[sporedro]

I don’t understand the vision bet. As a consumer, I want self driving with expectations of it being reliable and affordable. Again as a consumer I couldn’t care any less how it “works”. If someone is able to produce a car using more than just vision that works first, they will be the winner.

[webdevver]

it kind of make a muskian sort of sense.

"if the human brain can do it purely on optics, then so should we. if we need extra sensors that the human doesn't have, that means the model is worse than the human brain."

i can totally see that going through elons 105iq head. and there is something to be said there. kind of, "no cheating allowed!", where "cheating" is defined as "a sensor the human wouldn't have had".

whether it has value... well... thats hard to say, but you have to make a bet i suppose. the waymos are very expensive with their sensor arrangements. maybe that can be made cheap?

[JohnFen]

> if the human brain can do it purely on optics

The human brain doesn't do it purely on optics.

[antisthenes]

The human brain can do it on optics, poorly.

We still have tens of thousands of car-related deaths in the US.

Also, if doing it a different way than a human is cheating...are they sending data via organically grown neurons in the car? Didn't know that. Looks like "cheating" to me.

Maybe it makes sense in Musks' head.

Me - I want the car to be better than the human brain.

[AnimalMuppet]

And if he didn't sell it as working better than it does, that would be a principled stance.

And if he didn't have competitors, it would not be a damaging stance.

But in the reality we're in...