• elrik@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    2 months ago

    How is this different from the capabilities of Tesla’s FSD, which is considered level 2? It seems like Mercedes just decided they’ll take on liability to classify an equivalent level 2 system as level 3.

    • rsuri@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      According to the mercedes website the cars have radar and lidar sensors. FSD has radar only, but apparently decided to move away from them and towards optical only, I’m not sure if they currently have any role in FSD.

      That’s important because FSD relies on optical sensors only to tell not only where an object is, but that it exists. Based on videos I’ve seen of FSD, I suspect that if it hasn’t ingested the data to recognize, say, a plastic bucket, it won’t know that it’s not just part of the road (or at best can recognize that the road looks a little weird). If there’s a radar or lidar sensor though, those directly measure distance and can have 3-D data about the world without the ability to recognize objects. Which means they can say “hey, there’s something there I don’t recognize, time to hit the brakes and alert the driver about what to do next”.

      Of course this still leaves a number of problems, like understanding at a higher level what happened after an accident for example. My guess is there will still be problems.

    • GoodEye8@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      You’ve inadvertently pointed out how Tesla deliberately skirts the law. Teslas are way more capable than what level 2 describes, but they choose to stay as level 2 so they wouldn’t have to take responsibility for their public testing

    • Socsa@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 months ago

      Yeah it’s pretty much an insurance product. They came up with a set of boundary conditions someone would underwrite for their “stay between the lines” tech.

    • philpo@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      It’s not about the sensors, it’s about the software. That’s the solution.

      • skyspydude1@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Please tell me how software will be able to detect objects in low/no-light conditions if they say, have cameras with poor dynamic range and no low-light sensitivity?