Mobileye - Most Impressive Self Driving Demo Yet (CES 2019)

[Soda Popinski]

You can patent reading speed limit signs?!?!

You can patent a method for an autonomous vehicle to read a speed limit sign. Patent is listed as active. The question is, can you find "prior art" to invalidate the patent? Is it worth litigating if GPS data is good enough?

I'd imagine over time, the GPS data can be updated with video from Teslas driving around. Claim #1 on the patent states it's done in real-time. Updating GPS data from image captures isn't real-time, and wouldn't fall under this patent, even if "read" by computer.

 

[Glamisduner]

You can patent a method for an autonomous vehicle to read a speed limit sign. Patent is listed as active. The question is, can you find "prior art" to invalidate the patent? Is it worth litigating if GPS data is good enough?

I'd imagine over time, the GPS data can be updated with video from Teslas driving around. Claim #1 on the patent states it's done in real-time. Updating GPS data from image captures isn't real-time, and wouldn't fall under this patent, even if "read" by computer.

I'm no expert but this does not seem like the kind of thing that should be patent-able. The only way ever have self driving cars that work will be to read speed limit signs. I mean why not just get a patent on the ability to apply brakes real time using a camera...

 

[Soda Popinski]

I'm no expert but this does not seem like the kind of thing that should be patent-able. The only way ever have self driving cars that work will be to read speed limit signs. I mean why not just get a patent on the ability to apply brakes real time using a camera...

If Apple can get a patent on having a rectangular computer, this can be patented. Just because something is needed or useful, doesn't mean it can't be patented. Otherwise, why invent stuff? It is a serious invention, so I have now qualms about it.

 

[Glamisduner]

If Apple can get a patent on having a rectangular computer, this can be patented. Just because something is needed or useful, doesn't mean it can't be patented. Otherwise, why invent stuff? It is a serious invention, so I have now qualms about it.

I hate patent laws, they are designed to keep big businesses in place and screw individuals without deep pockets. Patent on rectangular computer is also something that should not be patent-able. Reading speed limit signs using cameras is nothing new really. If only mobile eye cars will be able to read speed limit signs then they pretty much cornered the market. Unless there is some new speed limit sign design that allow another way to read it (besides visually) and that would need to be implemented across the globe....

They basically patented visual reading of the signs. Obviously humans use eyes and computers use cameras, but the visual reading of signs is how signs in general were designed to be used. A copyright on the software / hardware seems more applicable here to me.

Do they also own the patent for stop signs and traffic light recognition? A bit ridiculous...

 

[GeoX750]

I hate patent laws, they are designed to keep big businesses in place and screw individuals without deep pockets. Patent on rectangular computer is also something that should not be patent-able. Reading speed limit signs using cameras is nothing new really. If only mobile eye cars will be able to read speed limit signs then they pretty much cornered the market. Unless there is some new speed limit sign design that allow another way to read it (besides visually) and that would need to be implemented across the globe....

They basically patented visual reading of the signs. Obviously humans use eyes and computers use cameras, but the visual reading of signs is how signs in general were designed to be used. A copyright on the software / hardware seems more applicable here to me.

Do they also own the patent for stop signs and traffic light recognition? A bit ridiculous...

Even though they play the game against each other, big companies actually are hugely anti-patent. The last few years they have been working to weaken and dismantle the patent system (See what Google's former head of patents did when she took over as director of the Patent Office).

The reason is, large companies (Google, Amazon, Apple, IBM) would rather rely on their name recognition, size, resources and deep pockets to keep out competition and monopolize markets.

A patent, however, enables a small company to stop a large company from doing what they invented. The proprietary patent is often the only way a small company just starting out can compete with a large company.

That is why Shark Tank investors ask if the startup has applied for a patent. They know deeper pockets can otherwise come in and take away their business. On the other hand, big companies know that patents actually help the little guy more and have been wanting to do away with patents.

 

[Bladerskb]

On the contrary it was Tesla that took the initiative to break up with Mobileye, first signs appeared in late 2015 when Tesla hired Jim Keller and tried to recruit George Hotz to "get rid of Mobileye". Mobileye wanted to stay with ADAS where it was the leader and did not want itself or others to move into the autonomous driving areas. The explanation it gave at the separation was just a spin to save its stock price but it somehow worked. Why would a sane company want to dump your most important customer, if that customer still is interested in the relationship, instead of to work with it even when you have different ideas of how to approach it?

In general having "partnership" is a sign of weakness by admitting that you don't have the technology and not thinking you could develop one. Why would one wants to share the know how with partners if you already have the leading technology?

Tesla made up like less than 1% of Mobileye's customer, how in the world is Tesla their most important customer?
Mobileye's chip is in 32+ million cars.

