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.
Tesla’s decision to only use cameras and no lidar will bite them in the ass.
*Musk’s. He regularly overrules the Tesla engineers.
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 think you need to use two tildes on each side if you want it show up as a strike through like this
~~like this~~
Came here to say this. Couldn’t be more on point. Using both cameras and LiDAR in tandem will be necessary for true self driving vehicles.
Currently they seem to be leading the race though even though the competition is using radar and lidar
Edit: Am I wrong?
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?
No, I mean leading the race as in having the most capable sefl driving system in existence which I believe is the case.
I don’t know what you’re basing the claim on that it’s not functional and safe.
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.
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.
All it would take is 1 poorly designed aftermarket laser, or some freak prism effect from some particulate on the lens to permanently blind someone.
It’s extremely low band infrared. It’s like the infrared lasers from your remote control it’s not going to burn you retinas out also that’s not how lasers work, you can’t convert from invisible light to visible light lasers through refraction or reflection.
That’s not how light/laser and prisms work. Prisms only separate out the frequencies that are contained within the light/laser. imagine the light is a sandwich and each frequency is a peice of the sandwich. If you take apart the sandwich you still have the same bread, meat and cheese just not stacked together. That’s what the prism is basically doing.
I hate that the article opens with
Just a decade ago, the concept of self-driving cars might have seemed like something out of a science fiction movie
Ten years ago there was already a ton of competition in self driving car research. They were first legalized on the roads 10 years ago. Tesla autopilot (including it even though it was a scam) was sold 9 years ago. Google spun off its self driving car division as waymo in 2016.
This feels like one of those “bruh Zelda ocarina of time came out 29 years ago, we old” memes
Hell, Mercedes and Bosch were testing it all the way back in 1993:
Here is an alternative Piped link(s): https://piped.video/watch?v=JTnBiTIvGqY
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source, check me out at GitHub.
Bet even the self driving software of BMW won’t use turn signals when they change lanes.
This will probably be under monthly subscription
“The route you selected contains a highway. Please purchase the Highway Driving Pack in addition to your City Driving Pack to reach your destination”
Almost certainly.
But self-driving also depends on up-to-date mapping data and continually improved algorithms for the autonomous systems to work properly. An ongoing cost to the customer makes the most sense for a service that has operating costs to the service provider.
I mean, does it? Presumably the idea (that Tesla had anyway) is to try and mimic what humans do, and we don’t need mapping data to drive “safely” (for a given value of safe). Of course, humans also get lost, but again, the GPS updates is basically free at this point for the mapping help humans need. (Garmin stopped charging yearly long ago, Open Maps and Google Maps and Wayze all are “free”).
Only if they’re giving the hardware away with the car. Tesla is charging ~$15k upfront for FSD. It would be absurd to tack a monthly fee on top of that.
Why do you think you should get stuff for free?
Hardware has a cost. Running a service has a cost. Providing updates has a cost. If you don’t think you should be responsible for the costs of the things you use, you’re going to be disappointed pretty often. Venture-capital funded startups can only give away free shit for so long before they have to start giving returns
Sample pricing for BMW self-driving add-on feature:
98% accuracy in obstacle avoidance - $299/mo.
85% accuracy in obstacle avoidance - $199/mo.
75% accuracy in obstacle avoidance (lowest legal limit!) - $99/mo.
disclaimer: BMW cannot guarantee 100% accuracy in accuracy rates
Another possibility.
Unlimited* crash avoidance instances - $299.99/mo
10 crash avoidance instances - $199.99/mo
5 crash avoidance instances - $99.99/mo
*crash avoidance may be limited during peak hours and times of congestion. After 12 crash avoidance instances, feature may be disabled without notice due to abuse of the system. All sales are final and minimum 5 year contract required. Price may increase at any time without notice
I’ve always thought that the Tesla craze would fizzle as major car brands start investing in EVs and self driving tech. I’ll take a Toyota, Volvo, Honda or BMW over a Tesla anytime.
Sadly Toyota is struggling to make a decent EV years after leading in hybrids. BMW on the other hand has insane efficiency
Still bizarre to me that Toyota had such a lead with hybrids and then went in on hydrogen and missed the boat on evs
From what I’ve heard, they have a history of letting other companies trailblaze, and then they come in to refine and perfect tech afterward. They recently tried to be the trailblazer and bet on a losing tech. Hopefully now they are refining the ev game and will come out with something above and beyond what we’ve seen so far as per their old MO.
They’ve made some incredible solid state battery leaps recently. For Japan hydrogen actually makes way more sense than a pure EV play too due to the way their grid(s) is set up and their power generation capacity. It’s their home market too so they are going to prioritise that.
hopefully this will change soon, there’s some nifty shit on the horizon from Toyota, hope they meet expectations. https://www.inverse.com/tech/toyota-electric-car-600-mile-range-ev
