Waymo’s co-ceo presents on AI driving

[mostlylong]

@FOOLME45

it’s the statements of those building a vision only system and the rationale for it.

Yes, the people without a scaling autonomous product do say that.

I didn’t write that vision-only is “flawed”:

@FOOLME45

If vision only and the rationale for it is flawed

I wrote that it may be less capable than multi-sensor for super-human safety.

And I wrote that this rationale is flawed:

@FOOLME45

When Lidar and the cameras conflict in terms of decision making, which system should take precedence?

Because, according to Waymo (and other experts):

@mostlylong

benefit from the complementary physics of the different sensing modalities

Here’s Nuro:

@mostlylong

A common counterargument is that adding sensors increases system complexity. That is true to some extent. But complexity, in this case, is an engineering problem rather than a fundamental barrier. Sensor fusion, calibration, and redundancy are hard problems, but they are solvable ones. When solved well, they yield systems that are more robust across lighting conditions and environmental variability, with multiple sensing modalities providing complementary and redundant information.

@FOOLME45

what is the motivation for Musk to pursue something that will not work or unnecessarily takes on greater risk of failure?

I don’t know? Cost? Ignorance? Both?

Five minutes of a web search will find answers on how and why multi-sensor works in machine learning and while conflicts among sensor data is a thing that happens, it is nowhere near being some kind of dealbreaker in modern models - as Waymo’s millions of weekly autonomous miles has shown us for years now.