Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by Someone 1756 days ago
AFAIK, it can detect them just fine, but it is bad at discriminating those its collision avoidance part should pay attention to from those it shouldn’t pay attention to (e.g. the road surface, traffic signs on the side of or over the road), so they (¿mostly?) chose to ignore all of them.
1 comments
sudosysgen 1756 days ago
That just means it lacks the ability to place objects in 3D space and plot a course, which is... sad.
link
cptskippy 1756 days ago
Most collision avoidance systems aren't that sophisticated. Radar based systems like those used in Volvo's Pilot Assist suffer from the same inability to discern stationary objects.

Most systems are self contained modules with low power micro-controllers that can emit basic warning and alert data onto the CAN BUS. Tesla's is actually taking the input from it's sensors and attempting to do more in-depth analysis and actually produce a 3D space.

The fact that they're still suffering from the same problem as other manufacturers shouldn't be an admonishment of their technology or attempts unless or until it's proven that their approach is fundamentally worse.

link
sudosysgen 1756 days ago
Well, no. No system that is unable to detect and map out a 3D maps of obstacles and plot a course through it without hitting stationary, well visible objects, is not suited to being used in a self-driving capacity. Whether it's from Tesla or anyone else.

If their approach fundamentally means they decided to work around mapping their surroundings in 3D correctly, as the GP suggested, there is a strong reason to admonish.

link