Elon Musk says losers use LiDAR. [Explanation video]

In this Tesla autonomy day presentation, Elon Musk predicts that anyone using LiDAR to solve full self-driving will fail. I also included another interview part where Elon explains Tesla's vision-based approach. Moreover, Tesla's AI head shows that with the only camera, you can achieve depth without LiDAR.
Andrej Karpathy is the director of artificial intelligence and Autopilot Vision at Tesla.
#ElonMusk #AndrejKarpathy #Tesla #FSD

[@user232349]

Lidar is not supposed to be substituting camera vision, but to augment it with additional information. Sure you can measure depth with stereo vision, but only if the object has sufficient contrast and illumination. When you're driving in the full sun, and are about to go inside a dark tunnel, cameras can't see inside the tunnel. When there's a white truck against a white background, there may not be enough contrast to see it. At night, cameras can only see where the headlights point. Stereo vision only works when you have multiple cameras looking at the same object, which is a problem for the Tesla because the B pillar camera is the only one that covers important side view sections.

[@richardjerrybest]

"When you're driving in the full sun, and are about to go inside a dark tunnel, cameras can't see inside the tunnel. When there's a white truck against a white background, there may not be enough contrast to see it. At night, cameras can only see where the headlights point." How do humans handle the above situations? LIDAR RADAR? Cameras have way better vision than any human and the optics can instantly adjust to changing light levels FASTER THAN YOU CAN REMOVE YOUR SUNGLASSES AS YOU ENTER THE TUNNEL.

[@user232349]

@@richardjerrybest Human eyes have sharper vision than cameras, and larger range between light and dark.

[@blahblahblah747]

true, but I think Elon is just saying if companies use it, as they are, as their main vision, then they'll fail

[@user232349]

@@blahblahblah747 Nobody is using lidar as their main vision.

[@blahblahblah747]

@@user232349 uhh im not really sure how the companies actually engineer it and to the extent they use it. but i'm skeptical that Tesla would make this presentation saying that Lidar is bad to map an environment or depth perception or whatever if other companies wern't already using it extensively. but yeah im not an expert.

[@elguapo3436]

His answer is just an evasive way to say "Lidar is too expensive to be used in your 100k tesla...", meanwhile processing the streams from the cameras represents a heavy computational workload for real-time identification of features... distance evaluation, and all the matrix algebra involved. Lidar provides real-time distance "measurement" in 3D at very low latency and requires less cpu intensive processing. Last never the least lidar will work day and night regardless of light, which is required by the cameras feeding the CV module. How about cameras + Lidar ? For added safety and redundancy...

[@pauobunyon9791]

He just want us to use whatever he develops

[@didier_777]

How do the cameras deal with the sun shining bright right into them? Or a car with high beams coming at you?

[@jamesmylife6578]

@@didier_777 the main advantage of cameras is receiving certain colors and designs which lidar kinda has a problem with. This would be good for traffic lights stop signs and other types of signs. Lidar is good for processing depth which would stop phantom breaking from cameras but it also isn’t good in bad weather like rain or dust which radar wouldn’t have a problem with however lidar has a better imagine resolution which could be better for knowing what the car is looking at but cameras would be even better than that. In conclusion you need more of a combination of sensors.

[@didier_777]

@@jamesmylife6578 Ideally you should have some combination of both.

[@jamesmylife6578]

@@didier_777 THATS WHAT IM SAYING… oops that was aggressive 😵‍💫

[@Mrymena]

1:40 Just because humans perform driving using vision alone, doesn't mean an autonomous driving system will not benefit from accurate depth information via lidar. If humans had the physical capability for distance sensing for eg. echolocation like bats or dolphins, you can bet we will be using that ability for driving

[@hivewatch]

This is the whole point. USE as many inputs beyond human capability as possible! Vision is the smallest part of the Spectrum. If Superman had Lidar he would use it AS WELL!

[@mikewallace8087]

Laser distancing measurements become corrupted in Fog, Rain , Falling Snow and Leaves . None of these systems Fail Safe. TESLA will be sued to bankruptcy .

