Live data from Hacker News

Sub-$200 Lidar could reshuffle auto sensor economics

spectrum.ieee.org

511–520 of 582 posts

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

#511
post #393

Earlier quoted context omitted.

According to that article, Waymo crashes 2.3x more often than human drivers (every 98k miles vs 229k miles), which is clearly false. I think it's far more likely that humans don't report most minor collisions to insurance, and that both Robotaxis and Waymo are safer than human drivers on average.

> According to that article, Waymo crashes 2.3x more often than human drivers (every 98k miles vs 229k miles), which is clearly false. Why is it clearly false? It might be false, but clearly? I would definitely like to see evidence either way. > I think it's far more likely that humans don't report most minor collisions to insurance, and that both Robotaxis and Waymo are safer than human drivers on average. That soun…

The NHTSA requires a report when any automated driving system hits any object at any speed, or if anything else hits the ADS vehicle resulting damage that is reasonably expected to exceed $1,000.[1] In practice, this means that everyone reports any ADS collision, since trading paint between two vehicles can result in >$1k in damage total.

If you go to the NHTSA's page regarding their Standing General Order[2] and download the CSV of all ADS incidents[3], you can filter where the reporting entity is Waymo and find 520 rows. If you filter where the vehicle was stopped or parked, you'll find 318 crashes. If you scan through the narrative column, you'll see things like a Waymo yielding to pedestrians in a crosswalk and getting rear-ended, or waiting for a red light to change and getting rear-ended, or yielding to a pickup truck that then shifted into reverse and backed into the Waymo. In other words: the majority of Waymo collisions are due to human drivers.

So either Waymos are ridiculously unlucky, or when these sorts of things happen between two human driven cars, it's rarely reported to insurance. In my experience, if there's only minor damage, both parties exchange contact info and don't involve the authorities. Maybe one compensates the other for damage, or maybe neither party cares enough about a minor dent or scrape to deal with it. I've done this when someone rear-ended me, and I know my parents have done it when they've had collisions.

If human driven vehicles really did average 229k miles between any collision of any kind, we'd see many more pristine older vehicles. But if you pay attention to other cars on the road or in parking lots, you'll see far more dents and scratches than would be expected from that statistic. And that's not even counting the damage that gets repaired!

1. See page 13 of https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/2025-04/third-am...

2. https://www.nhtsa.gov/laws-regulations/standing-general-orde...

3. https://static.nhtsa.gov/odi/ffdd/sgo-2021-01/SGO-2021-01_In...

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

#512

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think Tesla is ahead now in most respects Do you actually own a Tesla? I do. With FSD. And let me assure you, you are very wrong.

How old? The 2023+ models with HW4 are pretty good at FSD. A 2021 model with HW3 was scary bad when I tried it about a year and a half ago.

> I tried it about a year and a half ago.

So, you do not own a Tesla.

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

#514

Tesla is adding radar and I predict before long it will add LiDAR because that's the only way to get to Level 3, which is a requirement for moving forward in California https://www.fccidlookup.com/report/tesla-new-millimeter-wave...

Some internet comments said this was for detecting people in the cabin, not for detecting things outside the car.

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

#515
post #347

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…

LIDAR also struggle in heavy rain, snow, fog, dust. Check how waymo handle such conditions.

It's not only failing, it's causing false positives.

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

#516

Tesla is adding radar and I predict before long it will add LiDAR because that's the only way to get to Level 3, which is a requirement for moving forward in California https://www.fccidlookup.com/report/tesla-new-millimeter-wave...

Some internet comments said this was for detecting people in the cabin, not for detecting things outside the car.

They're not reading the actual FCC document then, which says:

Strategy: The move brings Tesla's sensor approach closer to competitors like Ford, GM, and Rivian, who utilize multi-modal systems (cameras plus radar) for their driver-assistance features.

Potential: This 'HD radar' could provide critical redundancy and data needed for achieving higher levels of driving automation and improving system performance in all conditions.

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

#517

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.

I find it comical that people continue to go back to this rage well against "a certain company" for their vision-only approach when the truth is they have the best automatic driving system an individual can buy, rivaling Waymo and beating the Chinese brands. Why are the commenters not pissed at the dozens of other car companies who have done absolutely nothing in this space? Answer: because it's not nearly as fun to…

Because other car companies don't have CEOs who've been super confident about predicting actual full self driving either "this year" or "next year" for the past decade. If Ford had been swearing up and down they'd have full self driving cracked any day now for ten years, and been charging people for the hardware along the way, everyone would be pissed at them too.

Surely you already know this, so why pretend otherwise?

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

#518

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Xpeng, Wayne, aiMotive to name three. Probably many others, who claim to use LIDAR but don’t actually rely on it. Because LIDAR is perceived as a prerequisite for autonomous safety, admitting to not needing it is a bad PR move — for now.

There is a massive technical difference between Vision first but with LiDAR redundancy vs No LiDAR at all that is Tesla approach. Those are not the same architecture. So claiming XPeng, Waymo, or aiMotive validate Tesla is technically misleading. XPeng system is sensor fusion. It is not camera only. Waymo is even clearer. For them LiDAR is not optional. aiMotive has now started to market camera only, but its experime…

Xpeng is abandoning sensor fusion. aiMotive has never bothered with sensor fusion. I never mentioned Waymo; unfortunately the AI gods at Apple auto-corrected me typing Wayve, as in Wayve Technologies Ltd.

Tesla FSD is not accurately described as a "no LIDAR at all" approach, if you're attempting to contrast it to other LIDAR-trained systems like aiMotive, Xpeng and Wayve.

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

#519
post #306
post #268

Before y'all say that now everyone will be able to get Waymo's sensor suite for hundreds of dollars instead of tens of thousands, that's the easy part. Waymo benefits from Google's unparalleled geospatial data. Waymo also has a support architecture that doesn't depend on real time remote operation, which can't be implemented reliably in almost all cases. You can't be following your supposedly unsupervised cars with a…

I’m not disagreeing with what you’re saying, but does Alphabet actually intend Waymo to be a trillion dollar retail car business itself, selling cars to everyone? Or would they be happy to sell all those super cool things to OEMs? In a world where “everyone” can make a car affordable that can run Waymo’s software, they may be happy to license all that to “everyone” and simply collect fat royalty checks, à la Microsof…

They'll probably operate some services and also license their tech to carmakers to sell to consumers. I'm sure there'll be a subscription involved for that too.

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

#520
post #225

When every car has LIDAR will they all begin to blind each other? (Insert old man rant “Why are everyone’s headlights so gosh darn bright these days?!”)

There's already cases in SF where a bunch of Waymos are right next to each other, driving around.
Post reply on HN