derek_frome
Joined 11 years ago
Joined 11 years ago
We make a point of this because legacy spinning lidar is unreliable. But it's unreliable because of the analog design, not because spinning is inherently unreliable.
There's a good explanation in the post about what we mean by digital lidar, but the tl;dr version is we use silicon CMOS chips for lasers and detectors vs analog components like side emitting lasers and APDs used by legacy lidar providers.
Solid state is a bit of a buzzword, and most "solid state" lidar sensors actually have small, delicate moving parts inside. Solid state sensors are aimed primarily at consumer vehicles, which are still many years away.
The benefit is (at least in theory) easier integration into the vehicle fascia and (again, in theory) higher reliability vs legacy spinning lidar, which are quite unreliable in the real world.
Ouster's digital lidar sensors are much more reliable than the legacy analog spinning lidar sensors, and much more compact - and therefore easier to integrate.
Also, Ouster runs a sponsorship program that gives deeply discounted or free sensors to cool projects. If you have a cool idea, shoot me an email: derek.frome at ouster dot io
"But if Tesla ultimately succeeds, it won't be because it's easier to achieve full autonomy without lidar than with it. It will simply be because Tesla began large-scale data collection from cameras long before other carmakers.
In short, the fact that Tesla backed itself into a corner by promising customers full autonomy without lidar doesn't prove that other companies won't find lidar helpful to their own self-driving efforts."
A great summary. The only thing it misses is that lidar is getting more and more like a depth camera. SPADs can sense ambient light and create 2D images that are perfectly correlated to 3D images, making it possible to apply 2D algorithms to 3D data [1].
[1] https://www.ouster.io/blog-posts/2018/8/31/the-camera-is-in-...