[@steved5700]

I don’t think it’s right to say that either option is the correct way. Safety is the number one focus and if both systems together can compliment each other to provide enhanced safety measures then I can see that happening in the near future. There have been numerous crashes and issues using just one or the other and if used together, it could vastly improve pedestrian/driver safety.

[@graeco78]

Good point. And this might be a little off topic but I'm starting to view Elon Musk as a wealthier Neil Degrasse Tyson. Self righteous and thinks their knowledge and way is better.

[@Factonise]

The biggest thing is that the neural net has to be as good as the human brain or better and has to be present on the car as the reaction time is really low. Using a server based neural net is not possible, so probably they will have to create better models and make them smaller. Quite a big challenge

[@donalain69]

i dont know.. when it comes to 3d scanning , Lidar is faster and way more effective then photogrammetry using massers of visual data and processing it into a bizarre zombie version of a 3d model.. but i do agree with him about cell structures is way ahead of our technology. The problem is that we wont be able to get our technology anywhere close to the level eyesight is on in our life time, since that would require fully understanding how our brain works (and getting our conciousness to understand itself without commiting suicide)

[@peterkim1999]

Their argument of vision only is based on the premise that vision alone is 100% accurate.

[@teknosql4740]

Did human driving using eye or lidar ?

[@sheminn460]

@@teknosql4740 did human driving lead to crash using eye or lidar?

[@teknosql4740]

@@sheminn460 i still prefer high speed camera + A.i, than using lidar, so the behaviour of driving similar to a skilled human.

[@jamesclerkmaxwell8020]

How do airplanes fly in the night or bad weather? Multitude of redundant and/or sensors. This is life and death matter, I dont understand how anyone can rationalize going cheap on this

[@aussiepawsborne9056]

@@sheminn46038 percent of crashes come from distracted driving, another 30 percent come from alchohol or narcotics, about ten percent come from aggressive speeding or driving. So yes, vision is just fine, it’s human error that’s the problem

[@datascience3975]

He is completely missing the point that during biological vision, the eyes move very fast and focus constantly to get the best perception possible, cameras can't do that. I wish humans had active vision like lidars, bc perception of depth based on vision alone is not very accurate to begin with. Musk is wrong here.

[@NoahsGameCave]

Musk is wrong everywhere

[@TheMrTape]

You're missing the point that cameras have the same resolution everywhere, meaning they're potentially far superior to human eyes, given decent resolution; you somehow think it's a benefit that eyes move very fast to "scan" for a better perception, but it's a massive flaw to circumvent the fact that we only have "high res" vision in the center; cameras don't suffer that flaw, so what are you on about exactly? Furthermore, you can technically get sub-millimeter precision in your 3D reconstruction, if the camera frames you make it from are of high enough resolution to permit it; it's very precise, you're just flat out assuming it's not, because if you had the slightest knowledge on the subject, you'd know perfectly well how precise it is. He is definitely right, given the relevant tech has progressed far enough, and it has. Not a fanboy at all btw, but you're talking complete bs.

[@suprajasupraja8382]

Human has sense of distance in a much faster perception. We human don’t only use eyes we also use lot more logical thing and use our eyes to input in the specific fetch. We move our eyes to the direction we intent to get input it’s not the other way round.

[@suprajasupraja8382]

LiDAR plus eyes is human.

[@esaskhan95]

I think it would be lame to rely on only cameras. Learning through different sources is the way to go

[@LenaLena-ui1pk]

elon was wrong, he is marketing his car but he is gonna fail big time

[@AR-fh2uh]

I agree 100% the focus should be to bring cost down not avoid tech. LiDAR has a place, stereo vision has a place, SFM has a place, hyper/multi spectral imagery has a place. The goal shouldn't be to do it as well as humans but better.

[@randomman057]

@@AR-fh2uh LiDar would increase cost, and for something that doesn't need to be precise with pinpoint accuracy, it's pointless. Computer vision with cameras will be better, particularly if they include infrared capability.

