this post was submitted on 03 Aug 2023
299 points (96.0% liked)

Technology

59235 readers
4163 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

BMW tests next-gen LiDAR to beat Tesla to Level 3 self-driving cars::Tesla's autonomous vehicle tech has been perennially stuck at Level 2 self-driving, as BMW and other rivals try to leapfrog to Level 3.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] tibi@lemmy.world 74 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (10 children)

Tesla's decision to only use cameras and no lidar will bite them in the ass.

[–] MacAttak8@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Came here to say this. Couldn’t be more on point. Using both cameras and LiDAR in tandem will be necessary for true self driving vehicles.

[–] mojofrododojo@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

fortunately LIDAR unit costs are going down, so multiple units, fusing their data with regular camera arrays should resolve a very good view, and be good at error-correcting for each other's shortcomings.

[–] AttackBunny@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

Already is.

[–] Thorny_Thicket@sopuli.xyz -3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Currently they seem to be leading the race though even though the competition is using radar and lidar

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 12 points 1 year ago (2 children)

If I leave in the race you mean the only company do have an actual product available for purchase then yeah.

But the reason they were able to get to market so quickly is because they don't actually have any concerns about it being functional or safe. That's a real boon to them because it helps them move quickly ahead of the competition that do care about those things.

[–] Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The average consumer would define self driving as "if my car crashes, my car should be sued". Is that how it works with a tesla crash, who pays for that?

[–] Thorny_Thicket@sopuli.xyz -4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's on the driver's responsibility

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Then what's the point in it?

What's the point in a self-driving system that has been babysat in order to ensure it doesn't murder you, random pedestrians and other road users. If I want a car that is unsafe if I take my hands off the wheel I can get a regular car, it already does that.

Tesla themselves call it FSD, Full Self Driving. That is at best false advertising and at worst reckless endangerment. It isn't fully capable, and it requires the driver's attention so it isn't self-driving. Literally every part of its name is wrong.

[–] Thorny_Thicket@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 year ago

It's called FSD beta

[–] Thorny_Thicket@sopuli.xyz -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

No, I mean leading the race as in having the most capable sefl driving system in existence which I believe is the case.

I don't know what you're basing the claim on that it's not functional and safe.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I am basing my claim on it not being functional and safe.

I'm basing my claim on the fact that it drives into trucks. Since I don't want to be driven into a truck by my car, I would consider that to be a failure state.

Do some research.

[–] Thorny_Thicket@sopuli.xyz -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I don't think anyone has ever claimed it's flawless. After all it's still in beta version. If you hit a truck it's because the driver wasn't paying attention.

I still don't know what you're basing these claims on except your own opinion apparently. "It's not safe" compared to what? As far as I know Tesla FSD has had less accidents per mile than an average driver.

In the 2nd quarter, we recorded one crash for every 4.41 million miles driven in which drivers were using Autopilot technology (Autosteer and active safety features). For drivers who were not using Autopilot technology (no Autosteer and active safety features), we recorded one crash for every 1.2 million miles driven. By comparison, NHTSA’s most recent data shows that in the United States there is an automobile crash every 484,000 miles.

Source

Perhaps you should do some more research?

[–] Send_me_nude_girls@feddit.de -4 points 1 year ago

Cameras are better for surveillance of people and can better be sold. Lidar data not.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Shikadi@lemmy.sdf.org 53 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I hate that the article opens with

Just a decade ago, the concept of self-driving cars might have seemed like something out of a science fiction movie

Ten years ago there was already a ton of competition in self driving car research. They were first legalized on the roads 10 years ago. Tesla autopilot (including it even though it was a scam) was sold 9 years ago. Google spun off its self driving car division as waymo in 2016.

This feels like one of those "bruh Zelda ocarina of time came out 29 years ago, we old" memes

[–] Hubi@feddit.de 13 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Hell, Mercedes and Bosch were testing it all the way back in 1993:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTnBiTIvGqY

[–] Jmr@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

Old Mercedes was insane. They really were the best or nothing

[–] PipedLinkBot@feddit.rocks 3 points 1 year ago

Here is an alternative Piped link(s): https://piped.video/watch?v=JTnBiTIvGqY

Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.

I'm open-source, check me out at GitHub.

[–] ConditionOverload@lemmy.world 46 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Bet even the self driving software of BMW won't use turn signals when they change lanes.

