[dstroot]

I own two Tesla’s. When conditions are adverse, i.e. fog, heavy rain, the system simply shuts off and reverts back to manual driving. Elon has said several times that humans can drive with two eyes and Tesla should be able to drive with X number of cameras. however, it suffers from the same problems humans do: if it can’t see it can’t drive and ironically that’s when it reverts back to human control.

[recursivecaveat]

I definitely agree that in principle a computer can drive with cameras alone. I don't know whether it's a useful statement. Like a human can determine the genre of a movie merely by watching it. I wouldn't suggest to blockbuster in 1990 that they should collect no genre metadata for movies because the database server should automatically sort it out on its own. (Nowadays somewhat feasible with ML of course, but 20+ years later.) What sensors/data you need is a question of where computers are now or will shortly be, and it seems that for now they need the extra structure of LIDAR for best effectiveness.

[carlmr]

>I definitely agree that in principle a computer can drive with cameras alone.

Obvious things first, cameras have way worse contrast and low light sensitivity than human eyes.

Humans have much more evolved logical thinking capacity, even the stupid ones can figure stuff out that modern AI struggles with.

Humans have other sensors, too that they use to plausibility check the picture they see. I.e. one of the best sensor fusion systems on the planet.

When in doubt humans can figure out whether it's a lens occlusion or a some other artifact in their vision by virtue of moving their head around.

There's probably other things I'm not thinking of. In any case to make full self driving work we should first start by using all available tech to make it safe. When you have safe tech you can slowly start removing individual sensors while verifying that safety remains high. As the experience and system evolves there will be optimization potential.

And until we have that low light thing and high contrast figured out, camera alone doesn't cut it.

[Eridrus]

Unrelated to FSD, what's a good example where frontier AI struggles with logical thinking that even stupid humans can figure out?

I personally feel like that isn't really true any more.

[kerridge0]

The recent one was should I drive my car to the car wash if it's only 300 feet from my house although it wasn't a slam dunk.

[Eridrus]

Right, but if these things are so rare that we all only know the one viral example, I feel like that lends credence to the models basically generally not having this problem.

Researchers built the Winnograd Schema Challenge more than a decade ago to assess common sense reasoning, and LLMs beat that challenge task around GPT 4.

[ndsipa_pomu]

They're not so rare. Hallucinations have been spotted everywhere, but the "driving a car to the car wash" is an amusing one that's been recently publicised. Developers aren't going to point out every time an LLM hallucinates an entire library.

[lps41]

If you ask this of any current day AI it will answer exactly how you would expect. Telling you to drive, and acknowledging the comedic nature of the question.

[batshit_beaver]

That's because AI labs keep stamping out the widely known failures. I assume without actually retraining the main model, but with some small classifier that detects the known meme questions and injects correct answer in the context.

But try asking your favorite LLM what happens if you're holding a pen with two hands (one at each end) and let go of one end.

[XorNot]

Well that, but Elon is also downplaying the quality of the human vision system compared to the cameras Tesla's have.

They're just not that good - nowhere near human vision performance. And a human in a car has a surprisingly good view of the road and a very fast pan tilt system to look around.

Tesla's do not actually have 360 degree full binocular vision coverage - nor the ability for a camera to lean left or right to improve an ambiguous sensor picture.

So while I fully believe that vision only self driving could work, within the constraints of automobile platforms and particularly the Tesla and it's current camera deployments, it is not remotely similar enough to human visual fidelity for that to solve a valid argument.

[buildbot]

Literally some of the highest dynamic range sensors attached to probably the best generally intelligent model existing we know of -

Humans are hard to compete with! I'd want LIDAR & RADAR just to give me an edge.

[Veserv]

Just to elaborate:

Tesla’s actually have zero binocular vision coverage because the cameras have different focal lengths and are too close even if they did have the same focal lengths.

They are also below minimum vision requirements for driving in many states.

[renlo]

> When conditions are adverse, i.e. fog, heavy rain, the system simply shuts off and reverts back to manual driving.

I also own a Tesla, and there is no indication shown to the user that FSD's vision is degraded. They need to add this in.

For example, numerous times I have been driving my Tesla with FSD activated with ostensibly a clean and clear windshield when suddenly the car will do the "clean the windshield in front of the camera routine" without any indication that the car's camera is degraded. If people haven't seen this "clean the windshield routine", the wiper fluid is dispensed and the wiper will vigorously wipe in front of the camera only -- the rest of the windshield only gets a cursory wipe.

