In my experience it's almost always shadows. I can't be sure of course, but I've definitively noticed a correlation: both shadows from overpasses or shadows from semis, this happens more often when the sun is low too.
It never happens at night though, which in my mind makes the shadows hypothesis weaker.
While I agree that Tesla is nowhere close to having an actually autonomous driving system, I think that Tesla did invest more into research and probably collected more data than anyone else on the market. This amount of research has to have some results, even if they don't have a product yet.
Yep, because if you want something bad enough, and if it’s clearly possible, enough research will get us there! Except: commercially viable fusion, quantum computers, hyper loops, AGI, interstellar space travel. Hmmm.
That’s the problem with research; much of it turns out to be a dead-end, or exponentially more difficult as you approach the goal. FSD looked extremely likely there for a time, but I think the problem was actually AGI in disguise.
Machine-learning of any kind has this uncanny ability to get you really far with very little work, which gives this illusion of rapid progress. I remember watching George Hotz' first demo of his self-driving thing, it's absolutely nuts how much he was able to do himself with so little. Sure, it drove like a drunk toddler, but it drove!
And that tricks you into thinking that the hard parts are done, and you just need to polish the thing, fill in the last few cases, and you're done!
Except, the work needed to go from 90% there to 91% there is astronomically higher than the work needed to go from 0% to 90%. And the work needed from 91% to 92% is even higher. Partly because the complexity of the corner cases increase exponentially, and partly because everyone involved doesn't actually know how the model works. It's been hilarious watching Tesla flail at this, because every new release that promises the moon always has these weird regressions in unrelated areas.
My favourite example of complexity is that drivers need to follow not only road signs and traffic lights, they also need to follow hand signals from certain people. Police officers, for example, can use hand signals to direct traffic, and it's illegal not to follow those. I can see a self-driving system recognizing hand signals and steering the car accordingly, but suddenly you get a much harder problem: How can the car know the difference between lawful hand signals, and some dude in a Halloween police uniform waving his hands?
You want to drive autonomously coast to coast? Cool, now the car needs to know how to correctly identify local police officers, highway patrol officers, state police officers, and county sheriffs, depending on the car's location.
Park rangers, all the fire departments, normal people who try temporarily route traffic around something unusual like a crash, animals, hazardous conditions.
And to detect when someone is doing a prank or just a homeless guy yelling and waving their fist at cars etc
One of the original overpromises from Musk was that you could definitely totally summon your car from NY to LA and it would magically drive all the way, next year, for sure.
Yeah, because if it understands hand gestures, it totally won't be used by criminals, directing it to a chop shop where they can disable it and cut it to pieces. What are you gonna do as the owner?
It already exists in Waymo. It obviously has a limited ODD but it absolutely works and easily passes “closely resembling FSD” for most real use cases (I.e. getting to work, school, and the store and back)
Companies are not allowed to leverage their dominant market position in one market in order to gain an advantage in other markets. If you dislike monopoly and antitrust laws, go vote against them.
Yes, and? The question asked was "how would a person [wind up with sketchy software installed] if it is behind a security toggle?". The answer I gave was that not every person that uses tech makes the decisions about setting it up, and that officially sanctioned routes imply support costs regardless of any disclaimers. Are you saying that if Apple had an official ability to root the OS that the number of people who wind up with unknowingly rooted would be the exact same as there are now when the only way to do that is with a jailbreak?
It never happens at night though, which in my mind makes the shadows hypothesis weaker.