Musk thinks lidar not needed for self driving

New / Eng daan
Apr 22 13 Comments

https://techcrunch.com/2019/04/22/anyone-relying-on-lidar-is-doomed-elon-musk-says/

Musk is again going against common industry wisdom. He proved naysayers wrong many times with Tesla and SpaceX, but will this be the case here? Humans are able to drive just using two eyes, but do we really have good enough AI to build self-driving just based on cameras, ultrasound and radar?

comments

Want to comment? LOG IN or SIGN UP
TOP 13 Comments
  • Apple industry
    Looks like he is smoking that shit again
    Apr 22 0
  • New / R&D mr.jangles
    Seems like they're handicapping thrmselves
    Apr 22 0
  • Oath / Mgmt Atinlay2
    He would know!
    Apr 22 1
    • Northrop Grumman / Eng HowCouldYu
      This guy zings!!
      Apr 22
  • Facebook AdaGrad
    The only universe where Tesla wins big in autonomous driving is if Lidar is not useful, and billions of real driving miles is critical.

    No wonder Elon claims that's the universe we're in. Good strategy.

    Only he knows the reality to hyperbole ratio in that statement.
    Apr 23 0
  • Apple 867530nine
    Humans are able to drive purely through subconscious information processing, leaving your conscious mind free to think of the past present or future. You can do this continuously unless there’s a sudden action that triggers your conscious mind to respond to sudden conditions.

    Lidar is just a modeling technique to understand the environment around you. Is it better than how our subconscious works? That’s a good question if EO/IR image processing and ultrasound can model this equally as well. I’m skeptical of Elon on this one given my naive armchair analysis of this. But generally the wisdom of the masses is smarter than the Wisdom of the few. But I’m nowhere near as smart as this guy either.
    Apr 22 2
    • Uber / Eng techcredit
      Generally the wisdom of the masses is wrong until the minority enlighten them, then it becomes common knowledge.
      Apr 22
    • Apple 867530nine
      No. That would be the exception. Not the generality.
      Apr 23
  • Microsoft / Eng
    tarasenko

    Microsoft Eng

    PRE
    Microsoft, Grab
    tarasenkomore
    I agree.... it’s redundant info in a sense and introduces more edge cases normal humans don’t have
    Apr 22 2
    • Microsoft / Eng
      tarasenko

      Microsoft Eng

      PRE
      Microsoft, Grab
      tarasenkomore
      How would lidar help with a police officer waving traffic through an accident?
      Apr 22
    • IBM skeirnx
      Isn’t that what the cameras are for? This is like asking “how would the rear view mirror help with a police officer waving traffic through an accident?”.
      Apr 22
  • Commvault alpha_wolf
    I would argue against this. Lidars & other sensors are just tools to get info about the environment.
    Apr 22 0
  • Microsoft JKWj76
    Hard to argue he is wrong here. He said "relying" not just "using".

    One thing he is right: It does feel wrong to have a FSD stack that has such a sucky vision stack that has to be helped by Lidar. That implicitly means that this FSD stack would simply not work with vision alone when Lidar is not providing critical info about the scene.

    Now, if Lidar is not critical to the system (i.e. self-driving works just as well through vision alone in the corner cases where Lidar doesn't work) then the next question becomes whether it's cost effective to include with every car, if it's just an expensive add-on that only provides some minor incremental value.
    May 4 0