8 ms·

What is the HN opinion on Tesla skipping lidar? Having spent some time with computer vision in university I think it's insane to skip it - sure stereo reconstru

by nisa 1y ago

What is the HN opinion on Tesla skipping lidar? Having spent some time with computer vision in university I think it's insane to skip it - sure stereo reconstruction is powerful but lighting conditions have such an impact on results that having some robust depth data feels like a no-brainer and skipping it feels like malignant neglect.

MOARDONGZPLZ 1y ago
I can only speak for myself, but I work on this stuff in this industry: Tesla’s choice is asinine at this point. It’s one thing to claim cameras only and find that won’t work and pivot, but they are so dug in that they can’t admit they were wrong and won’t do so. So it’s asinine now.
- yndoendo 1y ago
  What do yes call a person that has only visual sensory? Disabled. Humans have sight, touch, taste, sound, smell, and vascular sensory. Only a portion of systems used in self drive automation.
  - BenjiWiebe 1y ago
    Well I haven't used taste nor smell in my driving yet. Touch only as far as vibration and steering wheel torque (both not difficult to sense with electronics). That narrows it down a bit.
    - wileydragonfly 1y ago
      Never once smelled or tasted something funny when driving and realize you’d better pull over… like… right now? I have.
  - acka 1y ago
    Humans also have a vestibular system[1] and proprioception[2], which I think are very important in making judgments about safe following distance, car handling, and road conditions, in particular in adverse conditions like strong side winds and slippery or icy roads, which may not always be visually obvious. While some of this can be handled by an IMU, I think humans still have a strong advantage in fusing their various sensory inputs, thanks to millions of years of evolution. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vestibular_system https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vestibular_system [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proprioception https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proprioception
- Suppafly 1y ago
  >It’s one thing to claim cameras only and find that won’t work and pivot, but they are so dug in that they can’t admit they were wrong and won’t do so. So it’s asinine now. Didn't they start with lidar or radar or similar and then go back to only using vision based technologies?
xorcist 1y ago
A similar situation to Jobs reciting research on how optimal the one button mouse is. A thought bubble. Why, we will perhaps never know. But likely they were early and it was deemed too expensive back then, or didn't find a supplier they could work with. Now there's too much prestige in it and they can never back down which would be admitting to a mistake. It would be one thing if it was a one time event but then they repeated that playbook with the lack of a rain sensor.
colechristensen 1y ago
I think it was a valid decision that turned out to be incorrect and is staying put as a result of stubbornness. People really like criticizing decisions in hindsight especially here where the armchair engineer with the benefit of hindsight is too common.
- godelski 1y ago
  People have been criticizing this decision from the get go. It may have upgraded from engineers to the general public but let's be honest, the latter doesn't matter in a topic like this anyways
- relaxing 1y ago
  They should have had the benefit of hindsight as well thanks to testing.
zymhan 1y ago
> the HN opinion I'm not sure why you'd think HN has a monolithic opinion, this is a site with myriad different users.
- PNewling 1y ago
  Maybe they're more asking for the whole breadth of opinions available from the HN community?
- A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 1y ago
  True, but you will find that some subjects align people more closely than most others.
ruined 1y ago
interesting claim i read in another thread a couple weeks ago: >Tesla Vision is, currently, legally below minimum human vision requirements and has historically been sold despite being nearly legally blind. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43605034 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43605034
nfriedly 1y ago
> What is the HN opinion on Tesla skipping lidar? Short-sighted and egotistical. There likely have been deaths and injuries that would have been prevented by lidar, and there will likely be more in the future.
- ndsipa_pomu 1y ago
  It strikes me as foolhardy that the U.S. allows self-driving vehicles to use the public roads without having to pass safety tests. I'd blame the lack of government control of public spaces as well as Tesla's engineering.
  - drowsspa 1y ago
    Musk is allowed to test in production with 1 ton metal machines racing at 100 km/h without it entailing legal responsibility. Amazing the influence that a few million believers on social media can buy you these days
devmor 1y ago
It was a valid experiment and pushed computer vision but it clearly failed a long time ago. The fact that Teslas are not only still sold without lidar but “autopilot” is pushed as safe is disgusting. People will die (and have already died) horrifically because of this decision. It’s morally bankrupt.
