> humans only use vision to drive

I love this argument because it is so obviously wrong: how could any self aware person seriously argue that hearing, touch, and the inner ear aren't involved in their driving?

As an adult I can actually afford a reliable car, so I will concede that smell is less relevant than it used to be, at least for me personally :)

▲

xnx 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> hearing, touch, and the inner ear aren't involved

Not to mention possibly the most complex structure in the known universe, the human brain: 86 billion neurons, 100 trillion connections.

▲

ACCount37 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Human inner ear is worse than a $3 IMU in your average smartphone in literally every way. And that IMU also has a magnetometer in it.

Beating human sensors wasn't hard for over a decade now. The problem is that sensors are worthless. Self-driving lives and dies by AI - all the sensors need to be is "good enough".

	▲	jcalvinowens an hour ago \| parent [-]
		> The problem is that sensors are worthless Well, in TFA the far more successful manufacturer of self driving cars is saying you're wrong. I think they're in much better position to know than you :)

▲

kjksf 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

1. in US you can get a driver's license if you're deaf so as a society we think you can drive without hearing

2. since this is in context of Tesla: tesla cars do have microphones and FSD does use it for responding to sirens etc.

	▲	ibejoeb 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		(1) is true, but actually driving is definitely harder without hearing or with diminished hearing. And Several US states, including CA, prohibit inhibiting hearing while driving, e.g., by wearing a headset, earbuds, or earplugs.

▲

wat10000 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Involved? Yes. Necessary? Pretty sure no.

If it makes you happy, you can read "only vision" as "no lidar or radar." Cars already have microphones and IMUs.