It would be a bug if it did signal 🤣

[–] LEDZeppelin@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's that thing poor people do right before you cut them off

[–] mr_MADAFAKA@lemmy.fmhy.net 39 points 1 year ago (4 children)

This will probably be under monthly subscription

[–] RustyPenguin@sh.itjust.works 35 points 1 year ago (2 children)

"The route you selected contains a highway. Please purchase the Highway Driving Pack in addition to your City Driving Pack to reach your destination"

[–] SkyeHarith@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

Fekkin hell that sounds like a boring dystopia

[–] FireWire400@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Sounds like a pretty bad Black Mirror episode

[–] IDontHavePantsOn@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago

GM has had supercruise under subscription service for forever.

[–] llii@feddit.de 1 points 1 year ago

The goal is than no one owns anything anymore. Every company is after the sweet sweet recurring revenue.

[–] Bakachu@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Sample pricing for BMW self-driving add-on feature:

98% accuracy in obstacle avoidance - $299/mo.
85% accuracy in obstacle avoidance - $199/mo.
75% accuracy in obstacle avoidance (lowest legal limit!) - $99/mo.

disclaimer: BMW cannot guarantee 100% accuracy in accuracy pricing

[–] CmdrShepard@lemmy.one 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Another possibility.

Unlimited* crash avoidance instances - $299.99/mo

10 crash avoidance instances - $199.99/mo

5 crash avoidance instances - $99.99/mo

*crash avoidance may be limited during peak hours and times of congestion. After 12 crash avoidance instances, feature may be disabled without notice due to abuse of the system. All sales are final and minimum 5 year contract required. Price may increase at any time without notice

[–] Bakachu@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

At the hospital after you crash: dammit I forgot to set up autopay

[–] Llamajockey@lemmy.world 22 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I've always thought that the Tesla craze would fizzle as major car brands start investing in EVs and self driving tech. I'll take a Toyota, Volvo, Honda or BMW over a Tesla anytime.

[–] kupfakura@lemm.ee 6 points 1 year ago

Sadly Toyota is struggling to make a decent EV years after leading in hybrids. BMW on the other hand has insane efficiency

[–] nathanjaker@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

My understanding was that the challenge in making the next leap in self driving was not based in hardware (detecting objects with cameras vs LiDAR), but in software. As in, it isn't as difficult to detect the presence of objects as it is to make consistent and safe decisions based on that information.

[–] RealJoL@feddit.de 17 points 1 year ago (2 children)

But using LIDAR, you increase your data's accuracy and dimensionality, giving you more options to play with. It probably won't be a game changer, but it may be better than a camera only system.

[–] Valmond@lemmy.mindoki.com 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Gathering more data, and being able to process it seems obvious as a way forward. How much better is this "new" LIDAR?

[–] TenderfootGungi@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They did. And every other competitor does. Musk believes since humans can drive with only two eyes that cars should be able to as well. Maybe someday, but nowhere in the near future. Cameras miss too much and are easily blinded.

[–] Patius@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

It's also really stupid because the idea is to create a system that's better than humans. And let me tell you, people miss stuff all the time when driving. Tons and tons of accidents are caused by "negligent" drivers who looked both ways and missed someone due to a visual processing error or literally not being able to see something.

[–] CmdrShepard@lemmy.one -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That's not necessarily true. What you get is two separate things inputting raw data into a system that both need to be parsed. Sometimes, one won't agree with the other and can cause issues with how the car thinks it should respond.

Nobody has a fully working system at this point, so it's premature to make claims about what hardware is and isn't needed. It may very well be that LIDAR is a requirement, but until somebody figures it out, we're all just speculating.

[–] AlotOfReading@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You can, today, download an app and go ride in a self-driving car around multiple US cities. All of those cars use LIDARs. Sensor disagreement is not a major issue because sensor fusion is a very well-understood topic.

[–] CmdrShepard@lemmy.one 1 points 1 year ago

Yes but they geofenced those cars into areas with the most optimal conditions for autonomous driving. What happens when you take the car on the freeway, a suburban neighborhood, or a mountain pass?

[–] Ejh3k@midwest.social 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Self driving cars are great and all, but can we get someone seriously working on alternative fuels? EV is really pretty unsustainable. All the resources going to build batteries that are unrecycleable is a massive waste in my opinion. And the unless something drastic changes, the ranges that are needed for logistics and America aren't going to ultimately fix anything.

If they can create an alternative fuel that is significantly less polluting, or figure out how to make hydrogen less explody, the existing infrastructure worldwide of gas stations can still be efficiently used. And hopefully there will be a to retrofit existing vehicles to use this alternatives.