ShadowRam

joined 2 years ago
[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago

Ah, You are correct. Kbin and Lemmy still working out the kinks.

Here https://www.printables.com/model/307580-parametric-hinge

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago (2 children)

title is a link to printables

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago

I think they are just showing off the parametric nature of what could be done.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago

It would depend entirely on the printer and material used.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago (4 children)

It's a link directly to where they are published?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago

I'm confused,

It's a direct link to printables that hosts the files?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Now I want Satis-Space-factory

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

What?

What does Radar have anything to do with Lidar?

They are completely in different EM spectrums.

Also modern LIDAR is keyed in a way that LIDAR systems can't interfere with other LIDAR systems.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (9 children)

won’t add much to an existing array of visible spectrum cameras.

You do realize LIDAR is just a camera, but has an accurate distance per pixel right?

It absolutely adds everything.

But its surroundings are reliably captured by functional sensors

No it's not. That's the point. LIDAR is the functional sensor required.

You can not rely on stereoscopic camera's.
The resolution of distance is not there.
It's not there for humans.
It's not there for the simple reason of physics.

Unless you spread those camera's out to a width that's impractical, and even then it STILL wouldn't be as accurate as LIDAR.

You are more then welcome to try it yourself.
You can be even as stupid as Elon and dump money and rep into thinking that it's easier or cheaper without LIDAR.

It doesn't work, and it'll never work as good as a LIDAR system.
Stereoscopic Camera's will always be more expensive than LIDAR from a computational standpoint.

AI will do a hell of a lot better recognizing things via a LIDAR Camera than a Stereoscopic Camera.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (11 children)

challenges in self driving are not with data acquisition.

What?!?! Of course it is.

We can already run all this shit through a simulator and it works great, but that's because the computer knows the exact position, orientation, velocity of every object in a scene.

In the real world, the underlying problem is the computer doesn't know what's around it, and what those things around doing or going to do.

It's 100% a data acquisition problem.

Source? I do autonomous vehicle control for a living. In environments much more complicated than a paved road with accepted set rules.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 years ago

You need to dial up the linear advance just a hair to fix the bulging corners.

And you do look like your over-extruding by a hair as well.

Print a solid 20mm cube, 1 perimeter, 0% infill, 0 top layers.

It will print out a cube you can measure the wall thickness with a dial caliper.

The thickness should exactly match your extrusion width setting. If it does not, adjust your extrusion multiplier be how much your measurement is out.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago (3 children)
view more: ‹ prev next ›