Because Tesla Clown-in-Chief asked if humans could drive with just visual input, why can't a Tesla? C-in-C conveniently ignored that, to begin with, humans have binocular vision, and his cars had none. Also conveniently ignored were the facts that human eyes have immense dynamic range, are self-cleaning, and can move to track objects of interest. On top of this, humans also have hearing, which helps gauge danger. Many of these things could be filled in by Lidar but since C-in-C apparently had a revelation from heaven, possibly caused by drugs, lidar had to go.

They never used LiDAR. They removed the radar.

I hate this as well, but there are valid business reasons:

- Setting up infrastructure and support for consumers is expensive and hard to do well, especially if that's not your main industry.

- Some products are only economical if mass produced, and that requires large, guaranteed buyers.

Isn't LIDAR a high powered laser? How could they just go selling it to consumers like you?

Basically not.

Biggest risk is that a beam steering element stops while the emitters are running. Basically impossible with a phased array emitter like the article discusses.

And you'd probably have to be staring into the laser at close range while it was doing that.

The laser beams usually aren't tiny points like your laser pointer. Several centimeters across is more typical, especially at typical road distances. Your pupil is very small in comparison.

The optical hazard calculations are a very early part of the design of a LIDAR system, and all of this does get considered. Or should anyway.

Biggest risks are for people involved in R&D, where beams may be static and very close to personnel.

This is not quite true. It depends what you're talking about. Automotive LiDAR sensor prices typically range from $150–300 today for standard units. Mid-range ADAS systems (Ls+/L3) sensors are about $600-750 and the long-range units used by robo-taxis like Waymos are about $1,500–6,000 or more per sensor

https://www.fleetowner.com/technology/article/55316670

The ~$75k per sensor in 2015 refers to the long-range sensors. 99% of production is from 4 Chinese companies: Hesai, RoboSense, Huawei, and Seyond.

There's no reason to believe in just cameras. Cameras are easily blinded by glare and have their efficacy drop dramatically when they get dirty. Having inexpensive lidar AND cameras is the best of both worlds. When it comes to safety and comfort, we shouldn't be trying to optimize for cost. If we figure out how to make cameras alone bulletproof in the future, great. But there's not where we're at today.

I think that supports most people’s viewpoint though. Visible light Cameras alone can ‘work’ but more sensors is of course better. You infrared example for instance.

The only reason not to have more sensors of different types is cost (equipment and processing costs). Those costs are coming down fast.

Same limitations as radar and ultrasonic and ladar and vision cameras combined?

Even Tesla used to have radar and ultrasonic in their cars until relatively recently. And they use lidar (from Luminar) in their mapping fleet.

What makes you say radar is extremely expensive? Virtually every car from the last decade has at least one, many have two or more. They’re barely more than a PCB and a radar ASIC.