> It takes an absolute expert human to accurately judge distance between themselves and an object even 5 meters away.
Huh? The most basic skill of any driver is the ability to see if you're at a collision course with any other vehicle. I can accurately judge this at distances of at least 50 meters, and I'm likely vastly underestimating the distance. It is very apparent when this is the case. I can't tell if the distance between us is 45 vs 51 meters, but that is information with 0 relevance to anything.
> The result was that this beep would go off ... the humans in the car know it means a crash is imminent, but can't tell what's going on, where the crash is going to happen, then 2 seconds "nothing" happens, and then cars crash, usually 20-30 meters in front of the Tesla car. Usually the car then safely stops. Humans report that this is somewhere between creepy and a horror-like situation.
This is a non-issue and certainly not horror-like. All one's got to do is train themselves to slow down / brake when they hear the beep. And you're trying to paint this extremely useful safety feature as something bad?
> Worse yet is how humans respond to this. We all know this, but: how does a human react when they're in a queue and the person in front of them (or car in front of their car) stops ... and they cannot tell why it stops? We all know what follows is an immediate and very aggressive reaction.
What are you trying to say here? If the car in front of me brakes I brake too. I do not need to know the reason it braked, I simply brake too, because I have to. It works out fine every time because I have to drive in such a way to be able to stop in time in case the car in front of me applies 100% braking at any time. Basic driving.
Generally, what you're describing as predicting is more accurately called assuming. Assuming that things will go how one wants them to go. I call that sort of driving optimistic: optimistically assuming that the car in front of me will continue going forward and that there is nothing behind that huge truck that's blocking my view of the upcoming intersection, so I can freely gas it through.
That mindset is of course wrong; we must drive pessimistically, assuming that any car may apply max braking at any time and that if any part of our line of sight is obstructed, the worst case scenario is happening behind it - there is a high speed object coming towards us at a collision course that will reveal itself from behind the obstruction at the last second. Therefore, we must slow down when coming around a line of sight obstruction.
> Huh? The most basic skill of any driver is the ability to see if you're at a collision course with any other vehicle. I can accurately judge this at distances of at least 50 meters, and I'm likely vastly underestimating the distance. It is very apparent when this is the case. I can't tell if the distance between us is 45 vs 51 meters, but that is information with 0 relevance to anything.
That's probably because for things moving in straight lines at constant velocity you don't need to be able to measure distance at all accurately to figure out if they are on a collision course. You just need to be able to tell if the distance is decreasing.
First, you just have to note if their angular position is changing. If it is then they are not on a collision course.
If the angular position is not changing, then you have to check if the distance is decreasing. If it is they are on a collision course. If it is not then they aren't.
If you take advantage of the fact that cars generally have distinctly different front ends and back ends and that most of the time cars are traveling forward you don't even have to estimate distance. If the angular position is not changing just note if the direction the car is pointing has its front closer to you than its back or not. If its front is closer than its back then it is on a collision course. Otherwise not.
You will need to make some adjustments due to cars having volume. A near miss for point cars could still be a collision for cars with volume, but this should be fairly easy to deal with.
> Huh? The most basic skill of any driver is the ability to see if you're at a collision course with any other vehicle. I can accurately judge this at distances of at least 50 meters
Can you tell me the distance between 2 objects, each 50 meters away from you, down to 1 cm? That's the superhuman part. Even the distance between you and an object 10 meters away down to a few millimeters is impossible for a human.
It is because 10 measurements of that per second can predict with great accuracy where every object in the scene will go for the next few seconds, except for small children or bikes or ... that the LIDAR cannot see.
It can also tell you 4-5 seconds before it happens which objects are going to collide. Not just which object YOU are going to collide with, but any collision between any 2 objects if they are within the range of the LIDAR.
But they see fundamentally different things than humans. So humans will never work together nicely with LIDAR guided robots.
Huh? The most basic skill of any driver is the ability to see if you're at a collision course with any other vehicle. I can accurately judge this at distances of at least 50 meters, and I'm likely vastly underestimating the distance. It is very apparent when this is the case. I can't tell if the distance between us is 45 vs 51 meters, but that is information with 0 relevance to anything.
> The result was that this beep would go off ... the humans in the car know it means a crash is imminent, but can't tell what's going on, where the crash is going to happen, then 2 seconds "nothing" happens, and then cars crash, usually 20-30 meters in front of the Tesla car. Usually the car then safely stops. Humans report that this is somewhere between creepy and a horror-like situation.
This is a non-issue and certainly not horror-like. All one's got to do is train themselves to slow down / brake when they hear the beep. And you're trying to paint this extremely useful safety feature as something bad?
> Worse yet is how humans respond to this. We all know this, but: how does a human react when they're in a queue and the person in front of them (or car in front of their car) stops ... and they cannot tell why it stops? We all know what follows is an immediate and very aggressive reaction.
What are you trying to say here? If the car in front of me brakes I brake too. I do not need to know the reason it braked, I simply brake too, because I have to. It works out fine every time because I have to drive in such a way to be able to stop in time in case the car in front of me applies 100% braking at any time. Basic driving.
Generally, what you're describing as predicting is more accurately called assuming. Assuming that things will go how one wants them to go. I call that sort of driving optimistic: optimistically assuming that the car in front of me will continue going forward and that there is nothing behind that huge truck that's blocking my view of the upcoming intersection, so I can freely gas it through.
That mindset is of course wrong; we must drive pessimistically, assuming that any car may apply max braking at any time and that if any part of our line of sight is obstructed, the worst case scenario is happening behind it - there is a high speed object coming towards us at a collision course that will reveal itself from behind the obstruction at the last second. Therefore, we must slow down when coming around a line of sight obstruction.