This indicates to me that the camera has poor visibility and I am not informed or aware of this as a driver, which is concerning. I am often curious if there is a thin occluding film on the windshield in the camera box in front of the camera, or something that has degraded FSD's vision, but they do not give you the ability to view the camera feed, nor do they notify you that the vision is degraded. I think a "thin occluding film" may be in the camera box because my normal windshield outside of the camera box started to show a thin chemical film after a couple of months, which apparently (according to a Google search) happens when a new car off-gasses, adding a thin film of chemical byproduct to the windshield. This is my first new car so I've no idea if this is normal or not.

[bradfox2]

Maybe you have not received an alert but, yes it does, and it's annoying as all hell. Dirt, sun, etc all pop an alert about degraded performance.

[JumpCrisscross]

> yes it does, and it's annoying as all hell. Dirt, sun, etc all pop an alert about degraded performance

As with all things FSD, it does sometimes and not others. I've driving my parents' Tesla with FSD engaged and it did complain when the windshield got dirty but didn't say anything when it drove into fog. (I took over manually.)

[FeloniousHam]

Out of curiosity, was the camera view compromised? I would probably take over too, but like the poster above, I get the warning in all kinds of conditions.

[dawnerd]

Absolutely could be a clouded windshield on the inside (where it's really hard for normal people to clean). I brought this up when I got my last Model Y that it was foggy and they said it was "fine". Took it into service over a year ago and noticed they cleaned it. Clearly it's a problem but they're not being too transparent about it. I suspect they don't want to because it's not the easiest thing to remove the cover for normal people to clean.

[sbierwagen]

Recent Tesla updates will detect dirty glass inside the camera enclosure and offer to schedule (one!) free glass cleaning. You can do it yourself if you have a trim tool. (A thin plastic prybar) https://www.notateslaapp.com/news/3327/tesla-now-offers-free...

[anvuong]

I've always hated this argument. Why should I want a system that can drive "just as any human driver can"? I want it to be much much much better than the best driver out there, like 100x or 1000x better.

That argument is dumber and dumber any time I think about it. And we haven't even gotten into the fact that human eyes and its partner in crime the brain work much different than a camera.

[wolvoleo]

Also, human eyes are way better than the best cameras in low light and dynamic range. We're also better at focusing and glare mitigation.

But yes I agree we should hold self driving cars to a higher standard.

[sroussey]

Yeah, shining a q-beam at a tesla should not have it turn off FSD.

[hbarka]

That’s how Musk works. He waves his hands and uses words like “orders of magnitude” and “first principles” and then you end up with 250-meter long tunnels under your city with Teslas driving back and forth in it and fanboys forget this thing called subways ever existed.

[lateforwork]

> humans can drive with two eyes and Tesla should be able to drive with X number of cameras

Systems built from cameras that are only nearly as capable as human eyes and software that is only nearly as capable as the human brain will fall short overall. To match or surpass human performance, the individual components need to exceed human abilities where possible--and that's where LiDAR provides an advantage.

[BurningFrog]

I think the computer is WAY more capable than me because it doesn't get distracted, bored or tired.

If the cameras are a little less sharp in some sense is a minor rounding error in comparision.

[JumpCrisscross]

> If the cameras are a little less sharp in some sense is a minor rounding error in comparision

Comparing human and camera acuity is difficult. But saying Teslas have cameras that are a little less capable than human eyes is unfounded.

[cyberax]

That's correct. They are _far_ less capable than human eyes.

[lateforwork]

> because it doesn't get distracted, bored or tired.

You can say that about the original IBM PC from 1981. That doesn't make the IBM PC better at driving.

[9dev]

Birds can fly with two wings and humans should be able to fly with X number of limbs.

[FireBeyond]

Which is absolutely why Tesla's stats can't be trusted.

"Number of miles driven in situations where [quality of conditions is greater than some threshold] versus all conditions."

"If you don't count the games we'd definitely have lost, our winning percentage is so much higher!"

[Animats]

> the system simply shuts off and reverts back to manual driving.

That's not good enough. Too many accidents at manual takeover. The new standard, which Mercedes has demonstrated and China is mandating, is that the system must be able to pull the vehicle over and stop safely when there are problems.

