The Vision vs. Lidar debate is reminiscent of the AC vs. DC battle of the late 1880s.
Direct Current (DC) systems, as proposed by Thomas Edison, worked reasonably well but could not transfer power over long distances. (1/5)
Direct Current (DC) systems, as proposed by Thomas Edison, worked reasonably well but could not transfer power over long distances. (1/5)
As a result, power generation in a DC system had to be decentralized, increasing cost and slowing expansion. Lidar-based systems are similar in that they work reasonably well, but they are slow and expensive to scale. (2/5)
Nikola Tesla proposed an Alternating Current (AC) system which transferred power over long distances at high voltage and then stepped down the voltage to make it safe and usable. Similar to Vision-based systems, AC was easier and less expensive to scale. (3/5)
Many claimed DC was the only "safe" way to transfer electricity. Similarly, many today claim that Lidar is the only "safe" option for FSD. Both were/are wrong. (4/5)
Telsa won the currents battle with AC.
And I think Tesla will win the FSD battle with Vision.
In both cases, scalability matters.
(But ironically, Tesla superchargers are DC systems!)
(5/5)
And I think Tesla will win the FSD battle with Vision.
In both cases, scalability matters.
(But ironically, Tesla superchargers are DC systems!)
(5/5)
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
