[rrss]

> They showed that vision could already outperform radar.

important to note that much like there is a wide range from bad cameras (“filmed with a potato”) to high resolution cameras, there is a wide variety of radars with different capabilities.

the radar unit in Teslas was pretty limited (basically designed for adaptive cruise control), and they showed that vision could outperform that radar (and have no interest in exploring non-vision approaches because “humans can drive with just eyes”)

[rob74]

Yeah, (un)fortunately compared with cameras, eyes have really high resolution and (most relevant) a truly excellent dynamic range.

[mrguyorama]

In fact, there are many many many more signals that your eyes give your brain than just a 2d grid of pixels, which is why cheap off the shelf cameras slapped all over a car CANNOT do what two eyes can.

Your eyes also give coarse distance info by having to adjust focus, slight parallax (which depends on a HUGELY POWERFUL and pretty good edge detection and object classification system), an ability to perceive distance by the slight difference in orientation your eyes have to look at something in 3D space, some information about YOUR OWN head's orientation and movement, and a brain with a rough approximation of a simulation of the world around you to constantly check/verify any info against.

[watt]

The brain seems to make most of the resolution up, it seems the eyes really can see only a small area. The rest is made up by object permanence. https://www.shadertoy.com/view/4dsXzM

[cameronh90]

Modern sensors combined with computational photography does seem to be changing this though.

For example, I now use my phone camera to see where I'm going at night if it's dark, and to read distant text. This is despite my (corrected) eyesight being better than 20/20 and I have better than usual night vision.

The eyes are fantastic organs, but the thing that makes them exceptional is the brain. Computers seem to be catching up with that.

[yonaguska]

Flashlight's have come a long way. I much prefer that to using my phone, especially on Android where opening the camera can be finicky and turning on the lamp requires a ridiculous amount of steps compared to the iPhones. Especially handy if out in the cold with gloves. Armytek prime c2 pro is pretty great.

[cameronh90]

I do love a good torch, and I keep one on me most of the time.

However, I meant non-illuminated phone camera. The new low light sensors combined with AI is incredible. They can see things when it looks pitch black to me.

Also not sure how opening a camera is finicky, just double tap the power button and it opens for me, and turning on the flash takes two taps - though I rarely use the flash.

[yonaguska]

Sounds like I need a new phone then. I'm still on the pixel 3.

[jfim]

Double tapping the power button on Android has been the shortcut to open the camera for quite a long time. It should work on the Pixel 3.

[2III7]

Why do you have to open the camera in order to use the flashlight on an android phone? The button to turn the flashlight on is in the quick settings panel which can also be opened from the lock screen.

[vel0city]

On my older Motorola it was even a gesture of shaking it twice like a hatchet would turn the flashlight on and off.

How I miss the Moto X 2014, probably my favorite phone of all time.

[bob1029]

Eyes have other special properties (e.g. saccade) which contribute to their unique capabilities in this space.

[moffkalast]

> eyes have really high resolution

That's not actually the case, from what I heard. Most of our peripheral vision is smudged 720p at best, and we can only see a tiny focused area at slightly beyond 4K density. We also can't look at two things at once.

The dynamic range part is definitely true though.