 

[CarlK]

Tesla made up like less than 1% of Mobileye's customer, how in the world is Tesla their most important customer?
Mobileye's chip is in 32+ million cars.

Back in 14'~15' Tesla was its only and most visible customer using its imagie chip for self driving with added in house S/W. Everyone else was only doing minimal driver assistance with it.

 

[Electroman]

One night a couple weeks ago we were driving home on the Interstate in freezing fog and the system was paralyzed. There's no fall back to regular old hold the speed cruise control. I could go on and on.

WHAT?? You want to drive with a dumb cruise control on foggy day? Is that your death wish?

 

[Bladerskb]

Back in 14'~15' Tesla was its only and most visible customer using its imagie chip for self driving with added in house S/W. Everyone else was only doing minimal driver assistance with it.

Huh? First of all, L2 ISN'T self driving and no there were a bunch of ACC and LKA. The problem with you Tesla fans is that you live in a bubble. Yes Tesla was the most visible, which means its misuse of Mobileye tech brought unneeded risk to mobileye. Mobileye powers ALL of the safety feature in almost all cars today. Sit down and swallow that for a second. Why would they care about a 0.35%?

 

[CarlK]

Huh? First of all, L2 ISN'T self driving and no there were a bunch of ACC and LKA. The problem with you Tesla fans is that you live in a bubble. Yes Tesla was the most visible, which means its misuse of Mobileye tech brought unneeded risk to mobileye. Mobileye powers ALL of the safety feature in almost all cars today. Sit down and swallow that for a second. Why would they care about a 0.35%?

Yeah right. Why would Mobileye attacking its one time customer Tesla when they separate then. Did you see how classy and confident NVidia was when Tesla announced its plan for making own AI chip? It just said we will welcome Tesla if it decide to come back using our chip.

 

[Bladerskb]

Yeah right. Why would Mobileye attacking its one time customer Tesla when they separate then.

Attacking? Where did mobileye attack? They simply pointed out what happened. Elon blamed the camera and made up stuff stories about bright lights when the eyeq3 was not made to detect cross traffic period. On the other hand his radar should have stopped for the moving object, it failed. This is typical elon.

Here is mobileye's response.

“Tesla’s response to the May 7 crash, wherein the company shifted blame to the camera, and later corrected and shifted blame to the radar, indicated to Mobileye that Mobileye’s relationship with Tesla could not continue,” the supplier said. As for Tesla’s claim that Mobileye was threatened by Tesla’s internal computer vision efforts, the company has little knowledge of these efforts other than an awareness that Tesla had put together a small team.

This is in response to this "Tesla said Thursday that Mobileye tried to force it to abandon efforts to develop its own image-sensing capabilities"

This doesn't even pass the 5 years old toddler test. Why would a company with 32+ million paying customers (who make millions of cars a year) care about a company with 90k cars at the time whom most analyst were projecting will go bankrupt?

Mobileye could have just as easily sued Tesla for copying and using its patented tri-focal camera and 8 camera system.

Did you see how classy and confident NVidia was when Tesla announced its plan for making own AI chip? It just said we will welcome Tesla if it decide to come back using our chip.

Difference is Nvidia is just a chip provider, they only sell chips, not software. they don't provide perception software because they don't have any. Tesla tried to blame Mobileye's perception software initially. Huge difference.

 

[happyzod]

Attacking? Where did mobileye attack? They simply pointed out what happened. Elon blamed the camera and made up stuff stories about bright lights when the eyeq3 was not made to detect cross traffic period. On the other hand his radar should have stopped for the moving object, it failed. This is typical elon.

Here is mobileye's response.



This is in response to this "Tesla said Thursday that Mobileye tried to force it to abandon efforts to develop its own image-sensing capabilities"

This doesn't even pass the 5 years old toddler test. Why would a company with 32+ million paying customers (who make millions of cars a year) care about a company with 90k cars at the time whom most analyst were projecting will go bankrupt?

Mobileye could have just as easily sued Tesla for copying and using its patented tri-focal camera and 8 camera system.



Difference is Nvidia is just a chip provider, they only sell chips, not software. they don't provide perception software because they don't have any. Tesla tried to blame Mobileye's perception software initially. Huge difference.

NVIDIA DRIVE Software for Self Driving Vehicles

 

[voyager]

These are all rather non-complicated situations. Whoever has tried maneuvering a car through traffic in Amsterdam, realizes that even for an experienced driver so much info is coming his/her way, that driverless will be impossible for years to come... Unless learn & apply through some quantum computer processor becomes available any time soon.

 

[R.S]

Meanwhile, in the real world, I just drove my Tesla from New Orleans to Baton Rouge only using the turn signal for control.

