Elon Musk is 'full of crap'

[ishareit]

A GM exec slams Tesla's self-driving-car promises — says Elon Musk is 'full of crap'

A GM exec slams Tesla's self-driving-car promises — says Elon Musk is 'full of crap'

 

[kort677]

and?

 

[electracity]

"To think you can see everything you need for a level five autonomous car [full self-driving] with cameras and radar, I don't know how you do that," he (Miller)said.


Yup

 

[CalBlue 85D]

So far Tesla seems to be proving him right, but maybe they will surprise us. Maybe. On another note, GM also needs to remember the proverb about people who live is glass houses..... and I guess it depends on whether this is New GM talking or Old GM. Lots of skeletons in the closet.

 

[Tiger]

Humans can drive with 1-2 eyes, and usually what fails them is their attention span or impulse control failure. Fully autonomous driving is doable, as long as you focus on doing the right thing. 2 cameras would be enough if they were scanning in various directions.

 

[bonnie]

GM also declared Tesla just a niche company, building cars for tree-huggers several years ago. And yet, here we are.

More recently, GM CEO Mary Barra declared that 'unlike competitors, Bolts could be serviced in every state', conveniently leaving out the fact that GM has done everything possible to shut down Tesla in various states.

I'll give you all one guess what I think about GM management.

 

[OlderThanDirt]

After decades of owning GM vehicles their dealerships are the only thing I loathe more than gas stations.

New GM??? It's old GM with new clothes and a hair cut.

 

[McRat]

Error in the article. Super Cruise cars at this point do not have LiDAR sensors. The geomapped terrain was LiDAR mapped, but the cars do not have it.

The question remains if the CT6 SuperCruise has V2V like the CTS's do. Have not heard an answer for that yet.

In the GM long term model, the roads are mapped, the cars talk to each other, and they have full sensor suites including LiDAR. This allows max all-weather redundancy.

I think this is what GM is doing in SF. Waymo and Uber seemed to have moved to Arizona for testing, but GM is still doing a lot of SF miles every day.

 

[NerdUno]

Humans can drive with 1-2 eyes, and usually what fails them is their attention span or impulse control failure. Fully autonomous driving is doable, as long as you focus on doing the right thing. 2 cameras would be enough if they were scanning in various directions.

Your eyes can turn. Tesla's cameras can't. Big difference.

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

"To think you can see everything you need for a level five autonomous car [full self-driving] with cameras and radar, I don't know how you do that," he (Miller)said.


Yup

When GM has a self-driving car its execs will be more qualified to make statements on the subject.

But of course, Tesla's not just trying to make a self-driving system. It's trying to make one as cheaply as possible so that it's cheaper than the competition and it can sell it to lots of private car buyers.

 

[McRat]

Your eyes can turn. Tesla's cameras can't. Big difference.

Human eyes are actually very trick. Especially the way they are wired into the logic boards.

Unlike conventional cameras, they have a very high res center, and a low res motion-sensitive perimeter.

Hold your arm straight out, spread your fingers out wide. Stare intensely at your middle finger's nail. Do not allow your eyes to move. Notice that you can't resolve much of your hand? Now slightly move your pinky or thumb. See how easy you catch the motion even though you can barely resolve them?

And the long range resolution is killer. Not as good as some animals, but it blows current wide angle cameras in the weeds.
Sidebar - Better than 9 out of 10 people can tell the difference between a 0.250" dia pin and a .251" dia pin. That's a size difference of less than 1/2 a human hair.

 

[jdbob]

Your eyes can turn. Tesla's cameras can't. Big difference.

That's why there are multiple cameras.

 

[David99]

Nothing new about other car companies trying to make Tesla look bad. At the same time, I am very skeptical that full self driving will be possible in a Tesla by the end of the year as Elon promised. I'm not talking about the legal issues here. Just the car's capability. There is less than 3 months left.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

But the question on everyone's lips: Is Scott Miller @Bladerskb?

 

[McRat]

Does anybody have a full text of the conversation?

Seems everybody is regurgitating the same thing, which apparently starts in the middle of a conversation.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

GM also declared Tesla just a niche company, building cars for tree-huggers several years ago. And yet, here we are.

More recently, GM CEO Mary Barra declared that 'unlike competitors, Bolts could be serviced in every state', conveniently leaving out the fact that GM has done everything possible to shut down Tesla in various states.

I'll give you all one guess what I think about GM management.

Being right on BEVs, which Tesla obviously was, is not a guarantee on Tesla being right about the self-driving suite approach, though.

 

[boaterva]

But the question on everyone's lips: Is Scott Miller @Bladerskb?

Maybe, where's Miller live?

 

[Bebop]

Humans can drive with 1-2 eyes, and usually what fails them is their attention span or impulse control failure. Fully autonomous driving is doable, as long as you focus on doing the right thing. 2 cameras would be enough if they were scanning in various directions.

Exactly. I've been driving safely since I got my license with literally two eyes. The car has 8 eyes in 360 seeing at the exact same time + radar + sensors. I'm more than confident what Tesla continues to promote on the website and in the design studio to be true when it comes to full-self driving.

What I'm more concerned about is the "Ethics" issue. The brain of the car. As humans we know "right" from "wrong" and can for the most part make the right ethical decision. That I think is the biggest challenge in all of this.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

Exactly. I've been driving safely since I got my license with literally two eyes. The car has 8 eyes in 360 seeing at the exact same time + radar + sensors. I'm more than confident what Tesla continues to promote on the website and in the design studio to be true when it comes to full-self driving.

What I'm more concerned about is the "Ethics" issue. The brain of the car. As humans we know "right" from "wrong" and can for the most part make the right ethical decision. That I think is the biggest challenge in all of this.

Ultrasonics are pointless for most of the driving scenarios due to their short range, low speed and certain recognition issues, so we can chalk those out for other than some low-speed maneuvering.

Radar is good, but it is very narrow on Tesla, so it helps when driving forwards only. Basically the rest comes down to stationary cameras that do not have stereo vision to most directions, can not move, can not clean themselves when blocked, can not raise themselves when blocked by an obstacle etc.

I mean, even if we thought 360 vision is sufficient, why wouldn't we want 360 degree radar (which can see through objects) and 360 degree lidar (which can see in pitch black darkness and estimate range extremely precisely) in the suite?

Tesla still has time to add those to future suites, of course.

 

[zer0cool]

Humans can drive with 1-2 eyes, and usually what fails them is their attention span or impulse control failure. Fully autonomous driving is doable, as long as you focus on doing the right thing. 2 cameras would be enough if they were scanning in various directions.

Haha sure. Although human eyes have inherent issues, but it's vastly superior to any camera in so many circumstances. I mean does your vision get all fuzzy at night, with snowy looking noise everywhere which is bad even in some pretty well lit locations (to a human eye)? Can you see a person pretty well on a bright day against a bright sky? Sure you can. Try take a photo of a person with even the best camera against a background of bright sky...