[conductr]

My Lexus does this too. I rarely get it due to weather however it’s how I know I’m past due for a car wash (dust on sensors)

In any case, it seems reasonable to me that the human should be making the decisions once conditions become adverse. It’s a simple liability issue for the car company but also I’d rather trust my own judgment if it’s only 80% certain it’s not driving me off a cliff.

[FireBeyond]

One of the coolest features I saw like this was on a Jaguar XJL I had recently, that had an air particulate sensor and would automatically switch to recirc cabin air when that count was too high (i.e. dusty / smoky conditions).

[jacquesm]

> if it can’t see it can’t drive and ironically that’s when it reverts back to human control.

That seems to be better than that try to continue to run the vehicle. What would you expect it to do?

If it is foggy I just don't drive, anybody that expects me to drive when conditions are bad can go and drive themselves.

[bdangubic]

“enjoy our robotaxi service except if it is foggy or rainy or snowy… if that is the case enjoy our competitors services” /s

[jacquesm]

Well, even robotaxi's can't beat the laws of physics. There isn't some kind of god riven right to transportation, it is always conditions permitting.

[bdangubic]

yea, when it rains the world stops and we all sit home and wait for the Sun to make an appearance. coolest part is that some places in the US get like 200+ rainy days and you get to stay home cause you have no choice, schools closed etc :)

[jacquesm]

I fail to see the connection.

[bdangubic]

> There isn't some kind of god riven right to transportation, it is always conditions permitting.

If the condition is a little fog and little rain and little snow/sleet I hate to break it to you but those are very permitting. In most of the continental US the number of days where driving conditions for an (below)average human and such that it is wiser not to get on the road is very small. If the "robo"taxi technology you posses cannot match that of a (below)average human you got nothing but vaporware you've been pitching as "done deal" for more than a decade.

[giantrobot]

> Elon has said several times that humans can drive with two eyes and Tesla should be able...

And this is an amazingly stupid statement. Humans drive with most of their senses, not just vision. In fact our proprioception plays an important role in driving.

Even Tesla's use of cameras is poor because they're monocular and fixed in place. Most humans have binocular vision and those visual sensors have multiple degrees of freedom and the ability to adjust focus.

Even if you wanted to only use vision for navigation it's irresponsible to not use binocular configurations that get more reliable depth sensing.

[BurningFrog]

The Tesla Model Y has 9 cameras.

That's enough for vastly more depth perception than any human eyes.

[FireBeyond]

Nine cameras in each axis? Because the rear view cameras aren't doing anything for depth perception when driving in a forward direction.

[siren2026]

Birds has 2 wings.

I have 20 toes. Therefore I should fly 10 times better.

Amazing how you lost your critical sense just because you want Tesla to succeed and drink everything Musk says.

[UltraSane]

"Elon has said several times "

At this point I truly don't understand why anyone cares what that liar says.

[maxerickson]

It's a normative claim.

It might be dishonest (if he doesn't believe it is possible), but I don't think he's saying that the current systems have reached the mark.

[siren2026]

>> "Elon has said several times that humans can drive with two eyes and Tesla should be able to drive with X number of cameras"

This must be one of the most stupid takes that gets repeated non stop by Tesla fans.

I just don't get it. Humans also have emotions and other biological senses that Computers don't have. You just cannot compare both. What makes human so good at driving is that they can react relatively well to unknown new events. Teslas cannot do that, and with the current hardware never will.

[jrflowers]

This is a report about Teslas not doing that

[michaelmrose]

Remember that Elon isn't actually an engineer

[hn_acc1]

This. He makes a lot of unfounded assertions.

[BurningFrog]

Elon is deeply involved in engineering decisions in his companies, and has by all accounts deep knowledge in those areas.

And yet randos on the web keep asserting he's not an engineer. Is there any factual basis for this? Is it just that he doesn't have a degree with that word in the title?

[michaelmrose]

Being an engineer is neither having a degree in engineering which he doesn't have nor managing them and it certainly isn't owning a company that employs them. It's working as an engineer.

He continually says dumb things that aren't true or reasonable and has never worked in the field he's a rich boy who bought things with daddy's aparteid money.

[WarmWash]

He has a physics degree instead of an engineering degree.

I suppose most people don't know that physics degrees are largely accepted as engineering degrees.