| > You are asserting with no idea whatsoever, or relevance really given you're apparently ignoring that I was answering a very specific comment. I am directly addressing your comment about "DMS/DAM". How is that not relevant? > One, it really is not, there's nothing impressive-looking so far. What is impressive to you? That's what the critics said when the iPhone 1 was announced. That's what many also said about electric cars. Funny how the metrics (sales/safety) played out on that one. > These are just events it might be able to generate, it tells you nothing about how well the events are detected and how the consumer of those events integrates them. The fact that it can detect those events using a specialized redundant NPU hardware is a far cry from "Driver drowsiness detection" and "DMS/DAM" from "14 years ago". Hence, an apple to oranges comparison. > What do you think exactly, that other manufacturers just get a magical yes/no blob? It's interesting you ask that, because they mostly are binary logic if you look at the ECU firmware. Some "Driver drowsiness detection" (MBenz) systems will also just beep at random intervals after driving non-stop for 1 hour. But they still market them as being able to "detect" drowsiness. George Hotz talked about this many times. They also don't have any firmware code signing whatsoever (esp Toyota) which presents a security risk. Out of curiosity, which of the DMS/DAM systems do you have experience with? |