Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by silverlake 1593 days ago
Tesla limited themselves to cameras because Musk said “humans can do it with two eyes”. He also didn’t like the look of LiDAR on cars. Such an idiotic decision. Good to see Cruise is not lead by a mega-maniacal CEO.
3 comments

As of a few years ago, lidar added at least $7500 to the cost of a car. That's a huge price difference for a consumer.
Currently Tesla is charging $12,000 for access to their self-driving package. Even if we assume that the price would increase to $19,500 if they included a lidar (I'm skeptical), it would be the difference between paying $12,000 for a feature that doesn't work versus $19,500 for a feature that might work. This is a luxury option no matter which way you swing it.
Definitely a luxury option for showing off at this point, as a status symbol, lots of people out there daily drive cars that don't have a bluebook value anywhere near $12k for the entire vehicle.
> lidar added at least $7500 to the cost of a car

That was Adam years ago in the Self-driving world. Now, it costs only few hundred dollars only, starting with $99.

https://velodynelidar.com/products/puck-lite/

Problem isn't how much LIDAR used to cost or costs now. Problem is that customers paid for a product, and they still don't have it, many years later. And what is being showed nowadays is nowhere close to what was advertised.
Cruise is a ride service - they don't sell cars. So the actual question is: How much does it cost to pay an Uber driver over the lifetime of a car?
A more accurate summary of Tesla's position is that they beleive that the incoming data from different systems (lidar, radar, visual, etc) must be merged and very often there is contradictory data.

Resolving that correctly takes time (in ms), adds complexity and will sometimes be incorrectly judged.

Since the visual data is the more accurate the vast majority of the time, it will anyways take precedence over the other input. As humans have proven that visual is technically enough, they decided it makes more sense to squeeze the most out of the visual, rather than collecting other data, crunching it, then (in most cases) discarding it.

I am not sure they are right, and am pretty sure that even if so - they need better cameras.

But misquoting them doesn't really help your argument.

I believe those arguments are simply justifications for the fact that most people won't be able to afford Teslas with Lidars