- seb1204 1y ago
  I assume the same would apply to any car not using LIDAR? Or just Tesla because they decided on a different tech stack?
godelski 1y ago
As someone who's done a lot of computer vision, it is insane to skip it. And it's sad because what everyone missed from that viral Mark Rober video [0] was not the Looney Toons wall hit but the fucking kid in the smoke. Add all the cameras and AI you want, you ain't changing the laws of physics: visible light doesn't penetrate smoke. But radar does. Every (traditional) engineer knows that safe systems have redundancy. That safe systems have redundancy through differing modalities. Use cameras, but also use radar, lidar, and even millimeter wave. Using just cameras isn't just tying one hand behind your back, it's shooting yourself in the kneecap afterwards [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IQJL3htsDyQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IQJL3htsDyQ
- gmueckl 1y ago
  Is Tesla getting into legal mess if they need to add sensors to make self driving work when they already sold that feature to car owners? Would that imply that they need to retrofit already sold cars with upgraded sensor packages?
  - Ancapistani 1y ago
    My understanding is that they went the opposite direction - their cars used to have lidar, but don’t anymore. Worse, they turned them off for the older vehicles with a software update.
    - _ea1k 1y ago
      They never had lidar. They had a very low resolution radar that was used for AP, and some pretty terrible ultrasonic sensors with massive blind spots.
  - _ea1k 1y ago
    Yes, and this is already turning out to be a problem for them. They've acknowledged that HW3 is not sufficient, and will be on the hook for those who bought the FSD package with those cars. That isn't the end of the world, but it'd turn into a much bigger problem if they also had to add additional sensors and body modifications to support those sensors.
instagib 1y ago
Radar technology offers a range of applications, including the ability to detect objects around corners, behind obstacles such as brick walls, and even penetrate human bodies at specific frequencies. However, when multiple sensors yield similar results, it becomes challenging and costly to discriminate which results are valid. Operating radar at a specific frequency, such as 2.45 GHz (a microwave frequency often used due to its affordability), can be ineffective in environments rich in water droplets (e.g., rain), as these can dominate the radar signals. Higher frequencies enable the detection of smaller water droplets, but switching between frequencies can be expensive. Additionally, varying the radar's detection range to identify objects of different sizes complicates the calculations, involving factors such as minimum and maximum range, power, and time on target. Cameras typically detect non-moving objects by comparing successive images. In contrast, radar can identify both stationary and moving objects and determine their direction relative to the sensor by emitting a frequency and analyzing the reflected pulses. Lidar, on the other hand, uses light to measure the distance to objects in its path, employing a photoreceptor to capture the reflected light.
- ndsipa_pomu 1y ago
  That'll likely be why LIDAR is used rather than RADAR.
  - instagib 1y ago
    I was responding to Tesla skipping Lidar but apparently it’s a sore topic. As pointed out by someone else Tesla used to use ultrasonic radar sensors but stopped. “ Until this month's change, all Model S and Model X EVs intended for North America were equipped with radar sensors but the company has been building new Model 3 and Model Y vehicles without any front radar sensors since May 2021. That's when Tesla announced a change for those models away from radar to Tesla Vision” 0 I don’t think many people understand how these systems work but we’re not on a radar or engineering forum. 0. https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a39250157/tesla-no-radar-sensor-model-s-model-x/ https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a39250157/tesla-no-radar-s...
teleforce 1y ago
There will be time in the very near future (read five years time) people will not buy vehicle (car, bike, etc) without lidar as the price become insignificant as car reverse camera, and it become commonplace. Personally now I'll not buy any vehicle without assisted camera parking and apparently many people will agree with this important feature including Marques Brownlee [1]. [1] Reviewing my First Car: Toyota Camry Hybrid! [video]: https://youtu.be/Az6nemkRB1Y https://youtu.be/Az6nemkRB1Y
vault 1y ago
My opinion is that skipping lidar is nonsense. Check Mark Rober's video, published one month ago, "Can You Fool A Self Driving Car?" where he compares a Tesla with other Lidar-equipped cars: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IQJL3htsDyQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IQJL3htsDyQ

by nisa 1y ago

MOARDONGZPLZ 1y ago

I can only speak for myself, but I work on this stuff in this industry: Tesla’s choice is asinine at this point. It’s one thing to claim cameras only and find that won’t work and pivot, but they are so dug in that they can’t admit they were wrong and won’t do so. So it’s asinine now.

