[add-sub-mul-div]

> Elon and Andrej Karpathy argued that since humans can drive using just vision

Is this maliciously specious or am I missing something? I drive using vision plus decades of life experience and all the tacit knowledge, judgement, and reasoning ability that comes from that. We have not reproduced any of that with math, and getting/stalling 90% of the way there with mimicry is not good enough.

[saghm]

I don't think it's super surprising that someone who sells a product called "Full Self Driving" that isn't fully self driving would also happen to lack rigor in their scientific claims.

[judge2020]

It's obvious that they're talking about the input ("sensors") humans use and not presenting an exhaustive list of the things required to drive.

[rootusrootus]

Even just comparing sensors, the mediocre cameras Tesla uses are absolutely pathetic compared to the ability of a human eye. And I'm guessing it'll be some years yet before we have some kind of parity there. Not to mention the computing power to process the data.

[snovv_crash]

In some senses they are far superior to the human eye, peripheral vision for example.

[williamcotton]

It has more to do with training a neural network. The environmental cues for driving on a road are optimized for human vision. This becomes important when you think about it from a machine learning perspective. Fewer inputs are better for many reasons. Non-visual inputs will sometimes be in disagreement when the visual inputs during training which leads to a worse model.

If everyone could take some deep breathes and press pause on their emotional response to Elon Musk (and not assume everyone who happens to agree with him has a Musk tattoo) then they would fine plenty of rational arguments from an engineering perspective.