Tesla

[MrH]

See, multiple input methods is good, because they detect things in different ways.  Like Kevin said above, radar can see through fog, etc.

So instead of trying to figure out which input is correct when they differ, Tesla decided to just remove an input.  It's pretty obvious why they're exploding into trucks and ambulances as a result.

Tesla said they had solved full self driving, they just needed regulatory approval...5 years ago?  6?  I forget.

Even without digging into the obvious or technological reasons why vision only doesn't make sense, just look at the evidence.  All of Tesla's competitors aren't doing vision only.  They all think Tesla is doing it wrong.  Tesla has all the financial incentive in the world to try and sell the vision-only idea.  Why is everyone else wrong, and Tesla is right?  What gives them any credibility at all, let alone more credibility than the rest of the industry combined?

[r0tor]

Radar systems fault in heavy rain and snow.  They fault for objects.  They are low mounted and are terrible for hills.  They don't understand turns.  They have limited distance and repeatedly fail braking tests above 35+40mph...

Yet nobody has an issue with calling the systems "automatic braking" or "autonomous braking" or "emergency braking" or whatever combination of those words any automaker decides to use.

[SJ_GTI]

Another great idea (thanks to r0tor). Car companies should start labeling (all of) their cars as "fully self braking."

[NomisR]

I understand that it might be a nontrivial problem, but they've already solved a number of them - why throw up their hands at this one?

Correlating differing data from different sources isn't a new problem, its not an uncommon problem, and its one that has many usable solutions currently in use every day.

The Tesla explanation just doesn't make sense.

Supply shortage of radar and them cheaping out and using this as an excuse is probably the best explanation.  But otherwise, you're right.. it doesn't.

[NomisR]

Radar systems fault in heavy rain and snow.  They fault for objects.  They are low mounted and are terrible for hills.  They don't understand turns.  They have limited distance and repeatedly fail braking tests above 35+40mph...

Yet nobody has an issue with calling the systems "automatic braking" or "autonomous braking" or "emergency braking" or whatever combination of those words any automaker decides to use.

The radar system isn't just being use by itself and is being use as a part of the overall data.  How is a camera any better than rain and snow?  My autopilot doesn't work and goes out of wack when I pass a car at night due to the lights blinding the camera, how is that any better?  And I still get phantom braking and car slowing down for no reason when I'm on cruise control to a point that it got so annoying that I don't even bother using it. 

[AutobahnSHO]

Maverick has camera for lane keeping or centering (depending on trim $$$$ level) and uses radar for adaptive cruise. Cheap easy way of doing different things a little bit. Plus sensors for blind spot and reverse collision warnings.

The ideal system would combine lots of inputs together, not limit input.

[CaminoRacer]

I'm gonna start limiting my inputs so I don't get so confused while driving.

Should I go with a blindfold or earplugs first? Maybe eventually I can just use my sense of smell to navigate.

[Soup DeVille]

Radar systems fault in heavy rain and snow.  They fault for objects.  They are low mounted and are terrible for hills.  They don't understand turns.  They have limited distance and repeatedly fail braking tests above 35+40mph...

Yet nobody has an issue with calling the systems "automatic braking" or "autonomous braking" or "emergency braking" or whatever combination of those words any automaker decides to use.

The words they use are "collision avoidance," and "emergency braking." Neither of these imply they replace driver inputs.

"They fault in heavy rain and snow." So do cameras.
"They fault for objects." So do cameras
"They are low mounted and terrible for hills" This is because that's what those are designed to do. If mounting them higher works better, do so. There's no law about where they can be mounted.
"They don't understand turns." This is a software limitation, not tied to the sensor type.
"They have limited distance..." Again, that's what those systems are designed to do; its not a limitation of radar itself. The Navy uses radar guided missiles at mach 3- they certainly work at longer distances and higher speeds.

[r0tor]

Maverick has camera for lane keeping or centering (depending on trim $$$$ level) and uses radar for adaptive cruise. Cheap easy way of doing different things a little bit. Plus sensors for blind spot and reverse collision warnings.

The ideal system would combine lots of inputs together, not limit input.

Most cars do this... The result is the system disables itself when there is sun glare when the camera can't see.  The system disables itself in the fog when the cameras can't see.  The system disables itself in the snow when snow drives the radar sensors nuts.  The system disables itself in hard rain when the radar sensors go nuts.  The system disables itself when a leaf or bug gets stuck on the sensor.

That's the problem.  The multiple sensors are not used to cover for 1 sensor when another malfunctions.  All that ends up happening is disabling the system if any of the sensors malfunction which just results in more downtime than a single sensor.

[r0tor]

The words they use are "collision avoidance," and "emergency braking." Neither of these imply they replace driver inputs.

They also only do what the name implies under very specific conditions... Similar to FSD

[NomisR]

Most cars do this... The result is the system disables itself when there is sun glare when the camera can't see.  The system disables itself in the fog when the cameras can't see.  The system disables itself in the snow when snow drives the radar sensors nuts.  The system disables itself in hard rain when the radar sensors go nuts.  The system disables itself when a leaf or bug gets stuck on the sensor.

That's the problem.  The multiple sensors are not used to cover for 1 sensor when another malfunctions.  All that ends up happening is disabling the system if any of the sensors malfunction which just results in more downtime than a single sensor.

So going back to having one sensor is the answer? 

