In the piece — titled “Can You Fool a Self Driving Car?” — Rober found that a Tesla car on Autopilot was fooled by a Wile E. Coyote-style wall painted to look like the road ahead of it, with the electric vehicle plowing right through it instead of stopping.

The footage was damning enough, with slow-motion clips showing the car not only crashing through the styrofoam wall but also a mannequin of a child. The Tesla was also fooled by simulated rain and fog.

  • TommySoda@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    4 months ago

    Notice how they’re mad at the video and not the car, manufacturer, or the CEO. It’s a huge safety issue yet they’d rather defend a brand that obviously doesn’t even care about their safety. Like, nobody is gonna give you a medal for being loyal to a brand.

    • trashcan@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      These people haven’t found any individual self identity.

      An attack on the brand is an attack on them. Reminds me of the people who made Stars Wars their meaning and crumbled when a certain trilogy didn’t hold up.

    • rumba@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Vacuum doesn’t run outdoors and accidentally running into a wall doesn’t generate lawsuits.

      But, yes, any self-driving cars should absolutely be required to have lidar. I don’t think you could find any professional in the field that would argue that lidar is the proper tool for this.

      • rmuk@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        …what is your point here, exactly? The stakes might be lower for a vacuum cleaner, sure, but lidar - or a similar time-of-flight system - is the only consistent way of mapping environmental geometry. It doesn’t matter if that’s a dining room full of tables and chairs, or a pedestrian crossing full of children.

        • rumba@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          I think you’re suffering from not knowing what you don’t know.

          Let me make it a but clearer for you to make a fair answer.

          Take a .25mw lidar sensor off a vacuum, take it outdoors and scan an intersection.

          Will that laser be visible to the sensor?

          is it spinning fast enough to track a kid moving in to an intersection when you’re traveling at 73 feet per second?

          • rmuk@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            I think you’re suffering from not knowing what you don’t know.

            and I think you’re suffering from being an arrogant sack of dicks who doesn’t like being called out on their poor communication skills and, through either a lack of self-awareness or an unwarranted overabundance of self-confidence, projects their own flaws on others. But for the more receptive types who want to learn more, here’s Syed Saad ul Hassan’s very well-written 2022 paper on practical applications, titled Lidar Sensor in Autonomous Vehicles which I found also serves as neat primer of lidar in general..

            • rumba@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              4 months ago

              Well look at you being adult and using big words instead of just insulting people. Not even going to wastime on people like you, I’m going to block you and move on and hope that everyone else does the same so you can sit in your own quiet little world wondering why no one likes you.

            • racemaniac@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              4 months ago

              Wow, what’s with all the hostility against him.

              It’s maybe because i also know a bit about lidars that his comment was clear to me (“ha, try putting a vacuum lidar in a car and see if it can do anything useful outside at the speeds & range a car needs”).

              Is it that much of an issue if someone is a bit snarky when pointing out the false equivalence of “my 500$ vacuum has a lidar, but a tesla doesn’t? harharhar”.

              • octopus_ink@slrpnk.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                4 months ago

                (“ha, try putting a vacuum lidar in a car and see if it can do anything useful outside at the speeds & range a car needs”).

                Because no one suggested that.

              • rmuk@feddit.uk
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                4 months ago

                But, yes, any self-driving cars should absolutely be required to have lidar.

                So they think self-driving cars should have lidar, like a vacuum cleaner. They agree, and think it’s a good idea, right?

                I don’t think you could find any professional in the field that would argue that lidar is the proper tool for this.

                …then in the next sentence goes on to say that lidar is not the correct tool. In the space of a paragraph they make two points which directly contradict one-another. Hence my response:

                What is your point here, exactly?

                They could have said “oops, typo!” or something but, no, instead they went full on-condescending:

                I think you’re suffering from not knowing what you don’t know.

                I stand by my response:

                arrogant sack of dicks

                And while I’m not naive enough to believe that upvotes and downvotes are any kind of arbiter of objective truth, they at least seem to suggest, in this case, that my interpretation is broadly in line with the majority.

          • Forbo@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            You’re mischaracterizing their point. Nobody is saying take the exact piece of equipment, put it in the vehicle and PRESTO. That’d be like asking why the vacuum battery can’t power the car. Because duh.

            The point is if such a novelty, inconsequential item that doesn’t have any kind of life safety requirements can employ a class of technology that would prevent adverse effects, why the fuck doesn’t the vehicle? This is a design flaw of Teslas, pure and simple.

