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.

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.

  • tibi@lemmy.worldEnglish
    773·
    1 year ago

    Tesla’s decision to only use cameras and no lidar will bite them in the ass.

    • MacAttak8@lemmy.worldEnglish
      183·
      1 year ago

      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.

      • mojofrododojo@lemmy.worldEnglish
        11·
        1 year ago

        fortunately LIDAR unit costs are going down, so multiple units, fusing their data with regular camera arrays should resolve a very good view, and be good at error-correcting for each other’s shortcomings.

    • Thorny_Thicket@sopuli.xyzEnglish
      36·
      1 year ago

      Currently they seem to be leading the race though even though the competition is using radar and lidar

      • Echo Dot@feddit.ukEnglish
        142·
        1 year ago

        If I leave in the race you mean the only company do 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.

        • Corkyskog@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
          41·
          1 year ago

          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?

            • Echo Dot@feddit.ukEnglish
              4·
              1 year ago

              Then what’s the point in it?

              What’s the point in a self-driving system that has been babysat in order to ensure it doesn’t murder you, random pedestrians and other road users. If I want a car that is unsafe if I take my hands off the wheel I can get a regular car, it already does that.

              Tesla themselves call it FSD, Full Self Driving. That is at best false advertising and at worst reckless endangerment. It isn’t fully capable, and it requires the driver’s attention so it isn’t self-driving. Literally every part of its name is wrong.

        • Thorny_Thicket@sopuli.xyzEnglish
          01·
          1 year ago

          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.

          • Echo Dot@feddit.ukEnglish
            3·
            1 year ago

            I am basing my claim on it not being functional and safe.

            I’m basing my claim on the fact that it drives into trucks. Since I don’t want to be driven into a truck by my car, I would consider that to be a failure state.

            Do some research.

            • Thorny_Thicket@sopuli.xyzEnglish
              12·
              1 year ago

              I don’t think anyone has ever claimed it’s flawless. After all it’s still in beta version. If you hit a truck it’s because the driver wasn’t paying attention.

              I still don’t know what you’re basing these claims on except your own opinion apparently. “It’s not safe” compared to what? As far as I know Tesla FSD has had less accidents per mile than an average driver.

              In the 2nd quarter, we recorded one crash for every 4.41 million miles driven in which drivers were using Autopilot technology (Autosteer and active safety features). For drivers who were not using Autopilot technology (no Autosteer and active safety features), we recorded one crash for every 1.2 million miles driven. By comparison, NHTSA’s most recent data shows that in the United States there is an automobile crash every 484,000 miles.

              Source

              Perhaps you should do some more research?

    • AreYouNotEntertained@lemmy.worldEnglish
      718·
      1 year ago

      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…

      • falkerie71@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        10·
        1 year ago

        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.

      • Echo Dot@feddit.ukEnglish
        8·
        1 year ago

        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.

      • You999@lemmy.worldEnglish
        1·
        1 year ago

        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.