|
|
|
|
|
|
by makeitdouble
1108 days ago
|
|
|
There's still two sailiant there: - why would the goal be "the same level or performance as humans" ? For context, some towns are actively removing cars from whole areas not just for pollution impact but also for pedestrian safety. Moral issues aside, the status quo is just not enough, it needs to be way better. - achieving the same level as humans being possible in theory doesn't mean we'll get there in practice. Having enough hardware to realize something doesn't help if the software is not up to the task. And assuming they "just" solve the software issue could be like assuming 18th century people would "just" discover relativity. Software becoming as good as human in video processing just feels like a "general AI is around the corner" kind of expectation. |
|
|
This is what I mean with the last part of my argument. Lidar is supposedly an extremely thorough 3d depth map hopefully capturing at hundreds or thousands of FPS. But even if you have this data, the actual bulk of the problem with current self-driving isn't solved, that being the "business logic" for how to navigate the world smoothly and efficiently and to 'communicate' with other road users.