this post was submitted on 20 Mar 2025

-68 points (15.3% liked)

Technology

67535 readers

4970 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related news or articles.
Be excellent to each other!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

-68

AI driver: review of Mark Rober's LIDAR showcase (youtu.be)

submitted 1 week ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

24 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I think AI driver give a good summary of some of issues with the Mark Rober showcase of LIDAR.

Some of the bias Mark Rober friendships with the LIDAR supplier.
Not using Tesla full self driving
Being so nervous that he accidentally disables autopilot, twice.
The one sided view in LIDAR, with not show examples of LIDAR have issues.
Give a way forward to do the tests with FSD
Mark Rober not giving the test his full attention, fun vs scientific process

top 24 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 days ago

Copium from Tesla bag holder

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The single biggest issue must be that it was just funny / thought provoking content on YouTube - not a groundbreaking thesis being developed in real time.

However, some apparent shortcomings of the Tezla are probably worth following-up… by far more qualified individuals in a far more formal and peer reviewable environment.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Here's a link to that original video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IQJL3htsDyQ

I hadn't seen it before.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 days ago

Thank you.

I saw it a few days ago. I know the guy from his glitterbomb videos but it was the Roadrunner vibe that really attracted me this time

I’m no scientist but if you can map space mountain with lidar then… it’s probably better then a camera at identifying physical objects blocking your path. And his short experiment seems to support that.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I don't think it was very good response. All the points he brings up do not change any of the outcomes. Fsr would likely still fail all these tests.

Ive watched a lot of AI driver and I think fsr is cool but its lack of lidar is a huge mistake and creates these dangerous situations whete Tesla isn't smart enough to mimic the awareness of a real driver.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

lack of lidar is a huge mistake and creates these dangerous situations whete Tesla isn't smart enough to mimic the awareness of a real driver.

Can you give some examples?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Yeah every single test in marks video

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago (2 children)

I didn’t see any humans been test in the Mark Rober video. How do you know I won’t fail the same test?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago

You want to put a human in front of the Tesla and hope it stops? I don't think killing 5 people is a W for Tesla.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 6 days ago (1 children)

There was a story of where a deer was hit by a Tesla in FSD and didn't even slow down. If it can happen to a deer it can happen to a person, and LIDAR would be a lot less likely to in either case.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I think the previous post is asking for human drivers as tests. I think some people are just simping for Tethla. If Tesla started using LIDAR again- they’d cheer for it.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago

Ah yes, that's the more reasonable interpretation.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 week ago

Looks like you are trying really hard to defend Teslas ‘self driving’ bullshit. Tesla only using cameras for this is stupid. If you can’t see that then its a good thing you aren’t an engineer. Also, it was a youtube video for entertainment. Not a scientific study. You are trying too much here

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 week ago

Obvious simp is obvious

[–] [email protected] 38 points 1 week ago (2 children)

The friendships with LIDAR suppliers aside (always a problem with these kinds of things),

the full self driving wouldn't have saved the wall.
He's telling a story. Disabling autopilot because he's nervous is good storytelling because it's science communication, not science. Its also cause he knows it's super likely to fail.
He did show LIDAR having troubles - the heavy rain. Its just good enough to peak through it to stop the car before it hits the kid. it's just that the self driving ALSO has trouble with this, and in fact worse troubles. LIDAR has trouble in places where the light is going to be blocked, a situation that a pure camera solution on a Tesla is not going to solve. Not unlikely to solve, NOT GOING to solve. In the real world, if light can't penetrate through a thing twice, it's unlikely to only do it once.
Its not supposed to be scientific, it's science communication. Science is testing and retesting. He did one test and called it good.

Yup, LIDAR isn't a silver bullet for every situation to do sensing. But it's a damn sight better than pure cameras. And Musk would have known this if he was a good engineer. But hes not. Hes a spoiled, rich, apartheid-loving, racist asshole that thinks he's a good programmer and engineer.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Why does no one mention why they said they dropped RADAR: Who do you trust when vision conflicts with RADAR? There were constant problems on this point. LIDAR is another redundant and possibly conflicting input.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Yup, but that's going to be true in every environment. Conflicting or noisy signals are always going to be there when you have multiple sensors. Theres going to be conflicts between pure camera systems - what if a camera sensor goes buggy and starts putting out data that says there's always a thing to the left?