            • rumba@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              4 months ago

              But they do, there are literally cars out there with lidar sensors.

              The question was why can’t I have a lidar sensor on my car if my $150 vacuum has one. The lidar sensor for a car is more than $150.

              You don’t have one because there are expensive at that size and update frequency. Sensors that are capable of outdoor mapping at high speed cost the price of a small car.

              The manufacturers suspect and probably rightfully so that people don’t want to pay an extra 10 - 30 grand for an array of sensors.

              The technology readily exists rober had one in his video that he used to scan a roller coaster. It’s not some conspiracy that you don’t have it on cars and it’s not like it’s not capable of being done because waymo does it all the time.

              There’s a reason why waymo doesn’t use smaller sensors they use the minimum of what works well. Which is expensive, which people looking at a mid-range car don’t want to take on the extra cost, hence it’s not available

              • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                4 months ago

                Good God it’s like you’re going out of the way to intentionally misunderstand the point.

                Nobody is saying that the lidar on a car should cost the same as a lidar on a vacuum cleaner. What everyone is saying is that if the company that makes vacuum cleaners thinks it’s important enough to put lidar on, surely you’re not the company that makes cars should think that it’s important enough to put lidar on.

                Stop being deliberately dense.

                • A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  Stop being deliberately dense.

                  Its weaponized incompetence.

                  I bet they do the same shit with their partner when it comes to dishes, laundry, and the garbage.

                • Miaou@jlai.lu
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  Whether lidars are reliable enough to run on autonomous cars has nothing to do with whether they are cost efficient enough to run on vacuum cleaners though. The comparison is therefore completely irrelevant. Might as well complain that jet fighters don’t allow sharing on Instagram your location, because your much cheaper phone does.

              • Lemmyoutofhere@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                4 months ago

                Only Tesla does not use radar with their control systems. Every single other manufacturer uses radar control mixed with the camera system. The Tesla system is garbage.

                • rumba@lemmy.zip
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  yeah, you’d think they’d at least use radar. That’s cheap AF. It’s like someone there said I have this hill to die on, I bet we can do it all with cameras.

  • wabafee@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    I bet the reason why he does not want the LiDAR in the car really cause it looks ugly aestheticly.

      • mcz@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        Sorry but I don’t get it. You can getva robot vacuum with lidar for $150. I understand automotive lidars need to have more reliability, range etc. but I don’t understand how it’s not even an option for $30k car.

        • yonder@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          IIRC robot vacuums usually use a single Time of Flight (ToF) sensor that rotates, giving the robot a 2d scan of it’s surroundings. This is sufficient for a vacuum which only needs to operate on a flat surface, but self driving vehicles need a better understanding of their surroundings than just a thin slice.

          That’s why cars might use over 30 distinct ToF sensors, each at a different vertical angle, that are then all placed in the rotating module, giving the system a full 3d scan of it’s surroundings. I would assume those modules are much more expensive, though still insignificant compared to the cost of a car sold on the idea of self driving.

    • thistleboy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      I believe the outrage is that the video showed that autopilot was off when they crashed into the wall. That’s what the red circle in the thumbnail is highlighting. The whole thing apparently being a setup for views like Top Gear faking the Model S breaking down.

      • PraiseTheSoup@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        Autopilot shuts itself off just before a crash so Tesla can deny liability. It’s been observed in many real-world accidents before this. Others have said much the same, with sources, in this very thread.

    • FrChazzz@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      Read about this somewhere. Iirc, Elon felt cameras were better than LiDAR at a time when that was kinda true, but the technology improved considerably in the interim and he pridefully refuses to admit he needs to adapt. [Edit: I had hastily read the referenced article and am incorrect here; link to accurate statements is linked in a reply below.]

      • SkyezOpen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        I don’t even understand that logic. Use both. Even if one is significantly better than the other, they each have different weaknesses and can mitigate for each other.

          • Flax@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 months ago

            A LiDAR sensor couldn’t add more than a few hundred to a car, surely

            • jj4211@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              4 months ago

              They ditched radar at a time when radar only added probably about $50 a car according to some estimates.

              It may technically get a smidge more profitable, but it almost seems like it’s more about hubris around tech shouldn’t need more than a human to do as well. Which even if it were true, is a stupid stance to take when in that scenario you could have better than human senses.