[@mpirokajosephmgcokoca2355]

For as long you are going to afford it nhe

[@mpirokajosephmgcokoca2355]

​@@LenaLena-ui1pkhahahahaha hahahahaha 😀 this guy is a game changer. Ask Ford, Elon is becoming unstoppable how did we let that happen

[@manuel6541]

Remember that he sold 1 million+ cars with cameras only and the promise so unlock autonomous driving in the future. He simply CAN'T praise lidar now.

[@kolebronson24]

Does Elon know there is an automotive lidar on the market that offers dynamic range at low latency, and is under $500 per unit? Hell you cant even buy a car bumper for that much!

[@at2625]

What about when it’s Fog or dark how reliable will be vision. In those scenario Lidar is necessary. So to use fully autonomous vehicle probably need lidar and vision both for safety and reliability. Am I wrong ?? Anyone who can answer

[@joshuadarrington.]

trust the smartest man on the planet when it comes to these issues..

[@abhinavsood2670]

@@joshuadarrington. I hope that's sarcastic

[@za3kazeb]

You’re totally right, I’m a consultant that works mainly on lidars (ouster especially) and the need is always the same: cameras are not reliable

[@peterduxbury927]

I have no depth perception when driving in Fog. It's the most scariest time to be behind the Wheel.

[@centrointernetbds]

The fly don't use LIDAR.

[@awkwardturtle7973]

Cue the video of a Tesla completely yeeting a child sized doll while all the other Thomas cars using lidar detect said doll and come to a full and complete stop

[@spicemelange1077]

Bingo

[@granatapfel6661]

But the problem with cameras is fast changing light settings and dark spots of course the different angles of an object

[@za3kazeb]

That’s why LiDAR is always better. But Elon is cheap and LiDARs are very expensive

[@granatapfel6661]

@@za3kazeb true true haha

[@Mr_Steve3D]

As a 3D artist and Python developer, I see that direction and need to achieve the level of the human eye for vehicular observation & navigation. In order to do this they are not only going to have to pursue vision but what he said was we had to develop our own LIDAR so now they will have to develop ocular-based camera technology to achieve their results.

[@JerryMetal]

Wouldn't your car need a freakin' super computer onboard to run this neural net??

[@vimalrajayyappan2023]

😂Got u

[@m33tballa]

What about infrared and other wavelengths of light? They provide all the characteristics of traditional human vision

[@emnz1003]

As far i can agree with this reasoning "humans use only eyesight, so autonomous cars should do the same" i think it's not bad to use "superior senses". It's like saying "people moves through legs, so cars should have legs". Yes, it can be sufficient but simply with wheels cars can go faster

[@jayblazek]

this was 2 years ago which is a century in tech. Lidar is down to 500 $ and Tesla is using it on their next gen cars

[@MrGiggity890]

Are they though?

[@jeffufcfanaticrosenberg]

no ! lol

[@jeffufcfanaticrosenberg]

let's compare the fatalities of AP and FSD with Waymo ?? 😂😂😂😂

[@cohenkevinloriqueen818]

how do the cameras do with rain on them or fogged up ?

[@cihan.a]

they use extra sensors that penetrate snow or rain

[@goldenamour3730]

@@cihan.a aka lidar

[@THANADOLCHAIYASEN]

@@goldenamour3730 Nope, LiDAR use light (infrared) measuring distance from the object. In rain and foggy environment, LiDAR performance is poorer as well as optical camera. In this scenario, a lower resolution sensor, RADAR will associate in determining other cars and nearly objects.

[@defaultdefault3995]

switch to human mode? Gotta maintain driving skills somehow right?

[@pilotavery]

There are microwaves built into each of the cameras to heat it up and keep snow and rain and fog out of it and they don't have infrared filters so they can see light that penetrates through fog even better than humans. Basically, what do you do when there's fog? You just drive slower. So it behaves the same but slightly better. On top of that, it has radar. And not just a simple radar, it's actually a radar camera that's really low resolution but still can kind of build a sloppy 3D map.

[@bremexperience]

Given most humans can't drive worth their a**... I'd give lidar a try.