yndoendo 1y ago
What do yes call a person that has only visual sensory? Disabled. Humans have sight, touch, taste, sound, smell, and vascular sensory. Only a portion of systems used in self drive automation.
- BenjiWiebe 1y ago
  Well I haven't used taste nor smell in my driving yet. Touch only as far as vibration and steering wheel torque (both not difficult to sense with electronics). That narrows it down a bit.
  - wileydragonfly 1y ago
    Never once smelled or tasted something funny when driving and realize you’d better pull over… like… right now? I have.
- acka 1y ago
  Humans also have a vestibular system[1] and proprioception[2], which I think are very important in making judgments about safe following distance, car handling, and road conditions, in particular in adverse conditions like strong side winds and slippery or icy roads, which may not always be visually obvious. While some of this can be handled by an IMU, I think humans still have a strong advantage in fusing their various sensory inputs, thanks to millions of years of evolution. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vestibular_system https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vestibular_system [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proprioception https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proprioception
Suppafly 1y ago
>It’s one thing to claim cameras only and find that won’t work and pivot, but they are so dug in that they can’t admit they were wrong and won’t do so. So it’s asinine now. Didn't they start with lidar or radar or similar and then go back to only using vision based technologies?

xorcist 1y ago

A similar situation to Jobs reciting research on how optimal the one button mouse is. A thought bubble. Why, we will perhaps never know. But likely they were early and it was deemed too expensive back then, or didn't find a supplier they could work with. Now there's too much prestige in it and they can never back down which would be admitting to a mistake. It would be one thing if it was a one time event but then they repeated that playbook with the lack of a rain sensor.

colechristensen 1y ago

I think it was a valid decision that turned out to be incorrect and is staying put as a result of stubbornness. People really like criticizing decisions in hindsight especially here where the armchair engineer with the benefit of hindsight is too common.

godelski 1y ago
People have been criticizing this decision from the get go. It may have upgraded from engineers to the general public but let's be honest, the latter doesn't matter in a topic like this anyways
relaxing 1y ago
They should have had the benefit of hindsight as well thanks to testing.

zymhan 1y ago

> the HN opinion I'm not sure why you'd think HN has a monolithic opinion, this is a site with myriad different users.

PNewling 1y ago
Maybe they're more asking for the whole breadth of opinions available from the HN community?
A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 1y ago
True, but you will find that some subjects align people more closely than most others.

ruined 1y ago

interesting claim i read in another thread a couple weeks ago: >Tesla Vision is, currently, legally below minimum human vision requirements and has historically been sold despite being nearly legally blind. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43605034 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43605034

nfriedly 1y ago

> What is the HN opinion on Tesla skipping lidar? Short-sighted and egotistical. There likely have been deaths and injuries that would have been prevented by lidar, and there will likely be more in the future.

ndsipa_pomu 1y ago
It strikes me as foolhardy that the U.S. allows self-driving vehicles to use the public roads without having to pass safety tests. I'd blame the lack of government control of public spaces as well as Tesla's engineering.
- drowsspa 1y ago
  Musk is allowed to test in production with 1 ton metal machines racing at 100 km/h without it entailing legal responsibility. Amazing the influence that a few million believers on social media can buy you these days

devmor 1y ago

It was a valid experiment and pushed computer vision but it clearly failed a long time ago. The fact that Teslas are not only still sold without lidar but “autopilot” is pushed as safe is disgusting. People will die (and have already died) horrifically because of this decision. It’s morally bankrupt.

