Comment by top_sigrid

Comment by top_sigrid 3 days ago

11 replies

> If you can train a policy that drives well on cameras, you can get self-driving. If you can't, you're fucked, and no amount of extra sensors will save you.

Source: trust me, bro? This statement has no factual basis. Calling the most common approach of all other self-driving developers except Tesla a wank also is no argument but hate only.

ACCount37 3 days ago

[flagged]

  • top_sigrid 3 days ago

    This is so dumb, I don't even know if you are serious. Nobody ever said it is lidar instead of cameras, but as additional sensor to cameras. And everybody seems to agree that that is valuable sensor-information (except Tesla).

    • sejje 3 days ago

      I'm able to drive without lidar, with just my eyeball feeds.

      I agree that lidar is very valuable right now, but I think in the endgame, yeah it can drive with just cameras.

      The logic follows, because I drive with just "cameras."

      • senordevnyc 3 days ago

        Yeah, but your "cameras" also have a bunch of capabilities that hardware cameras don't, plus they're mounted on a flexible stalk in the cockpit that can move in any direction to update the view in real-time.

        Also, humans kinda suck at driving. I suspect that in the endgame, even if AI can drive with cameras only, we won't want it to. If we could upgrade our eyeballs and brains to have real-time 3D depth mapping information as well as the visual streams, we would.