You're not responding to what they said. The person you're responding to is talking about depth from stereo, not cognition. Lidar _also_ doesn't know what the glass feels like.
All I'm saying is that even with stereo inputs, we're doing more than computing depth from the baseline between left/right images. Close one eye and you can still estimate relative objects positions, because you learned that roads are mostly planar and cars don't float but stand on the road. You know what the expected size of a car is compared to, say, a human, and if the car is visually smaller than the human, it must be more far away.
Lidar _also_ doesn't know what the glass feels like.
Yes I agree with you, lidar and most current vision sensors also suffer from this.
People who have good vision in one eye can usually get their drivers licence without problems. So the depth from stereo is not a necessary part of driving for humans.
It doesn't matter how you estimate depth, but you do have to estimate it to drive, and the first step before you can estimate is that your eyes (eye in your example) need to see pictures. Light entering the eye is an entirely different stage in the process than reasoning about said light.
All I'm saying is that even with stereo inputs, we're doing more than computing depth from the baseline between left/right images. Close one eye and you can still estimate relative objects positions, because you learned that roads are mostly planar and cars don't float but stand on the road. You know what the expected size of a car is compared to, say, a human, and if the car is visually smaller than the human, it must be more far away.
Lidar _also_ doesn't know what the glass feels like.
Yes I agree with you, lidar and most current vision sensors also suffer from this.