Tesla's autonomous vehicle tech has been perennially stuck at Level 2 self-driving, as BMW and other rivals try to leapfrog to Level 3.
BMW tests next-gen LiDAR to beat Tesla to Level 3 self-driving cars::Tesla's autonomous vehicle tech has been perennially stuck at Level 2 self-driving, as BMW and other rivals try to leapfrog to Level 3.
This.
That cocksucker has such ~a tiny dick~ fragile ego he makes huge decisions without any expertise simply because he says so.
Thats how he built the whole “genius” thing around him. Reality of it is that he is an annoying dumbass who thinks he knows it all and anyone in the same room with more than one brain cell is immediately annoyed with him. But he has a lot of money so i guess LeTtEr X cOoL
I don't know wefwef at all, but on the old Reddit apps, as well as Liftoff and Sync, it seems like two is necessary. I'll check your test on desktop Firefox when I get on my computer next, just out of curiosity
No big deal either way! I seem too remember something similar happening with RIF and spoiler tags, too (I think that one was sensitive to where you put after the opening spoiler tag indicator, but it if you were in "new" Reddit, it didn't matter about the spaces)
There are different versions of Markdown and they all have slightly different standards although where they're broadly the same they are variable in the particular.
Reddit and I think lemme, although I'm not quite sure, use a version called Cramdown, the problem is if the app rendering the code doesn't think they are using Cramdown and uses something else you get inconsistencies in rendering.
Wikipedia also uses their own media version to be awkward.
fortunately LIDAR unit costs are going down, so multiple units, fusing their data with regular camera arrays should resolve a very good view, and be good at error-correcting for each other's shortcomings.
Humans drive using “cameras” (eyes) and no LiDAR, that’s the assumption Tesla is making — that a supercomputer can drive 10x better than humans using the same type of sensor. Nobody really knows yet if that’s true but I get the logic.
LiDAR also is UV/visible spectrum and is blocked by dust/fog/snow/rain so it doesn’t help much in many driving situations..
You're making an argument against LiDAR with it using UV/visible spectrum, guess what uses visible spectrum to see stuff? Cameras. And they also have an unfortunate downside of not having good dynamic range, so in very bright/low light situations they probably don't work that well either. Teslas aren't even using infrared cameras to see in the dark to my knowledge.
Unsure why you are downvoted, because that is sound logic. I recall hearing on a podcast of I think a former Tesla engineer that having too many sensors potentially makes things less effective since you have to deal with different types of input, and have to crunch more data, etc. etc. Efficient development also means knowing when to cull unnecessary time sinks.
I hate Elon as much as the next guy, but... Well, humans are obviously not perfect drivers, but Tesla clearly believes that in time, with cameras all around the car (already an improvement over human drivers), a good enough AI solution would be able to match or surpass humans.
I still rather have good ol radar as a fallback if cameras and their AI model don't work for some reason. They are still work in progress, and rely on trained models to recognize objects, while if a radar sees something, it is because there is something actually there and not a guess. I don't buy the story that too much sensors is bad. Planes rely on multiple different sensors plus backups for redundancy to fly safely, self-driving cars with vastly superior tech should be able to do the same.
They actually have used radar along with the cameras for a while. It wasn't until the last few years that they decided to ditch them. I think I read that they realized it was a mistake and are going to add them back on future models.
Anything short of fiercely anti-Tesla gets immediately downvoted here. Just how it goes I guess. I’m not the biggest Tesla fan but hope they succeed on this front, we desperately need driving assistance technology to make the roads safer.
If buy leading the race you mean the only company to have an actual product available for purchase then yeah.
But the reason they were able to get to market so quickly is because they don't actually have any concerns about it being functional or safe. That's a real boon to them because it helps them move quickly ahead of the competition that do care about those things.
Of course one good argue that an unsafe self-driving system is in fact not a self-driving system and therefore they are not the first to market.
The average consumer would define self driving as "if my car crashes, my car should be sued". Is that how it works with a tesla crash, who pays for that?
What's the point in a self-driving system that has been babysat in order to ensure it doesn't murder you, random pedestrians and other road users. If I want a car that is unsafe if I take my hands off the wheel I can get a regular car, it already does that.
Tesla themselves call it FSD, Full Self Driving. That is at best false advertising and at worst reckless endangerment. It isn't fully capable, and it requires the driver's attention so it isn't self-driving. Literally every part of its name is wrong.
I am basing my claim on it not being functional and safe.
I'm basing my claim on the fact that it drives into trucks. Since I don't want to be driven into a truck by my car, I would consider that to be a failure state.
I don't think anyone has ever claimed it's flawless. After all it's still in beta version. If you hit a truck it's because the driver wasn't paying attention.
I still don't know what you're basing these claims on except your own opinion apparently. "It's not safe" compared to what? As far as I know Tesla FSD has had less accidents per mile than an average driver.
In the 2nd quarter, we recorded one crash for every 4.41 million miles driven in which drivers were using Autopilot technology (Autosteer and active safety features). For drivers who were not using Autopilot technology (no Autosteer and active safety features), we recorded one crash for every 1.2 million miles driven. By comparison, NHTSA’s most recent data shows that in the United States there is an automobile crash every 484,000 miles.