Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Why not? Humans can drive in less than optimal situations with 2 eyes as sensors.

If the goal is to have a solution that can drive in the same situations as a human.

What sensor is missing then and why?

Ps. My statement questions mostly LIDAR as additional sensor, I'm not sure if AI/ML is good enough yet too, but we'll c. I'm pretty sure Lidar isn't as important as many people think it is.

And for all Musk's "his faults", you can't deny he is correct on a lot of cases.

Almost everyone questions the Lidar decision, but loses sight of the most simple question.

What's missing with only cameras, if humans can do it?



> What's missing with only cameras, if humans can do it?

The human brain - which can respond to novel situations in a reasonable way without prior training.

E.g. if I put you in a truck in the middle of a field, you’d be able to successfully drive around without being confused by tall grass. You’d also successfully avoid dangers such as cliffs/boulders even though you may have never done it before. If you can figure out how the human brain does that, we’d be one step closer to general AI.


> What's missing with only cameras, if humans can do it?

Intelligence.


> What sensor is missing then and why?

But the discussion at hand is about LIDAR/sensors. Please read the entire comment...

Not about if "AI is capable enough currently"


>What's missing with only cameras, if humans can do it?

A human brain?

The debates about LIDAR etc. aren't that they're needed to pilot cars effectively on roads in the abstract but that they may be needed in the absence of a high level AGI to reach acceptable levels of functionality. And they may not be enough of course.


But it doesn't matter if the sensors on the market don't work in bad weather.

You still need to rely on cameras only then, to get the job done as good as humans can.

It's possible that the current state of AI is not enough, but current LIDAR technology won't solve that problem.


I don't really disagree. More sensor data can be a substitute for some human judgement. Up to a point and under some circumstances.

But neither sensors nor simply collecting lots of data is any sort of magic bullet. Whatever the enthusiasts may think.


Technologically, there are things the machine can't do that human's can:

- HDR - human eyes do this really well

- Moving the camera. Humans will move their heads to perceive depth on things and to bypass obstacles. They will tilt, pitch, and yaw their heads to get views.

Google had a post on this recently.


> Moving the camera.

This is a good answer actually, any thought on where to find the post?

I looked for it but haven't found the correct keywords obviously. Also tried Waymo just to be sure.

None the less, I never claimed that the current camera is sufficient. Although I didn't foresee tilting/moving the camera as a problem.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: