerging hazard as much as several tenths of a second faster than a novice, giving them significantly more time and space to react. However, a careful, experienced driver will also anticipate places where there are likely to be hazards and adjust their driving style to compensate.

Does a self-driving car know that there's a park just round the corner and it's half an hour after the local kids came out of school, thus increasing the risk of a child chasing a ball into the road?

Does a self-driving car understand that the group of people standing quite near the road up ahead are outside a bar at 11:30pm and thus quite likely to be drunk and suddenly stagger into the road?

Does a self-driving car know about the pothole in the cycle lane that you had to avoid while riding into town yesterday, and anticipate that anyone riding in that cycle lane today may move out into the main traffic lane without warning to go around it?

Does a self-driving car know that the news last night reported on a local black spot for "accidents" caused by people wanting to make fake insurance claims, and decide to take another route that is a little slower but avoids that black spot?

Better sensors, fast data processing, and the ability to monitor all sensors all the time are big advantages, for sure, but these things mostly support reactive behaviour. I've seen nothing so far to suggest that the better reactions currently outweigh proactively avoiding or mitigating these kinds of hazards in the first place. Obviously that might change in any number of ways in the future, but we seem to be a long, long way from that point yet.

Re: Tesla Autopilot

#268

Post by mrfusion » Sat, Jun 17, 2017, 3:10 PM UTC

bubblethink wrote: post #211

boramalper wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's hope for someone to initiate GNU/Tesla hehe.

Unfortunately, such a thing will never exist, at least in a road legal sense. No government is going to approve it if it can be modified by the user. At best, you can have "look but don't touch" kind of open backed by some company if it has to be road legal. We aren't even fully over wifi router firmware yet.

Yet people work on their brakes in their driveway all the time. Hard to imagine a government allowing that.

Re: Tesla Autopilot

#269

Post by jclardy » Sat, Jun 17, 2017, 3:16 PM UTC

TeMPOraL wrote: post #189

keymone wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You don't switch from seeing cars to seeing nothing to seeing an elephant just because the input got a little noisy yeah, instead you get hallucinations, muscle twitches, seizures, mental breaks and many more ways a brain can fail to do it's job.

Sure, but a) we have thousands of years of experience with those, and b) none of those are caused by little random noise in the visual input. Brains are incredibly robust against noisy data.

Our vision and persistent world model are good, but all humans are overconfident in their ability to drive in poor conditions (or even normal conditions, for many people.)

A computer isn't going to look down at a text message on their phone, fall asleep at the wheel, or get in a car while intoxicated. All which occur literally every day. People take driving for granted, because (at least in the US) we have to. Our sprawling suburbs couldn't function without it, so the barrier to entry is simply being a teenager.

Would I completely trust Tesla's auto-driving? No, not at all. But I at least trust them as much as I do an average driver, which is still just barely. The difference with Tesla's system is that one failure leads to improvement of the entire fleet, whereas one human failure maybe improves that one human driver. That means self-driving cars will continuously improve, while humans will just continue to be terrible drivers.

Re: Tesla Autopilot

#270

Post by Retric » Sat, Jun 17, 2017, 3:19 PM UTC

dsfyu404ed wrote: post #259

Retric wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The real world is not filled with adversarial examples. Further, NN often does not think it's doing great when providing off the wall examples. Further this is a car, with GPS, where simply stopping is a completely viable option 99% of the time. The truth is people really really stuck a driving, but it's easy enough that the vast majority of mistakes don't result in any problems.

>simply stopping is a completely viable option 99% of the time. For a naive definition of "vaiable" that does not take into account other people that need to use the roadways. A car stopping or even slowing drastically in a lane will have the same negative affect on the transportation system as a minor accident.

These cars are unlikely to stay stopped for long as there are going to be passengers in them.

Now, we could get into hypothetical situations, but the reality is minor accidents are already really common like with so many other things machines can be better than people without being perfect.