←back to thread

65 points doener | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
rmu09 ◴[] No.45345721[source]
US made cars had the reputation of being low quality, too big, too heavy and too inefficient for european cities.

Tesla was somewhat different. People bought Teslas not for their promised "self driving" capabilities (I know no Tesla driver that took those promises at face value or got the FSD option FWIW), but one motivation was to "stick it" to snobbish arrogant european manufacturers wanting to develop "clean" ICEs with "green fuels" or other non-sensical crimes against thermodynamics like H2-cars.

Now, Tesla (and the US in general) has a brand toxicity problem, and it is worsening. People I know that would consider a Tesla some years ago now drive electric VWs or BWMs or KIAs, often times much more expensive cars than the comparable Tesla 3 / Y model.

This trend will probably continue the next years, and I don't see a way for Tesla to repair the brand image.

replies(6): >>45345771 #>>45345851 #>>45345901 #>>45345908 #>>45346627 #>>45346875 #
bayindirh ◴[] No.45345851[source]
Tesla killed its brand reputation thrice.

- First they went "camera only", alienating people who knows the tech.

- Then they mocked car industry for so long. It was a necessary poke at first, but they didn't get prepared, and the elephant proved that it can run.

- Then Elon's Trump affair and all the shebang happened.

The broken FSD promises, using non-auto rated parts (and related failures), being negligent of their own errors and acting like they are deaf to the criticism is the cement between the layers.

replies(2): >>45345963 #>>45346605 #
storus ◴[] No.45345963[source]
They had camera-only tech employing multiple 4k cameras running at over 2000fps. Not your grandma's 480p/25fps webcam many car manufacturers use as parking cameras. 2000fps gives you enormous safety margin even in case of individual frame misdetection. The long-tail issues they hit are present on LiDAR vehicles as well but LiDAR is much slower, more difficult to process and sensor fusion adds its own errors.
replies(8): >>45346032 #>>45346086 #>>45346115 #>>45346268 #>>45346460 #>>45349033 #>>45350326 #>>45353213 #
4gotunameagain ◴[] No.45346086{3}[source]
Assuming of course that the relevant computer vision components can run at 2000 fps as well.. I highly doubt it.
replies(1): >>45346112 #
bayindirh ◴[] No.45346112{4}[source]
Running at 2000FPS in low light (and getting meaningful data at that sensor size) is also impossible to begin with. Even if you can do constant 60, you're in good shape.

2000 can be good for doing multiexposure and maybe detecting fine movement, but assuming that everything running 2000FPS (and processing 16000 frames/sec) is not a simple thing, esp, if you're running in an uncontrolled and chaotic environment.

replies(1): >>45346633 #
piva00 ◴[] No.45346633{5}[source]
I was about to comment the same, 2k FPS means a maximum shutter speed of 1/2000, you need a lot of light to capture an image this quickly, in low light conditions it's simply impossible to capture enough light even if using very high end optics and sensors.
replies(1): >>45347199 #
storus ◴[] No.45347199{6}[source]
I don't know the specifics, maybe they are timing individual cameras in a way they achieve 2000fps with a crisp image in each camera and merging them together. Or maybe they are using some MIT tech that was able to capture super low light conditions.
replies(2): >>45347362 #>>45348289 #
1. walls ◴[] No.45348289{7}[source]
Or, just maybe, you are completely wrong and misheard or were lied to.