[@afgor1088]

seriously doubt someone as unqualified as elon "spearheaded" creating spaceX's LiDAR. what he means is the same thing Steve jobs meant, someone else designed it and he announced it

[@cskye6529]

I disliked the modern internet hyperbole of using words like "slam" or "hate." Just because Elon Musk says that LIDAR is a bad idea doesn't mean he "hates" it or is "slamming" it. Maybe to investors hopped up on adderal and cocaine it may seem that way but he's casually saying it is a bad idea and we shouldn't depend on it and give up on the idea of autonomous cars.

[@S0L12D3]

He had a sarcastic and rude response before the guy even asked the question. Clearly he feels they are a threat to his business

[@cskye6529]

@@S0L12D3 Well he thinks they are stupid. I agree with him.

[@timkim7]

Elon Musk likes to compare self driving against human drivers but he should remember that each human driver is legally responsible for his own failures. Near-perfection is not good enough for automobiles that are mass produced in millions and drive many miles every day. The problem with machine learning-based computer vision is that it can never guarantee its results, and that small chance of failure will eventually cause accidents in many places. Lidar is worth the effort if it can eventually reduce the chance of accidents by a very small amount.

[@GDD34]

Lidar isn't even expensive, and is obviously in many ways superior to stereo camera vision for measuring distance, etc

[@prashkd7684]

If the goal is to solve driving in good weather than sure cameras can solve the problem but if we want our self driving cars to go beyond the capabilities of human vision and drive safely in low visibility situation than at this point of time Lidar is the best solution. My prediction is that in the future Teslas will only run inside tunnels OR Elon will be forced to add Lidars as backup. After all extra $300 bucks on a $40,000 car means nothing when it comes to Human life.

[@emnz1003]

I hope that one day only cameras will allow full autonomous driving, but why not using LIDAR until we reach that? Moreover i think it could be a great redundant feature, since also human eyesight can sometimes be confused, while whit LIDAR you "can't get confused". Furthermore if the problem is the cost, maybe the way to go for autonomous veichles is semi-public transportation like Waymo is doing, so that you have really expensive and safe cars but its cost is splitted in lots of users (though it would be nice to have private autonomous cars too)

[@AR-fh2uh]

And then it rains, is dusty, or there is fog. or you come up against a highly reflective or highy mat surface that imagery cannot percieve depth from.

[@zsomborszarka2616]

I would agree with Elon Musk, if they had cameras with comparable performance to the human eye. Unfortunately such a sensor is not have been made. For that reason i think that lidar is necessary to make up for the lack of information. Also it is not bad at all, if the computer have more information about the dept, than a human, there are accidents where false dept perception was the cause. I agree that vision should be the primary information source, and for that reason you don't need a state of the art lidar system, a worse consumer grade sensor would be plenty.

[@datascience3975]

He promoted Hyperloop too. People make mistakes.

[@hivewatch]

VOLVO will be using LIDAR for the EX90. Lidar is not lame. VOLVO knows about safety. Trust me on this. radar ranging is also essential technology and TESLA shouLd be using it not removing it and then patenting a SUPER RADAR!

[@tripham9422]

I think that is too broad we had to use right tool for the right job . For fast and long range then lidar is good like drone aerial photography but for deep underground or behind building then ultrasound and radio wave , microwave and nano aloha are unbeatable and harmless so each is designed 2ith functional in mind

[@v4sTislow]

i think they both have to work together lidar and vision! what if theres no light how can vision see??

[@user-ik6hu1zz8w]

If there is no light, human can't drive. Btw, driving with no light is absolutely illegal in US

[@v4sTislow]

@@user-ik6hu1zz8w absolutely correct! malfunctions or low light like tunnels are what im trying to example

[@tacocat8867]

Lidar doesn't need light, it will just be greyscaled.

[@Seed-qj6jk]

@@v4sTislow you know about headlights right? They light up the road in front of the car so the cameras can see

[@HardAssetsFTW]

What if it’s pitch black dark?

