General > General Technical Chat
Tesla Full Self Driving (FSD) info - interesting stuff!
maginnovision:
--- Quote from: wraper on April 25, 2019, 02:37:03 am ---
--- Quote from: maginnovision on April 25, 2019, 01:19:25 am ---I'm not interested in the bits that aren't relevant, just the end result. I've been reading all about it but I did not watch any videos so you are correct.
--- End quote ---
All your post is not relevant to actual situation. They even made full self driving demo rides (signs, traffic lights, junctions) for attendees. By the end of the year, it is supposed to be released for actual customers.
--- End quote ---
If they release full self driving I'd be amazed. They had hiccups even with their fully setup mock drive. I hope for all tesla drivers that FSD does come out one day because they don't seem to be thinking. Seriously they've been saying FSD next year for 3 years. What I don't know is what's different this time? Why was the FSD hype train event the day before a terrible quarter financial document release. Obviously I don't need the answer for that.
In all seriousness though I could never get behind tesla and their FSD program when the CEO says LIDAR is a crutch, developers using it are doomed and at the same time they don't seem to be doing anything the others aren't. I definitely do not think FSD will come out this year or next but maybe they'll upgrade all the cars they're obligated to by the end of next year. Then the next computer will come out and it'll start again. From my POV the hardware itself is about as interesting as a crypto miner ASIC. It's cool but I don't want it. From what I recall it's faster than the old Nvidia system they had but still slower than the newer Nvidia systems. Time will tell if that pays off but the reduced energy consumption probably is required for their cars.
Dubbie:
--- Quote from: maginnovision on April 25, 2019, 05:22:03 am ---and at the same time they don't seem to be doing anything the others aren't.
--- End quote ---
They went over at length all the things they are doing that others aren't.
Training NN with a constant stream of real automatically annotated data is a pretty huge thing. nobody else has that. Like they said, it's the long tail of rare events that cause problems. Look at the lady crossing the road carrying her bike that was killed. Having a NN that is trained well enough to deal with odd scenarios like that requires absolute torrents of real world data.
I'm not addressing your question of if this is the time that level 4-5 self driving will really happen, time will tell on that count. But you can't deny that they are doing some extremely cutting edge stuff here.
maginnovision:
--- Quote from: Dubbie on April 25, 2019, 05:54:42 am ---
--- Quote from: maginnovision on April 25, 2019, 05:22:03 am ---and at the same time they don't seem to be doing anything the others aren't.
--- End quote ---
They went over at length all the things they are doing that others aren't.
Training NN with a constant stream of real automatically annotated data is a pretty huge thing. nobody else has that. Like they said, it's the long tail of rare events that cause problems. Look at the lady crossing the road carrying her bike that was killed. Having a NN that is trained well enough to deal with odd scenarios like that requires absolute torrents of real world data.
I'm not addressing your question of if this is the time that level 4-5 self driving will really happen, time will tell on that count. But you can't deny that they are doing some extremely cutting edge stuff here.
--- End quote ---
I think that's a poor example though, Ubers car never should have hit that lady. It simply wasn't setup to stop. It knew she was there and it knew it was going to collide it just wasn't allowed to do anything. Tesla may also come into the scenario where they overfit leading to extreme examples of WTF(I'd argue it already has happened many times but you don't have to) or underfit and also fail to react.
I don't really know if I trust Tesla to be honest about everything either, it's not their strong suit. For anything they're truly doing that nobody else does they deserve credit, assuming it's helpful. I also like that Waymo has their simulator where they can cook up a scenario, run it and train against it. You actually get to build a sort of similar thing in the autonomous vehicle program at Udacity that culminates in control of a real car. For such a complicated problem where a single death could literally end the Tesla story I think they are being very stubborn assuming they know better than everyone else. The whole autonomous day was nothing more than a publicity event and I really hope they don't try and push out some half cooked solution. Every company working on this problem is doing cutting edge work though, Tesla is literally no different in that respect and nobody likely has a really good idea of where everyone else is at. Regardless of what happens I think it's really interesting to follow and look forward to hearing more from every company involved in solving this problem but I don't expect Tesla is years ahead like they think they do. They may just not be aware of what they don't know.
Just to add... If anyone has a link to an overview of everything they say they're doing I'd like to read it but I have no interest in a long video.
Dubbie:
You may have missed it but they talked at length about the reasons why simulations are a poor substitute for real data. When you see the two compared, it’s very obvious. The real world images have so much more variety and complexity.
You also mentioned that they may not know what they don’t know yet. I think they are past this stage. Their system can run in shadow mode where a human driver is driving the car and the computer is constantly making predictions about what it would do next if it was driving. It can self check simply by waiting a minute and seeing what actually happened. This is vastly different to running things in a simulation as there is a vast depth and richness of scenarios and behaviours that could never possibly be replicated in a simulation.
I think at one point they mentioned that to have realistic enough other cars in the simulator, you’d almost have to solve the self driving problem!
maginnovision:
--- Quote from: Dubbie on April 25, 2019, 07:25:03 am ---You may have missed it but they talked at length about the reasons why simulations are a poor substitute for real data. When you see the two compared, it’s very obvious. The real world images have so much more variety and complexity.
You also mentioned that they may not know what they don’t know yet. I think they are past this stage. Their system can run in shadow mode where a human driver is driving the car and the computer is constantly making predictions about what it would do next if it was driving. It can self check simply by waiting a minute and seeing what actually happened. This is vastly different to running things in a simulation as there is a vast depth and richness of scenarios and behaviours that could never possibly be replicated in a simulation.
I think at one point they mentioned that to have realistic enough other cars in the simulator, you’d almost have to solve the self driving problem!
--- End quote ---
If they release FSD this year I'll believe what they said if not I'm going to say they're just trying to tell everyone they're right and everyone else is wrong. The fact is Tesla's all vision system has already resulted in 2 decapitations and many fatal accidents. The only saving grace they have now is they get to pass the blame to drivers. "Should have been paying attention, should have managed it themselves". They won't have that to fall back on if they call it FSD. I guess we'll see what happens in the future. Just don't forget to question them when they say they are the experts and their demo is no more impressive than a years old Google demo.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version