You should either elaborate on your argument, or at least provide further reading that clarifies your point of contention. This kind of low effort nerd-sniping contributes nothing.
You should either elaborate on your argument, or at least provide further reading that clarifies your point of contention. This kind of low effort nerd-sniping contributes nothing.
Responding to ridiculous uncited wild comments doesn't require a phd thesis paper, my friend.
GP's statement is completely unsupported, the burden is on them.
It's commonly brought up saying, and I don't think it's too far from the truth.
Driving under every condition requires a very deep level of understanding of the word. Sure, you can get to like 60% by a simple robot vacuum logic, and to like 90% with what e.g. Waymo does. But the remaining 10% is crazy complex.
What about a plastic bag floating around on a highway? The car can see it, but is it an obstacle to avoid? Should it slam the brakes? And there are a bunch of other extreme examples (what about a hilly road on a Greek island where people just honk to notify the other side that they are coming, without seeing them?)