[@mikewallace8087]

LiDar is corrupted by Fog , Rain, Falling Leaves and Snow. FSD is also flawed . What TESLA needs is a dedicated AI brain on each car system.

[@jjnxyz4368]

The compute power is what makes lidar better. You can do a lidar scan with a Resepi lidar unit from Inertial Labs and the small internal unit can make a 3d cloud almost instantly. 30s after landing a drone you have a point cloud compared wit 5-6 hours with picture for 3d mapping. In other words lidar gives far more detail far quicker.... and yes it is expensive.. a Resepi Lidar unit costs 30K so it isn't viable for vehicles yet and cheap lidar isn't much better then a camera.

[@jony1710]

Humans crash cars all the time and are a horrible benchmark for autonomous vehicles so saying humans can navigate without lidar is really not a good argument. You can use cameras and such to infer distance but feed in accurate depth data into that data-set and you'll have huge improvements in your learning algo. Additionally, Lidar doesn't need black box ML algorithms to produce the depth data, so make for more a more predictable system which is great for a safety mechanism. Machine learning algorithms frequently act unpredictably when presented data that wasn't in their training set, and we can see that there have been crashes in Tesla cars that simply wouldn't happen if they had lidar data to check the algo. Additionally, Lidar is getting cheaper... it's in consumer electronics so this idea that it's expensive is evaporating quickly. Maybe Musk is right and once we "solve" computer vision, lidar will be unnecessary, but if we can get cheap accurate depth data, why not?

[@hivewatch]

Hit Nail on head! I don't want my car to drive / see like a human thanks, Humans are dangerous.

[@AdrianRodriguezAIR]

LiDAR helps to do a lot of new things that you are not able to do without it. Digital twins are one example of it.

[@MrSpaceMees]

3:04 my brain must be broken, they are the same size for me.

[@XxMsrSzprzxX]

The point of computers and tech is to be able to do what humans cannot, why is there this emphasis to try making vision systems behave exactly like we do? Computer vision isn't great. I've heard of Teslas crashing into motorcycles because the computer vision thinks the two very close, low down tail lights on a motorcycle, especially a touring motorcycle are in fact a distant car. Absolute joke, LiDAR would have seen this.

[@Learner073]

Instead, smart use Lidar to win battles 🎉. If every country get lidar in their military and a nuclear, no one can threaten you.

[@jamesclerkmaxwell8020]

Those guys are clueless. Airplanes have VFR for clear skies and IFR when no vision is possible. The more sensors, the better.

[@thug0071984]

The people talking about Lidar clearly didn't watch the video. If you watch the very end, he states the benefits of Lidar.

[@fluffypinkpandas]

Lidar can tell me if im actually heading into a tunnel or if the roadrunner painted visually accurate tunnel in front of my Wile E Coyote ass. Visual information like symbols, traffic, road signs, pedestrians yes That should be visual. and it is my job to see it. but lidar aids that. Lidar is objective. Lidar says, with certainty, something is truly there, and isn't an illusion or mirage. And there is a measurement between source, and target. Where with a camera, there isn't. Cameras help me see an image with immediacy an image I need to see now, and with clarity to extended ranges Lidar needs to work in TANDEM with my camera to tell me how far away everything is, as lidar alone cannot produce visual clarity like a camera can, but Lidar provides objectivity in what its lasers CAN hit. so that my car can respond to it My car is my co-pilot in this endeavor. If I get something wrong, the car gets it right. If the car gets something wrong, my judgement corrects it. And together we form a complete brain Removing LIDAR is like removing touch from your senses. You are going to notice that sense being missing And wish you had it once its gone. It would be like if your hearing went from stereo to mono, and you could no longer tell relative directions and distances of sound sources. It would be maddening to not have a vast combination of complex senses after previously having them.

[@hivewatch]

I will fit lidar personally to my car and radar and rockets and EVERYTHING ELSE!

[@fluffypinkpandas]

@@hivewatch EVERYTHING!

