So he demanded that the driver assistance software be as safe as possible before public release? paving the way for full self driving 6-7 years later? is this a bad thing?
I thought the “needs lidar” debate was settled years ago? Lidar cannot read signs. It is also prohibitively expensive to put in vehicles. If you’re going to drive with a neural network you need as much training data as possible, which means as many sensors in as many vehicles as possible.
If your cameras detect something the lidar does not, you trust the cameras, every time. Lidar can very easily misinterperet the world. It works great for simple robots who need to know where walls are and don’t need to specifially identify animals, people, obstacles, speed bumps, construction zones, etc.
Theres also the simple fact that humans can drive just fine without having evolved a lidar sensor.
Actually, no you don’t. Lidar cannot dentify object’s specifically. Tesla does use lidar in their testing/prototype vehicles and they have to find any instances manually where these systems don’t agree. It always falls back to cameras.
No he ABSOLUTELY didn't do that, because it's very unsafe and he unleashed not only AP but also that total steaming pile that is "FSD". Which is neither F nor SD.