That's a bold claim. Care to justify it?

Yeah, it only works in extremely controlled environments driving really slowly.

The design is also flawed as it has to work with cameras anyway. The last thing you want is two systems arguing over what they see.

▲

ra7 10 months ago | parent | next [-]

Extremely controlled environments like the entire city of San Francisco?

Sensor fusion is a thing. There are no two systems that “argue with each other”. I can’t believe the same old ignorant tropes are still making rounds.

▲

coolspot 10 months ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Waymos don’t drive slowly, I don’t know where you’re getting this from. If anything, they drive too fast for a thing without a driver.

▲

Infinitesimus 10 months ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It doesn't have to be an argument. You know what each system is good at and prioritize inputs accordingly.

▲

adamweld 10 months ago | parent | prev [-]

Nice, you just outed yourself as being completely clueless. There exist many good sensor fusion techniques for summing the output of disagreeing sensors.

▲

jaimex2 10 months ago | parent [-]

Sounds like bad designs. If you can get rid of something to reduce complexity you absolutely should.

	▲	ra7 10 months ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Except when getting rid of something results in a non-working system. Reduced complexity doesn't work as evidenced by Tesla's inability to have a single driverless mile after nearly a decade of development.
	▲	olabyne 10 months ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Did you forget why the 737 max had 2 crashs ? The alert of the difference between 2 sensors didn't work / wasn't there. So the system was relying on 1 sensor.