All of the actually WORKING self driving systems use LIDAR. This is not a coincidence.

servo_sausage an hour ago | parent | next [-]

I work with programs approaching L3+ from L2, with the requirement that the system works for 99% of roads (not tesla before people start fixating on that).

We find that the cases where lidar really helps are in gathering training data, parking, and if focused enough some long distance precision.

None of these have been instrumental in a final product; personally I suspect that many of the cars including lidar use it for data collection and edge cases more than as part of the driving perception model.

	▲	heisenbit 12 minutes ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Accidents are not normal driving situations but edge cases.
	▲	UltraSane 8 minutes ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Waymo is the best current autonomous driving system and Waymo uses LIDAR. This is because LIDAR is an incredibly effective sensor for accurate range data. Vision and Radar range data is much less accurate and reliable. Waymo used LIDAR in the realtime control loop. It combines LiDAR, camera, and radar data in real time to build a 3D representation of the environment, which is constantly updated. I fundamentally don't trust any level 4 system that doesn't use LIDAR

▲

small_model 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Like Waymo? (https://dmnews.co.uk/waymo-robotaxi-spotted-unable-to-cross-...) 17 years after betting the farm on LIDAR the solution fails to navigate a puddle. Sorry but they bet on the wrong technology, Tesla has overtaken them with multi camera and NN solution.

▲

cheema33 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> Tesla has overtaken them with multi camera and NN solution.

Let me guess, you heard this from Elon?

▲

UltraSane 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Your conclusion from a single incident is a bad inference. One vehicle getting confused by a puddle (likely a sensor fusion edge case or mapping artifact, not a fundamental LIDAR failure) doesn't indict the technology. Tesla's cameras have produces vastly more failures.

Waymo has driven tens of millions of autonomous miles with a serious injury/fatality rate dramatically lower than human drivers. The actual data shows the technology works. Tesla FSD still requires active driver supervision and is not legally or technically a robotaxi system. Comparing them as if they're at parity is wrong.

LIDAR gives direct metric depth with no inference required. Camera-only systems must infer depth from 2D images using neural networks, which introduces failure modes LIDAR doesn't have. Radar is very valuable when LIDAR and cameras give ambiguous data.

What metrics has Telsa overtaken Waymo? Deployed robotaxi revenue miles? No. Disengagement rates? No published comparable data. Safety per mile in driverless operation? No.

▲

small_model 2 hours ago | parent [-]

A Tesla wouldn't stop for a puddle. Also its not locked to a small geofenced area (people have driven coast to coast without a single intervention on FSD including parking spot to parking spot) when I can buy a Waymo vehicle that does this then Waymo would have caught up with Tesla.

▲

jamespo 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Wow, so it can cope with driving on the highway. That's the easy part.

▲

UltraSane 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Your puddle example is utterly irrelevant. Tesla's are notorious for phantom breaking. Robotaxis are very much locked to tiny geofenced areas. Some even shaped like a penis because Musk is such a child.

"people have driven coast to coast without a single intervention on FSD including parking spot to parking spot"

I find this claim very dubious. Prove it. Teslas never drive empty for a very good reason.

	▲	small_model 31 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Err they have lots of Model Ys in Austin as Robotaxis right now with no drivers. I guess this is also 'dubious'. Look it's clear you have a huge bias I would urge you to read up on https://grokipedia.com/page/List_of_fallacies otherwise your emotional responses will blind you to reality.