Gary Marcus

Rank 11 of 47

Score 83

@skryl_alex @elonmusk They are but my point is that saying humans don’t need LiDAR so we don’t need them in AI is fallacious.

Looks like Tesla may minimally need at it training, and that might require it essentially everywhere, updated regularly.

Humans don’t need it ever. True AGI wouldn’t either.

5/20/2025, 1:48:09 PM

In reply to:

Alex Skryl

@skryl_alex

255d

@GaryMarcus @elonmusk Training and real-time inference are very different use cases.

Using lidar reference maps during training to teach the vision system to infer distance correctly on large clusters is not the same as trying to do sensor fusion on underpowered inference hardware.

Gary Marcus

@GaryMarcus

256d

Now that it is public that Tesla is actively using lidar to collect city-specific data, I thought I would retweet what I said to @elonmusk in October 2021, when he was running around saying we would not need LiDAR for AVs:

Gary Marcus

@GaryMarcus

1572d

This logic makes no sense @elonmusk.

1. Birds flap their wings, but that does not mean that wings are the only way to achieve flight.

2. Current neural nets lack the cognitive depth and robustness that would be necessary to support reliable L5 self-driving form vision alone.

The statement engages in a technical discussion about the use of LiDAR in AI and autonomous vehicles, specifically addressing the logic behind Tesla's approach to self-driving technology. It critiques the argument that because humans do not need LiDAR, AI does not either, suggesting that while humans may not need LiDAR, AI might benefit from it during training. The tone is analytical and aims to clarify a misconception in the ongoing debate about AI technology.

Principle 1:
I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
The statement does not cause harm and is focused on a technical critique rather than personal attacks. [+1]
Principle 3:
I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
The statement promotes understanding by clarifying a technical point about AI and LiDAR, contributing to a more informed discussion. [+2]
Principle 4:
I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
The statement engages in constructive criticism by addressing a specific argument and providing a counterpoint without resorting to personal attacks. [+2]