Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Sub-$200 Lidar could reshuffle auto sensor economics

spectrum.ieee.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

441–450 of 582 posts

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

#441

Post by thfuran »

nindalf wrote: post #390
atonse wrote: post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just for the record though, Musk isn't blindly anti-LIDAR. He has said (and I think this is an objective fact) that all existing roads and driving are based on vision (which is what all humans do). So that should technically be sufficient. SpaceX uses LIDAR for their docking systems. I would argue that yes, we do use vision but we get that "lidar depth" from our stereo vision. And that used to be why I thought camera…

> So that should technically be sufficient Sufficient to build something close to human performance. But self driving cars will be held to a much higher standard by society. A standard only achievable by having sensors like LiDAR.

Even if they weren’t going to be held to a higher standard for widespread acceptance, tens of thousands of people a year in the us die due to humans driving badly. Why would we not try to do better than that?

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

#442

Post by thfuran »

runjake wrote: post #382
AnotherGoodName wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The points linked repeatedly focus on cost and complexity as justification, even explicitly stating musks desire to minimise components in Kaparthy’s list. They don’t focus on safety or effectiveness except to say that vision should be ‘sufficient’. Which is damning with faint praise imho. If that link was to try and argue that the removal of sensors makes perfect sense i have to point out that anyone that reads that…

To be clear, from a personal standpoint, I am pro-more sensors and sensor fusion. I assume Musk, et al are acting in best faith in trying to find the right compromises.

Why would you assume Musk is acting in good faith? That’s very much not his thing.

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

#443

Post by BurningFrog »

atonse wrote: post #347
willio58 wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Based on that list it boils down to 2 things it seems: - cost (no longer a problem) - too much code needed and it bloats the data pipelines. Does anyone have any actual evidence of this being the case? Like yes, code would be needed, but why is that innately a bad thing? Bloated data pipelines feels like another hand-wave when I think if you do it right it’s fine. As proven by Waymo. Really curious if any Tesla engin…

Just for the record though, Musk isn't blindly anti-LIDAR. He has said (and I think this is an objective fact) that all existing roads and driving are based on vision (which is what all humans do). So that should technically be sufficient. SpaceX uses LIDAR for their docking systems. I would argue that yes, we do use vision but we get that "lidar depth" from our stereo vision. And that used to be why I thought camera…

Teslas have at least 3 forward facing cameras giving them plenty of depth vision data.

They also have several cameras all around providing constant 360° vision.

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

#444

Post by kappi »

runjake wrote: post #328
zelphirkalt wrote: post #119

Since 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.

Karpathy provided additional context on the removal of LiDAR during his Lex Fridman Podcast appearance. This article condenses what he said: https://archive.is/PPiVG And here's one of Elon's mentions (he also has talked about it quite a bit in various spots). https://xcancel.com/elonmusk/status/1959831831668228450?s=20 Edit: My personal view is that LiDAR and other sensors are extremely useful, but I worked on aircra…

Instead of betting on RADAR and LIDAR HW getting better and cost going down, they went with vision only approach. Everybody in this field knows the strengths and weakness of each system. Multi-modal sensor fusion is the way to go for L4 autonomy. There is no other way to reduce the risk. Vision only will never be able to achieve L4 in all the weather conditions. Tesla may try to demonstrate L4 in limited geography and in good weather conditions but it won't scale.

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

#445

Post by 0_____0 »

neilv wrote: post #437

Laser safety people: how concerned should we be about city streets full of aggressively cost-engineered Lidar emitters?

Basically not.

Biggest risk is that a beam steering element stops while the emitters are running. Basically impossible with a phased array emitter like the article discusses.

And you'd probably have to be staring into the laser at close range while it was doing that.

The laser beams usually aren't tiny points like your laser pointer. Several centimeters across is more typical, especially at typical road distances. Your pupil is very small in comparison.

The optical hazard calculations are a very early part of the design of a LIDAR system, and all of this does get considered. Or should anyway.

Biggest risks are for people involved in R&D, where beams may be static and very close to personnel.

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

#446

Post by 0_____0 »

keyKeeper wrote: post #84

There are laser measurers sold for a few buck on Temu. Robot vacuums sold for few hundred dollars have Lidars that map out the room in a seconds. Is there any actual technical reason why automobile Lidar be expensive? Just combine visual processing with single point sampler that will feed points of interest and accurate model of the surroundings will be built.

Oh my god so many reasons. I don't feel like getting fully into it but that's kind of like asking why you can't use your kitchen scale to measure highway traffic as it drives over it.

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

#447

Post by pbreit »

zelphirkalt wrote: post #119

Since 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.

All of driving is designed for visual.

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

#448

Post by pbreit »

atonse wrote: post #347
willio58 wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Based on that list it boils down to 2 things it seems: - cost (no longer a problem) - too much code needed and it bloats the data pipelines. Does anyone have any actual evidence of this being the case? Like yes, code would be needed, but why is that innately a bad thing? Bloated data pipelines feels like another hand-wave when I think if you do it right it’s fine. As proven by Waymo. Really curious if any Tesla engin…

Just for the record though, Musk isn't blindly anti-LIDAR. He has said (and I think this is an objective fact) that all existing roads and driving are based on vision (which is what all humans do). So that should technically be sufficient. SpaceX uses LIDAR for their docking systems. I would argue that yes, we do use vision but we get that "lidar depth" from our stereo vision. And that used to be why I thought camera…

Why is this getting downvoted? It's good faith and probably more accurate than not.

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

#449

Post by niceguy1827 »

So tiring to keep hearing this argument "humans only use vision to drive, so why would self driving cars need more?"

This argument is inherently anti-progress. It's like saying human had been using sextants to navigate for hundreds of years, why GPS?

A more sensible question is, why not?

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

#450

Post by c7b »

willio58 wrote: post #336
runjake wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Karpathy provided additional context on the removal of LiDAR during his Lex Fridman Podcast appearance. This article condenses what he said: https://archive.is/PPiVG And here's one of Elon's mentions (he also has talked about it quite a bit in various spots). https://xcancel.com/elonmusk/status/1959831831668228450?s=20 Edit: My personal view is that LiDAR and other sensors are extremely useful, but I worked on aircra…

Based on that list it boils down to 2 things it seems: - cost (no longer a problem) - too much code needed and it bloats the data pipelines. Does anyone have any actual evidence of this being the case? Like yes, code would be needed, but why is that innately a bad thing? Bloated data pipelines feels like another hand-wave when I think if you do it right it’s fine. As proven by Waymo. Really curious if any Tesla engin…

My understanding is that there's more data processing required with cameras because you need to estimate distance from stereoscopic vision. And as it happens, the required chips for that have shot up in price because of the AI boom.

But I think costs were just part of the reason why Elon decided against Lidar. Apparently, they interfere with each other once the market saturates and you have many such cars on the same streets at the same time. Haven't heard yet how the Lidar proponents are planning to address that.

Post reply on HN