seb1204 1y ago
I assume the same would apply to any car not using LIDAR? Or just Tesla because they decided on a different tech stack?

godelski 1y ago

As someone who's done a lot of computer vision, it is insane to skip it. And it's sad because what everyone missed from that viral Mark Rober video [0] was not the Looney Toons wall hit but the fucking kid in the smoke. Add all the cameras and AI you want, you ain't changing the laws of physics: visible light doesn't penetrate smoke. But radar does. Every (traditional) engineer knows that safe systems have redundancy. That safe systems have redundancy through differing modalities. Use cameras, but also use radar, lidar, and even millimeter wave. Using just cameras isn't just tying one hand behind your back, it's shooting yourself in the kneecap afterwards [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IQJL3htsDyQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IQJL3htsDyQ

gmueckl 1y ago
Is Tesla getting into legal mess if they need to add sensors to make self driving work when they already sold that feature to car owners? Would that imply that they need to retrofit already sold cars with upgraded sensor packages?
- Ancapistani 1y ago
  My understanding is that they went the opposite direction - their cars used to have lidar, but don’t anymore. Worse, they turned them off for the older vehicles with a software update.
  - _ea1k 1y ago
    They never had lidar. They had a very low resolution radar that was used for AP, and some pretty terrible ultrasonic sensors with massive blind spots.
- _ea1k 1y ago
  Yes, and this is already turning out to be a problem for them. They've acknowledged that HW3 is not sufficient, and will be on the hook for those who bought the FSD package with those cars. That isn't the end of the world, but it'd turn into a much bigger problem if they also had to add additional sensors and body modifications to support those sensors.

instagib 1y ago

Radar technology offers a range of applications, including the ability to detect objects around corners, behind obstacles such as brick walls, and even penetrate human bodies at specific frequencies. However, when multiple sensors yield similar results, it becomes challenging and costly to discriminate which results are valid. Operating radar at a specific frequency, such as 2.45 GHz (a microwave frequency often used due to its affordability), can be ineffective in environments rich in water droplets (e.g., rain), as these can dominate the radar signals. Higher frequencies enable the detection of smaller water droplets, but switching between frequencies can be expensive. Additionally, varying the radar's detection range to identify objects of different sizes complicates the calculations, involving factors such as minimum and maximum range, power, and time on target. Cameras typically detect non-moving objects by comparing successive images. In contrast, radar can identify both stationary and moving objects and determine their direction relative to the sensor by emitting a frequency and analyzing the reflected pulses. Lidar, on the other hand, uses light to measure the distance to objects in its path, employing a photoreceptor to capture the reflected light.

ndsipa_pomu 1y ago
That'll likely be why LIDAR is used rather than RADAR.
- instagib 1y ago
  I was responding to Tesla skipping Lidar but apparently it’s a sore topic. As pointed out by someone else Tesla used to use ultrasonic radar sensors but stopped. “ Until this month's change, all Model S and Model X EVs intended for North America were equipped with radar sensors but the company has been building new Model 3 and Model Y vehicles without any front radar sensors since May 2021. That's when Tesla announced a change for those models away from radar to Tesla Vision” 0 I don’t think many people understand how these systems work but we’re not on a radar or engineering forum. 0. https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a39250157/tesla-no-radar-sensor-model-s-model-x/ https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a39250157/tesla-no-radar-s...

teleforce 1y ago

There will be time in the very near future (read five years time) people will not buy vehicle (car, bike, etc) without lidar as the price become insignificant as car reverse camera, and it become commonplace. Personally now I'll not buy any vehicle without assisted camera parking and apparently many people will agree with this important feature including Marques Brownlee [1]. [1] Reviewing my First Car: Toyota Camry Hybrid! [video]: https://youtu.be/Az6nemkRB1Y https://youtu.be/Az6nemkRB1Y

vault 1y ago

My opinion is that skipping lidar is nonsense. Check Mark Rober's video, published one month ago, "Can You Fool A Self Driving Car?" where he compares a Tesla with other Lidar-equipped cars: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IQJL3htsDyQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IQJL3htsDyQ