[@AyushSharma80001]

Very Interesting stuff

[@apersonyoudontknow3346]

So funny when it thought about how a ai is Able to tell where it is I thought dots

[@videojeroki]

The question: if human could shoot lasers and get depthmap on top of the color vision, how the brain could it? Why evolution totally skipped that capacity? or maybe it has been developped, but it was a failure and so disappeared.

[@videojeroki]

just like a human would normally do, an autonomous car should adapt its driving choice according to the visibility conditions. ex: If a autonomous car can see through fog and so doesn't need to slow down, that would be seen as danger for other non-robot drivers, and so create a grater danger.

[@datascience3975]

With optics and image analysis you get the probability of an object, with lidar you get solid data. Too many bugs with visual perception.

[@H3ROBOYz]

Yes

[@alexsandrowildalex_47]

Normal glasses was not made to see better in the dark, only a infrared glasses, i mean LIDAR was developed to air surveillance and reconnaissance, not to sensor of self drive car

[@JenPurple2022]

Compare Bat vs Human navigation ability hmmm

[@camadams9149]

I agree and disagree. 1) Developing AI camera based computer vision equal to that of human capabilities is essential. Using LiDAR as a crunch is for losers 2) Driving down the price of all sensors to a few cents/dollars is essential 2b) Once the price of a sensor is low enough to be negligible, adding it to a tech stack increases future capabilities and use cases

[@kicka55]

The price won't decrease without using the sensor widely. That's what today's companies are doing. They create demand for LIDAR so that more companies build them which leads to competition and reduced costs. If nobody would use LIDAR outside the military it would never get cheap. LIDAR is not for losers.

[@REAL-UNKNOWN-SHINOBI]

And let's all crash our Tesla's into box truck together ❤️

[@camadams9149]

@@REAL-UNKNOWN-SHINOBI Happens frequently enough with regular cars. Might be cheaper using a camry

[@Wise__guy]

@@camadams9149 Camrys hold their value

[@camadams9149]

@@Wise__guy They do. I exclusively buy Camrys. Reliable, affordable cars

[@tristanvandever9411]

So basically lidar is long distance brail

[@IHWKR]

The statement that no one uses lidar to navigate our body is facetious. Of course we dont, but we also arent made of inorganic material. A computer and a brain are two very different things working on two very different spectrums.

[@eversurfer]

Specifically speaking navigation in a car? What if i am a sailboat entering a channel of ever changing currents and shoals. I fly a drone of the entire sweep of of the channel overlaid with the contour of an existing navigational map. Another passive income owner 80 acres of timber wants a real time summary of how many trees, what volume, board feet, and have an almost perfect analysis of volume, count and board feet. So just one of many aspects of the use cases, and saying it is lame, is like saying the docking with the docking station is lame. Practical value is realtime mapping of growth, change and passive fingerprinting for the mariners, woodland owners, farmers, and developers of the future cities that did not have the supply chain or the trail surveyors map. So the title may be invalid and lame for saying lidar is lame, the value to surveying damage, growth or change far outweighs robotic navigation for space station or car driving. Great to know it is lame for your products. Now what about those who work to feed, house, and navigate the channels of life.

[@raulraouuul8582]

One thing people dont understand lidar( infra-red ) and vision (visible light) are the same thing with just different wavelength !

[@delmanpronto9374]

exactly... i think radio waves (RADAR) is what most are thinking

[@myatthhu]

Nope. They just basically do not use the same method or essentially similar technologies. Cameras do not use emitters of visible light to measure distance (If you include auto-focusing then yes.) LiDAR is a system composing of 2 main devices. Emitter and sensor. LiDAR uses most wavelengths of EM spectrum, not just infrared. LiDAR is similar in concept to RADAR. And Camera or Vision is just a cluster sensor cells that can image visible light.

[@DanDeGaston]

Uhhh no. . . . Vision takes lightwaves in from the surrounding area and only works when it is light outside and nothing is obstructing the visible light spectrum. Lidar shoots a very specific wavelength out and then detects for when that signal comes back to determine the range, and then uses the doppler effect to determine the velocity(Well the parallel velocity.)