[Morris Minor]

Musk wins Time's Person of the Year.
TSLA takes a bug dump.
hahaha.
His interview with Dan Carlin is more interesting; he's a big WW2 airplane nerd (Grumman F6F Hellcat is his favorite)

[r0tor]

So going back to having one sensor is the answer? 

Why compound issues?

The argument is absurd anyway.  There is still a wheel and pedals.  Trying to use any of these systems through rain, snow, fog, ect is just absurd.  I think everyone knows not to even use basic cruise control in these conditions.

[CaminoRacer]

Musk wins Time's Person of the Year.
TSLA takes a bug dump.
hahaha.
His interview with Dan Carlin is more interesting; he's a big WW2 airplane nerd (Grumman F6F Hellcat is his favorite)

Dan got a lot of backlash on Twitter for that interview, but I started listening to it this morning and it's decent.

[NomisR]

Why compound issues?

The argument is absurd anyway.  There is still a wheel and pedals.  Trying to use any of these systems through rain, snow, fog, ect is just absurd.  I think everyone knows not to even use basic cruise control in these conditions.

Yet, when the goal is true full self driving, with Elon Musk saying, no steering wheels, you sorta need to rely all of these things to make it work.

[r0tor]

Yet, when the goal is true full self driving, with Elon Musk saying, no steering wheels, you sorta need to rely all of these things to make it work.

Yet, human controls will probably always be with us

[Morris Minor]

Dan got a lot of backlash on Twitter for that interview, but I started listening to it this morning and it's decent.

Dan is not an interviewer. Given his job I can see why it's easy for him fall into the trap of speechifying his questions, but that's okay. He'll learn - he's a smart guy. Musk has me hunting around looking for the differences between Packard-built & Rolls-Royce-built Merlin engines.

[CaminoRacer]

Dan is not an interviewer. Given his job I can see why it's easy for him fall into the trap of speechifying his questions, but that's okay. He'll learn - he's a smart guy. Musk has me hunting around looking for the differences between Packard-built & Rolls-Royce-built Merlin engines.

The backlash was mainly due to him "giving Elon a platform" and not drilling him about a host of irrelevant things for a history podcast. Typical twitter stuff, from people who refused to listen to the podcast first before complaining.

At first I thought Elon was a weird choice for his show, but after listening to some of it I think it makes more sense. He's not a historian or history author like most of Dan's interview guests, but he knows enough about the subject matter to be interesting.

[Morris Minor]

The backlash was mainly due to him "giving Elon a platform" and not drilling him about a host of irrelevant things for a history podcast. Typical twitter stuff, from people who refused to listen to the podcast first before complaining.

At first I thought Elon was a weird choice for his show, but after listening to some of it I think it makes more sense. He's not a historian or history author like most of Dan's interview guests, but he knows enough about the subject matter to be interesting.

If nothing else, Musk reinforced my favorite aphorism that companies should listen to their engineers.
PS I had an uncle who was in the RAF - he too thought the Hellcat was the best fighter of WWII - an unpopular opinion in the Spitfire-obsessed UK.

[Eye of the Tiger]

If nothing else, Musk reinforced my favorite aphorism that companies should listen to their engineers.
PS I had an uncle who was in the RAF - he too through the Hellcat was the best fighter of WWII - an unpopular opinion in the Spitfire-obsessed UK.

Spitfires were OKAY.
The F6F Hellcat was a beast.

[Eye of the Tiger]

The Hawker Hurricane was a better aircraft than the Spitfire. Fight me.

[FoMoJo]

The Hawker Hurricane was a better aircraft than the Spitfire. Fight me.

The Spitfire is prettier.

[NomisR]

Yet, human controls will probably always be with us

How are you suppose to control anything if there's no steering wheel or gas pedal?  A joy stick or a X Box controller?

[r0tor]

The Hawker Hurricane was a better aircraft than the Spitfire. Fight me.

Hawkaloogie spitwad was better

[GoCougs]

I'm a bit of a WWII aviation nerd. Once took a flight in a B-17 and even stood out the top (escape hatch) of the damned thing over Puget Sound.

P-47 is my favorite of WWII. The largest single-engine military plane of WWII, was also the most armed, and nearly the best performing in some aspects. It had the audacity to continue on with a ginormous air-cooled radial as most of the theater was rocking the air-cooled V12s.

It was GINORMOUS.



My second favorite is the FW-190-D. In this version, meant for high altitude, the radial was replaced with an inverted liquid-cooled V12. Most all indications are it was probably superior to the P-51D, and would have centimated Allied bombers. The TA-152, a super high altitude version, even more so, but so few were built (like 50) not sure it really counts. Both versions came too late in the war to have any real effect.

Paul Allen's aviation museum just north of Seattle has the only FW-190-D13 to have survived. It is flying condition but to expensive and rare so they don't actually fly it.

[Eye of the Tiger]

They say the P-47 could hit Mach 1 in a dive

[Eye of the Tiger]

How are you suppose to control anything if there's no steering wheel or gas pedal?  A joy stick or a X Box controller?

Have you even seen Avatar? Plug your pony tail into the docking shaft.

[CaminoRacer]

I've always liked the P-38

[FoMoJo]

The de Havilland DH.98 Mosquito, likely my favourite.  Made from laminated plywood with 2 Rolls Royce Merlin engines, it could outrun everything in the sky until the ME 262 came along.

[Eye of the Tiger]

The de Havilland DH.98 Mosquito, likely my favourite.  Made from laminated plywood with 2 Rolls Royce Merlin engines, it could outrun everything in the sky until the ME 262 came along.

But nobody could fly the ME-262