News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on How the LIDAR tech GM just bought probably works. Parent comment

Re:How the LIDAR tech GM just bought probably works by ajross on Tuesday October 24, 2017 @01:17PM (#15543251)
That sensor you linked looks to have its two cameras about 10cm apart. A car is easily 1.5m wide, giving a very cheap 15x increase in range for far objects and beating the LIDAR quote by a ton (and of course you can have multiple camera pairs for different distance ranges of course).

I'm with the grandparent: I genuinely don't understand the obsession with LIDAR in this space. It's complicated and fiddly, and seems to be competing with an "obvious" solution involving $3 camera parts.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:How the LIDAR tech GM just bought probably works by dljsjr on Tuesday October 24, 2017 @01:51PM (#15543580)
More cameras still doesn't fix the interaction with ambient light and LIDAR units like the ones produced by Velodyne or Ibeo have ranges out to 200m[1]

Again, I think they both have their uses. If LIDAR can be made not so complicated and fiddly, I think it brings a lot to the table.

[1]: https://autonomoustuff.com/product/ibeo-lux-standard/

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:How the LIDAR tech GM just bought probably works by ajross on Tuesday October 24, 2017 @02:17PM (#15543855)
Sure, it could. But again its competition is cheap camera hardware that can be had for a few bucks and that outperforms the human eyeballs that we know are safe enough to drive cars on real roads.

I don't doubt that LIDAR can work with some development. I'm just shocked that it seems to be the default position in the industry and want someone to explain this to me in a way that makes sense.

[ Parent | on HN ]