[@MinhNguyen-wz2wn]

but camera can not see well in low light/rain/fog condition, and LiDAR has become much cheaper now due to technology advancement

[@uncletom1986]

Guaranteed Elon uses LiDAR

[@incyphe]

If Lidar's cost comes down to just couple thousand, is it still stupid?

[@delmanpronto9374]

if like musk says, "vision is solved", then i think so yes. LIDAR is short range... and basically light detection unlike RADAR (radio wave detection)

[@intelligentunite4557]

@@delmanpronto9374 How is 500m ”short range”?

[@delmanpronto9374]

@@intelligentunite4557 when you compare that to RADAR it's nothing. solving "vision" basically involves seeing 500 m or more.

[@DanDeGaston]

@@delmanpronto9374 500 meters is 1/3 a mile. More than enough range for the needs of Lidar, As the Lidar is not the vision system and just needs to verify that the path vision has plotted will not cause a collission with other objects that vision incorrectly guessed size, speed or clearance. Vision will still need to read the lights/signs/road/ and traffic directions and follow this correctly.

[@delmanpronto9374]

@@DanDeGaston it's also 1/2 a km. zoom lens cameras can see a lot further than 500 m. it's the not the "needs of lidar" we are concerned with, but the needs of the car and decision making in respect of its movement. "Vision will still need to read the lights/signs/road/ and traffic directions and follow this correctly." exactly. lidar isn't the solution to that either. good AI is. if cameras do the job of lidar and better, it's as musk says, stupid.

[@skyshark88]

Lidar for landing gear on rockets ….

[@Stopinvadingmyhardware]

this makes intent. Profit motive with intent. I could build a case with this.

[@emnz1003]

Humans drive with eyes, so cars can do it with cameras. Well, maybe yes, but why not using Lidars in ADDITION to cameras? If we follow that reasoning humans don't have eyes behind their head, so we should remove cameras from the back of the car? Maybe cars will be able to drive with cameras, but for sure they will drive better with lidars

[@Rawi888]

Bruh 🤦🏿‍♂️ even a kid would let you know redundancy is best. They really got lost in the sauce of "once you solve vision, you solve autonomy" my brother in christ, you're not getting full self driving if you're stubborn aboutyour data streams.

[@useduser]

what do you mean ,you came here only with vision ,young friend and what is will then what is intention what is attention

[@sourhill2292]

elon musk is really one to talk about “expensive and unnecessary”

[@guychi-chifly950]

Imagine an NFL quarterback retrofitted with LiDAR and software uploaded into his brain to compliment his eyesight. It’s just a ridiculous example but you’d get complete passes all day.

[@XeeChou]

Yeah, Elon musk doesn’t use LiDar, instead, use super expensive gpu for all the vision tasks. Must be genius for budget

[@zhongvince9210]

samething as “would you prefer a smart brain or strong limbs”

[@Zvangimo]

Lidar is 20 more expensive

[@taaaaaaay]

Once u build a model on those super expensive gpu’s you call, its practically like running an arduino on a car

[@user-xt5oe2gm5v]

Engineer. Don't forget.

[@pratik245]

Game theory in action. Give more ideas

[@godsguy13]

Lidar on the street cams no more crims demolition man future total recall

[@dreddmann9292]

first of all using autonomous vehicles to drive us around is lame. I don't want to rely on any kind of machine to decide how and when to drive me around. I don't want my life to have to adjust to the autonomous machine in order for me to get around. I want to remain the one in control of my whereabouts and I want to remain as the one to be in control of the machine that'll take me to and from where ever I may be going. I don't want my life to be autonomously controlled by any kind of machine. I don't care if it makes everything else run smoother for everybody else, I care on weather or not I'm in control of whatever may make my life smoother. When you go to an amusement park ride, you are not in control of the vehicle you are in, I don't want my travels to be limited to have to stay in my vehicle till the vehicle stops and it decides and tells me when it's safe for me to exit.

[@ngenes1]

Fact vision can’t detect distance as lidar. If China solves the cost to be affordable than they will lead better car autonomy.

