Why bother with autonomy crap? Just focus on making cheap electric cars that can save the planet.
because, as history has shown, that isn't a core competency of Tesla.
New Tesla software to offer 'full' autonomy, Musk says
51–60 of 94 posts
Re: New Tesla software to offer 'full' autonomy, Musk says
#52I'm worried he's talking about going from what the NHTSA calls level 2 to level 3 autonomy[1], where the car is capable of navigating all the way to the destination but the driver has to remain alert for potential dangerous situations. That's probably an even worse idea in terms of people actually complying than the existing level 2 autonomy and I think Waymo is absolutely right in trying to skip straight to level 4/…
We need to work with some real numbers. In the US there are about 1.2 fatalities per 100 million miles driven [0]. About 19 months ago, Tesla said their cars logged 1.3 billion miles on autopilot [1]. I'd guess that autopilot number has at least doubled by now. So if there have been far fewer than 26 people killed by autopilot, then it's already saving lives. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_r…
That's the number of miles with autopilot-equipped hardware. It's only 100 million miles with autopilot engaged (from the article you cite). Let's say its 200 million now. They're at two confirmed deaths, which is about what you'd expect.
To the extent the numbers are statistically significant, it's worse than you'd expect. The fatality rate for Telsa drivers is 1/4 the average. Since the overwhelming majority of miles on autopilot equipped hardware are driven with autopilot disabled (per your article), that means Tesla human drivers are a lot safer than the average. So you need 1 fatality per 300-400 million miles driven just to match human Tesla drivers.
Re: New Tesla software to offer 'full' autonomy, Musk says
#53When is Tesla going to bite the bullet and issue a full recall so they can retrofit all existing Tesla cars with LIDAR? They are still claiming on their website: > "All Tesla vehicles produced in our factory, including Model 3, have the hardware needed for full self-driving capability at a safety level substantially greater than that of a human driver." ...but without LIDAR that simply isn't true. Either the accident…
LIDAR is not magic. You can get full situational awareness with boring old video these days. LIDAR was just easier to characterize back in the day before gigahertz ASIC AD video processors.
LIDAR may be more expensive, but it has one huge advantage: it can identify stationary objects in 3D space.
For a visual processing system to accomplish the same task, it must first: identify objects in a frame. Identify objects in the next frame. Identify objects in the images taken from the other cameras. Compare the objects, taking into account positional differences arising from the speed of the vehicle, and triangulate their positions relative to the vehicle.
This is certainly doable (Microsoft Photosynth has been around for at least a decade), but each one of these tasks, and especially the last task, requires more processing power than Tesla has put into its vehicles.
Re: New Tesla software to offer 'full' autonomy, Musk says
#54Earlier quoted context omitted.
Tesla disagrees with you on this, they are still operating with the belief that cameras will eventually be superior and cheaper compared to LIDAR. https://www.theverge.com/2018/2/7/16988628/elon-musk-lidar-s...
I know they disagree with me, they have multiple reasons to bury their heads in the sand. Admitting they were wrong would be a PR disaster, it would probably hurt Elon's ego, and a recall to retrofit LIDAR would probably be extremely costly. But if you talk with the leading experts in the field of car automation, the research groups who are actually making it work to some degree today, they are all using LIDAR. Furth…
No. LIDAR has its place, but it certainly a tech that has seen its day. Integrated sensor arrays consisting of multiple cameras and image processors can build more accurate situational awareness pictures faster. And to imply that Tesla's automation assist is not working is ridiculous.
Re: New Tesla software to offer 'full' autonomy, Musk says
#55I'm worried he's talking about going from what the NHTSA calls level 2 to level 3 autonomy[1], where the car is capable of navigating all the way to the destination but the driver has to remain alert for potential dangerous situations. That's probably an even worse idea in terms of people actually complying than the existing level 2 autonomy and I think Waymo is absolutely right in trying to skip straight to level 4/…
We need to work with some real numbers. In the US there are about 1.2 fatalities per 100 million miles driven [0]. About 19 months ago, Tesla said their cars logged 1.3 billion miles on autopilot [1]. I'd guess that autopilot number has at least doubled by now. So if there have been far fewer than 26 people killed by autopilot, then it's already saving lives. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_r…
This is a deceptive use of statistics because it's papering over all the nuance involved. Not all road miles are equivalent. Specifically, Tesla Autopilot only functions (or is meant to function) in a very narrow subset of all conceivable driving conditions. Many of the situations that Tesla Autopilot isn't meant for are the most dangerous conditions that unassisted humans drive in.
