Even if cameras can do it, it feels wrong to not use tech that can do it better that vision alone. Even if it costs more, it should still be used because these are machines that can kill people, and life is too valuable. If it can't be done the best we can, then maybe it shouldn't be done at all yet.
Some people live in brick houses and others in trailers or worse. It’s just not how the reality of the world works. The reality is we’re lucky to even have the luxury of a warm trailer relative to the chaos and pain of nature.
The corporation's risk assessment department has calculated it's more cost effective to deny and then fight the consequences in court vs. spend the extra money up front?
On a different note TIL learned that Tesla uses the raw camera sensor data and creates an occupancy network, instead of using images and object detection, which feels like to me that Tesla isn't really using vision.
Sadly, Morgan Stanley suggests that the release of this information may result in invoking the "Osbourne Effect." Osbourne Computer, decades ago, released information about a great new future model. This resulted in customers refraining from buying the current Osbourne model, resulting in steep losses and bankruptcy. Not to say bankruptcy will happen to Rivian, but many customers may refrain from buying the current R1 model, and instead opt for the future R2 model, which may result in a bad quarter or two for Rivian. FWIW. Rivian seems to have amazing technology in the works, but investors may be in for a bumpy ride until a successful R2 rollout ... according to Morgan Stanley (which may be conflicted by their business with Tesla).
I was going to say the opposite: that unlike back in the Osbourne days, consumers today understand that there will always be “something better” announced soon, and they’re used to making purchase decisions anyway.
>>Morgan Stanley suggests that the release of this information may result in invoking the "Osbourne Effect." Osbourne Computer, decades ago, released information about a great new future model. This resulted in customers refraining from buying the current Osbourne model, resulting in steep losses and bankruptcy.
Sadly that did not work for Tesla, and the promises of FSD next year...for the last 10 years...
It’s literally called the FSD computer and the software is called “supervised”. So if anything they’re directly claiming it’s a hardware accomplishment while the software is lesser
* they were positioned for stereopsis like the human visual system
* had 6 degrees of motion freedom like the human visual system
* were hyper-adaptive to lighting conditions like the human visual system
* had a significantly higher density of pixels per degree of arc in the focus region like the human visual system
* and were backed by a system capable of intuiting object inertia like the human visual system.
Tesla does none of those.
Reductio ad absurdum.
EVs are safer, why we haven't banned ICE vehicles yet?
How about screening every food item in supermarket for chemicals and pathogens. Surely that will minimize excess death?
Lot's of things can be "best we can", ask yourself why it's not done yet.
On a different note TIL learned that Tesla uses the raw camera sensor data and creates an occupancy network, instead of using images and object detection, which feels like to me that Tesla isn't really using vision.
Sadly that did not work for Tesla, and the promises of FSD next year...for the last 10 years...
"Tesla (TSLA) has to replace computer in ~4 million cars or compensate their owners" - https://electrek.co/2025/04/14/tesla-tsla-replace-computer-4...
Maybe focus on these:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46291500
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46291156
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46291414