Which other cars currently allow this?

I am pretty sure Mercedes can do that, too. And maybe also Cadillac’s super cruise, or whatever Audi, or BMW has.

I had a Mercedes rental recently and it could easily change lanes, with only the blinker. And it was also pretty good at keeping the lane and distance.

Not sure if they also use MY, but if they do, I guess MY is as far as Tesla with real road legal cars, you can buy.

 

[strider]

WHAT?? You want to drive with a dumb cruise control on foggy day? Is that your death wish?

No, that was a separate complaint. Because ACC sucks so bad (when overtaking it locks onto the slower car in the lane I'm departing and slows me down which is very dangerous) I want to be able to just use regular cruise unless AP is active.

 

[happyzod]

I am pretty sure Mercedes can do that, too. And maybe also Cadillac’s super cruise, or whatever Audi, or BMW has.

I had a Mercedes rental recently and it could easily change lanes, with only the blinker. And it was also pretty good at keeping the lane and distance.

Not sure if they also use MY, but if they do, I guess MY is as far as Tesla with real road legal cars, you can buy.

I believe all of them use Mobile-eye processors at least.

 

[apilot]

Bladerskb -

Good info on Mobileye, thanks. One thing that's frustrating is trying to understand which new cars have which versions of EyeQ chips in them. Is there a list somewhere?

I know the 2019 BMW X5 has the EyeQ 4 chip with a trifocal camera, but when I test drove it near San Francisco, it did a terrible job staying in the lane - was pretty surprised, frankly. How much of that is due to the chip vs. the way BMW is implementing it? Also, how is the software updated over time? Assuming it's manufacturer dependent but finding the information is impossible.

 

[Bladerskb]

Bladerskb -

Good info on Mobileye, thanks. One thing that's frustrating is trying to understand which new cars have which versions of EyeQ chips in them. Is there a list somewhere?

I know the 2019 BMW X5 has the EyeQ 4 chip with a trifocal camera, but when I test drove it near San Francisco, it did a terrible job staying in the lane - was pretty surprised, frankly. How much of that is due to the chip vs. the way BMW is implementing it? Also, how is the software updated over time? Assuming it's manufacturer dependent but finding the information is impossible.

The driving control software is being done by ZF for 2019 bmws. They are a tier1. When buying cars with focus on autonomy. You have to look for ADAS systems that were developed in-house. Tier 1s do the bare minimum so they can push it out of the door for multiple OEMs. Their goal is not to write a good control algorithm so EyeQ4 goes to waste.

There's only been two consumer in-house development using EyeQ. That's supercruise and AP1 and it shows.
However there are 2 upcoming internal development this year for the US using EyeQ4, supercruise 2.0 from GM and a L2+ from FCA which would probably be in the next jeep Cherokee (i'm not sure, haven't gotten confirmation).

For next year (2020), there's VW, NIO and LUICID MOTORS.
Then year after that (2021), BMW, FCA (again), and Audi

 

[Sunshine State]

Bladerskb -

Good info on Mobileye, thanks. One thing that's frustrating is trying to understand which new cars have which versions of EyeQ chips in them. Is there a list somewhere?

I know the 2019 BMW X5 has the EyeQ 4 chip with a trifocal camera, but when I test drove it near San Francisco, it did a terrible job staying in the lane - was pretty surprised, frankly. How much of that is due to the chip vs. the way BMW is implementing it? Also, how is the software updated over time? Assuming it's manufacturer dependent but finding the information is impossible.

I also have a new 2019 X5, I’m not sure what was wrong with the one you test drove but mine does an amazing job even on back roads except that BMW requires you to touch steering wheel almost continuously. If you remove your hands for more than 1 second the BMW warns you repeatedly and then drops back to lane keep assist which ping pongs. I did read that they are changing to an optical sensor very soon and maybe already have, mine is a December build. BMW continually update the products throughout the year. The option on my new X5 was $1,700 and that was also discounted by our BMW dealer, not $5,000 like my Teslas. BMW doesn’t hype their product like others but it’s very impressive, it’s called Traffic Jam Assistant. BMW leans much more towards safety by requiring constant hand contact but it could easily be hands free.

 

[apilot]

I also have a new 2019 X5, I’m not sure what was wrong with the one you test drove but mine does an amazing job even on back roads except that BMW requires you to touch steering wheel almost continuously. If you remove your hands for more than 1 second the BMW warns you repeatedly and then drops back to lane keep assist which ping pongs.

Yeah, I was surprised. Maybe it was downgrading to LKA like you were saying, but I don't think so. The UI was also a bit confusing, but I'm coming from a Tesla, so most other ADAS systems seem more complex from that standpoint. Will try again and pay attention to the mode.