Furthermore the statistic doesn't break out the role of "Autopilot" features from the role of other safety features present in Tesla cars but not present in many other cars. More effective airbags, crumple zones, emergency braking(?) could all be lowering the fatality rate in Tesla cars enough to mask the "Tesla Autopilot" making driving more dangerous than if it weren't present.
Tesla fatality rates should be compared against equivalent class cars when driven by humans under the conditions which Tesla Autopilot are meant for.
Re: New Tesla software to offer 'full' autonomy, Musk says
#56Wake me up when I can tell my car to go get serviced and come back by 5 so _I_ can drive home.
Re: New Tesla software to offer 'full' autonomy, Musk says
#57I'm worried he's talking about going from what the NHTSA calls level 2 to level 3 autonomy[1], where the car is capable of navigating all the way to the destination but the driver has to remain alert for potential dangerous situations. That's probably an even worse idea in terms of people actually complying than the existing level 2 autonomy and I think Waymo is absolutely right in trying to skip straight to level 4/…
We need to work with some real numbers. In the US there are about 1.2 fatalities per 100 million miles driven [0]. About 19 months ago, Tesla said their cars logged 1.3 billion miles on autopilot [1]. I'd guess that autopilot number has at least doubled by now. So if there have been far fewer than 26 people killed by autopilot, then it's already saving lives. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_r…
Tesla's Autopilot miles are highway miles, but Tesla is comparing those miles to fatalities across all types of roads--freeways, highways, normal streets, dirt roads, etc. On the safest type of road (i.e., freeways, which have the fewest obstacles or impediments to driving), Tesla is no better than the national average over all types of roads.
And that's horrific. It means that Tesla isn't saving lives, it's causing more people to die than would have died if they hadn't been using Autopilot. Worse, as Tesla's many competitors have demonstrated, is that self-driving cars can be safer than human-drven cars. Just not the way Tesla does it.
Re: New Tesla software to offer 'full' autonomy, Musk says
#58Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're changing the meaning by adding the word "related." Say Microsoft stated it would "will begin to enable full 8K features" on the XBox One. That would mean that something would be in 8K--maybe just for movies but not games. It wouldn't mean "features related to 8K" but not a actually being able to display 8K video anywhere.
If say, Tesla would now be able to parallel park all the time without human intervention or oversight, would that not be considered a fully autonomous feature?
So long as it could park without any human oversight, yes, I'd consider that to fit Musk's statement. But will Tesla be even there by August?
Re: New Tesla software to offer 'full' autonomy, Musk says
#59Earlier quoted context omitted.
I know they disagree with me, they have multiple reasons to bury their heads in the sand. Admitting they were wrong would be a PR disaster, it would probably hurt Elon's ego, and a recall to retrofit LIDAR would probably be extremely costly. But if you talk with the leading experts in the field of car automation, the research groups who are actually making it work to some degree today, they are all using LIDAR. Furth…
No. LIDAR has its place, but it certainly a tech that has seen its day. Integrated sensor arrays consisting of multiple cameras and image processors can build more accurate situational awareness pictures faster. And to imply that Tesla's automation assist is not working is ridiculous.
I think you have an unrealistic understanding of the state of visual processing systems today.
The hardware simply isn't capable of the processing necessary to develop 360-degree situational awareness at the speeds that a vehicle would be driving.
Re: New Tesla software to offer 'full' autonomy, Musk says
#60Earlier quoted context omitted.
I know they disagree with me, they have multiple reasons to bury their heads in the sand. Admitting they were wrong would be a PR disaster, it would probably hurt Elon's ego, and a recall to retrofit LIDAR would probably be extremely costly. But if you talk with the leading experts in the field of car automation, the research groups who are actually making it work to some degree today, they are all using LIDAR. Furth…
No. LIDAR has its place, but it certainly a tech that has seen its day. Integrated sensor arrays consisting of multiple cameras and image processors can build more accurate situational awareness pictures faster. And to imply that Tesla's automation assist is not working is ridiculous.
On the contrary, LIDAR is only recently coming into its own:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-01-08/alphabet-...
https://arstechnica.com/cars/2017/01/googles-waymo-invests-i...
What I'm 'implying' (saying outright I thought) is that Tesla hardware is unsuitable for the continued advance of automation functionality. What they're doing currently is already pushing their inadequate sensors to the limit.