More systems giving data to establish ground truth is better. Dont Boeing yourself into thinking that one sensor is good enough - that's how you kill people.

Edit: you also know how they're doing the depth detection with cameras? With AI. You know, that thing that we keep having troubles hallucinating data with. So the data it's getting from the depth subsystem isnt ground truth, it's significantly worse and could be completely wrong.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

No, the camera data is combined into one visual "truth" I would bet. There was a fatal accident where the radar didn't see a truck because it shot under it. At the time the radar was more trusted than the camera. The only way to solve that was to only have one sensor, and radar could never be the sole input.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

You clearly have no clue what you're talking about.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 hours ago

I think when you've gone ad homonym then I won

[+] [email protected] -13 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Until someone re do the test, we will not know.
yes if you do it knowingly, then redo it without talking control.
Yes and no, he did put it down as a win.
Mark is an engineer and has a good history of using scientific process. He has previously shown that it can be combined.

I know sadly that Tesla has lost a lot of respect due to Elon, especially over the last 4 years.

Engineer is in large part about balancing cost vs features. Yes the will be cases where LIDAR is better, but it comes at high cost. Think about it what is break over point the where the 0.1% edge case where LIDAR will do better, justify the cost.

If the test that Mark show to unexpected drivers I think many humans drivers will failed. Like spoting a dark stationary object in fog or heavy rain, is very difficult.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 6 days ago

Until someone re do the test, we will not know.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=9KyIWpAevNs

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

FSD won't solve the "the sensors don't detect the wall" issue
That was not the point of the video.
It did stop, yes. That is a win. Didn't kill the kid. The Tesla didn't. It killed the kid. That's a fail. What's your point?
Why would you run a test multiple times with the high potential for damage to a very expensive vehicle when it's not supposed to be published in a journal? You talk about cost vs features for manufacturers but don't apply that same logic to Rober. Its also a one-off thing for Rober, so the math is better for him than the "cheaper, OK with kids dying" method of Musk.

I think you're underestimating how many situations a LIDAR system will be better than an all camera system. Its also a tradeoff in human lives. I'd rather it be slightly more expensive up front and not have kids die than cheap and kill kids.

And yes. Self driving should be better than humans. Cause humans suck as drivers. We have two cameras in one location in the car. Self driving must be better and make up for the limitations of humans. Cameras dont make up for them and thus are a terrible replacement for humans.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

It sounds like you feel LIDAR is need to provide the service you are looking for.

It is probably possible that I underestimate how many situations there is that LIDAR can be significant better. I am open to learn more about it. It can also be that valve the normal driving more than the edge cases. From my view historically LIDAR cars have mainly been limited to a limited area, will FSD seem to be in a league of its own driving on unmarked roads and parking spots.

Yes I am praise FSD, I think Elon only part in that is the willingness to take risk and fund someone that have cost billions to develop, and taking a leadership role in setting a direction, when at the time no other automaker was willing to do so.

If you hear the software engineers talking about how complex of task it is to solve logic behind make a car feel human, you will truly understand how little we know. Can recommend this video from the last AI day Ashore from Tesla talk about FSD

The issue more there is a lot of people that look at the video and think, “LIDAR is need because it stop for this obscure events, and is not the result in normal driving that matter”. How many people experience a Wile E. Coyote event per year, where a perfect painted wall pops up around a blind corner?!

If a car stop because it was raining or a fire hydrant is leaking, and there no other issue, is that good for everyday driving?

You say you like to pay more for a system that also have LIDAR, how much are the mass of people willing to pay extra for that feature that only helps in a 0,1% of the time? 500€, 5000€, or 50000€

How much better does a self driving car need be? What stats shall we use to measure if a self driving car is better than human? This are all complex topics that we like a quick answer to.

Going back to Mark, the Wile E. Coyote event this could be it own video, as it not relevant for normal driving. It wound be fun on its own.

With science process, I mean the fog and water they could have looks at there setup was there something wrong with the setup, that favor one car over the other? Will the LIDAR stop without having an obstacle behind the “wall” of water? How does it perform normal driving? Is this element that is unreasonable to do in a LIDAR vs Camera test?