Words like "good", "better" and "should" always carry freight that's often worth unpacking. Here, "better" really needs a definition.
A CCD is better than human eyes inasmuch as it captures a field rather than a narrow focus, with fuzzy periphery, that must be pointed at an object to resolve it.
I'm sure we could find metrics where a 360-degree lidar is better than human eyes.
It's disingenuous to pretend that sensor quality is the whole story, of course.
Human drivers have notoriously variable reflexes. I once rear-ended someone because I was inattentive. I assert that the current gen has better reflexes than some percentile of real-world meat-drivers, and I suspect that the percentile is higher than 90. Human reflexes simply aren't that quick without significant priming.
A CCD is better than human eyes inasmuch as it captures a field rather than a narrow focus, with fuzzy periphery, that must be pointed at an object to resolve it.
I'm sure we could find metrics where a 360-degree lidar is better than human eyes.
It's disingenuous to pretend that sensor quality is the whole story, of course.
Human drivers have notoriously variable reflexes. I once rear-ended someone because I was inattentive. I assert that the current gen has better reflexes than some percentile of real-world meat-drivers, and I suspect that the percentile is higher than 90. Human reflexes simply aren't that quick without significant priming.