[@mmc5261]

Con men LiDAR is the future

[@LenaLena-ui1pk]

it is almost end of 2022, there will be a very little time left when he will have to eat what he said here.

[@ijustwannawatchshite]

elon out of his depth as usual

OK, release your product when you actually "solve vision".

[@raznatovicanastasija]

Is that Kasparov talking?

[@adeptiotsolutions3644]

Agree with Elon

[@mpwilso]

Diffraction limited, all I have to say.

[@mpwilso]

Most lidar is IR, hence less angular resolution than vis., however impractical high frequency interrogation lidar would be ideal.

[@silo3com]

I call bullshit. Visual interpretation is susceptible to misinterpretation. Lidar is a theoretical bump stop.

[@gooderlinsen]

and winners have his FSD crash into police cars, one after another

[@prodigiii712]

And nobody else has fsd. Where is the so called fsd of GM? If it was so great they would show off.

[@muhammadqaisarali]

Someone bring Musk to Lahore, Paksitan. So he may check fog here. No eye can work here. 😅. So the cameras won't. Self driving cars are supposed to overcome the humans weak points as well. Like no vision in the case of fog etc.

[@frankiechavez1052]

LiDAR mars

[@wegder]

More money for musk

[@matthewtyndale9122]

But the cars hit ppl and crash

[@matthewtyndale9122]

@Theoxa no I bot

[@kalmdwn7711]

Optical illusions fooling the computer

[@snowfox7739]

Yet another thing Elon will be wrong about. Lidar allows for so much more data that a simple camera just can't do reliably. Try using AR apps on an iPhone with the lidar sensor and an iPhone without one see which is more accurate.

[@DoggARithm]

Guess cars functioning at night is for losers. unless... well I'm sure 360 degree infrared will be much cheaper /s

[@mmc5261]

Lying about LiDAR 😏

[@Stopinvadingmyhardware]

his attitude is why people burned to death in his cars

[@JadeaRS4]

And losers deal with musk.

[@asbaDoce]

I love how the captions are just a strong simplification of what is being said without question, like tech could be summarized as "good" or "bad". This Musk's groupies should start a cult.

[@austin2k994]

U cannot call someone’s invention stupid

[@DenC.personalPage]

My car has Lidar and saved me a couple of times. In this age of cellphones almost everyone are on their phones while driving so LiDar is necessary

[@prodigiii712]

Does your car stop on stop signs and red lights does it turn into another street.

[@Flusterbomb]

ahahahhahahhahahaahahaahahahahahhahahaaaaaaaaaahhhhahhahahhahahahahhahahahahahhahha

[@henriaho2271]

Tuollaisella kameralla superhyper paska resoluutiolla voi kuvata matkan kuuhun niin ei pieni muistikortti mene täyteen Tai kuvata osan matkasta Mars planeetan takaa Niin sillä tavalla saisi isommankin muistikortin täyteen 🤔

[@SnoopRocket]

LOL

[@GNP3WP3W]

The speaker after Elon definitely ate one too many adderalls before this speech

[@jasong273]

Elon keeps saying human level is the metric we need to reach and is achievable with camera's only.. It is absolutely unacceptable to have this as the bar. There is a big difference if someone is killed by a human driver and if someone is killed by a corporation via their self driving program. It's going to stunt trust in the autonomous driving industry and open Tesla up to lawsuits. I don't get why he thinks that is acceptable when in fact he uses Luminar Hydra LIdar sensors to calibrate his own nueral network and gather ground TRUTH data which wouldn't be neccessary if his camera's were up to task. Cool with me he Tesla will soon be passed by others fairly quickly as they put out an average of 1 million cars a year while Nissan for example puts out 4 million passenger cars themselves and 9 milliion cars per the alliance.

[@heath3550]

Wtf are these guys talking about. I used to listen to Elon musk but this is so transparently cringe. Using LiDAR is trying to create fully autonomous vehicles and there are countless accounts of hilarious Tesla self driving malfunctions. Obviously I can see if I drove there. Thanks for the anatomy lesson on eyesight. This makes me want to invest in LiDAR because of how scared these dudes are of it to produce this cringe