Submind YouTube summaries
Thumbnail for Sebastian Thrun: Autopilot Makes Me a Safer Driver | AI Podcast Clips

Sebastian Thrun: Autopilot Makes Me a Safer Driver | AI Podcast Clips

Watch on YouTube

Video summary

In this discussion, Sebastian Thrun addresses the fundamental dilemma facing autonomous vehicle innovators: balancing public safety with the drive to innovate. He contrasts two distinct leadership approaches within the industry, noting that while Tesla under Elon Musk often displays an aggressive stance toward innovation, Waymo adopts a more cautious, safety-focused methodology. Thrun argues that both strategies are valid and necessary for progress in this sector, drawing parallels to the aerospace industry which has successfully managed similar risks over its century-long history. He emphasizes that while absolute zero risk is impossible—just as with nuclear energy or weapons—the goal is to balance these competing interests through rigorous procedures and methodological practices that have proven effective in creating a safer world than ever before. Thrun expresses strong personal support for Tesla's incremental approach, stating he uses Autopilot daily because it significantly enhances safety when drivers are tired. He highlights the technological shift from geometric reasoning to deep learning as a major catalyst for progress in self-driving cars. When Waymo and Google X initially relied on precise 3D mapping and geometric rules, Thrun observed that these methods were often brittle; they struggled with edge cases like curved lane markings or varying sunlight conditions because engineers had to write complex code for every scenario. In contrast, the rise of deep learning allows systems to learn from vast amounts of data in a human-like manner, recognizing patterns intuitively rather than relying on rigid pre-programmed rules. To demonstrate the power of this machine learning approach, Thrun describes his course at Udacity, which has educated over 20,000 students and trained engineers for nearly every self-driving car team globally. The curriculum focuses on tasks like lane finding using only camera images, a challenge that traditionally required extensive programming but can now be solved by labeling hours of driving data in just 24 hours. Students with no prior coding experience can build perfect lane finders within this timeframe, showcasing how machine learning dwarfs the capabilities seen even ten years ago. This capability allows vehicles to adapt and improve continuously without needing exhaustive manual rule-writing for every possible road condition or visual anomaly. Addressing Elon Musk's provocative claim that Autopilot is merely a "crutch," Thrun defends the sufficiency of camera-based perception systems by comparing them to human vision, noting that humans drive using only their eyes rather than other senses like smell or touch. He further praises the decentralized nature of Western innovation, likening it to an anthill where many independent entities try different hypotheses simultaneously without a central government dictating direction. In this competitive ecosystem, if one approach fails, others can succeed and claim victory, driving overall advancement more effectively than a centralized model that might waste time pursuing incorrect paths. Ultimately, Thrun believes that the diversity of approaches in companies like Tesla and Waymo ensures that society benefits from multiple successful innovations rather than relying on a single mandated solution.
Read the full video transcript
you know the interesting you mentioned gutsy let me let me ask some maybe unanswerable question may be edgy questions but in terms of how much risk is required some guts in terms of leadership style it would be good to contrast approaches and I don't think anyone knows what's right but if we compare Tesla and way Moe for example Elon Musk and the way Moe team the there's slight differences in approach so on the Elon side there's more I don't know what the right word to use but aggression in terms of innovation and on weibo side there's more sort of cautious safety focused approach to the problem what do you think it takes what leadership at which moment is right which approach is right look I'm I don't sit in either of those teams so I'm unable to even verify like so what it says correct right in the end of the day every innovator in in that space will face a fundamental dilemma and I would say you could put aerospace Titans into the same bucket yes which is you have to balance public safety with your drive to innovate and this country in particular in States has a hundred plus year history of doing this very successfully yet travel is what a hundred times are safe per mile then ground travel and then cars and there's a reason for it because people have found ways to be very methodological about insuring public safety while still being able to make progress on important aspects for example like yell and noise and and fuel consumption so I think that those practices are pruned and they actually work we live in a world safer than ever before and yes they will always be the provision that something was wrong there's always the possibility that someone makes a mistake or there's an unexpected failure we can never guarantee to 100% absolute safety other than just not doing it but I think I'm very proud of his of the end states I mean we've we've dealt with much more dangerous technology like nuclear energy and and kept that safe - we have nuclear weapons and we keep those safe so so we have methods and procedures that really balance these two things very very successfully you've mentioned a lot of great autonomous vehicle companies that are taking sort of the love of four-level files a jump in full autonomy or the safety driver and take that kind of approach and also through simulation and so on there's also the approach that Tesla autopilot is doing which is kind of incrementally taking a level-two vehicle and using machine learning and learning from the driving of human beings and trying to creep up trying to incremental improve the system until it's able to achieve level four autonomy so perfect autonomy in certain kind of geographical regions what are your thoughts on these contrasting approaches when suppose of all I I'm a very proud Tesla and I literally used the autopilot every day and it literally has kept me safe is a beautiful technology specifically for highway driving when I'm slightly tired because then it turns me into a much safer driver and that I'm a hundred percent confident it's the case in terms of the right approach I think the the biggest change I've seen since I went away one team is is this thing called deep learning deep learning was was not a hot topic when I when I started way more or Google self-driving cars it was there in fact we saw the Google brain at the same time in Google X so I invested in deep learning but people didn't talk about it wasn't a hot topic and nowadays there's a shift of emphasis from a more geometric perspective where you use geometric sensors they give you a full 3d view when you do a geometric reasoning about over this box over here might be a car towards a more human-like oh let's just learn about it this looks like the thing I've seen ten thousand times before so maybe it's the same thing machine learning perspective and that has really put I think all these approaches on steroids at Udacity we teach a course in self-driving cars we can infect I think which we've if credits over 20,000 or so people on self-efficacy kills so every every self-driving car team in the world now use our engineers and in this course the very first homework assignment is to do Lane finding on images and lane finding images for layman what this means is you you put a camera into your car oh you're open your eyes and you would know where the lane is right so so you can stay inside the lane with your car humans can do this super easily you just look and you know where the line is just intuitively for machines for long term of a super heart because people would write these kind of crazy rules if there's like vineland Marcus and he's for fight really means this is not quite wide enough so let's all it's not right or maybe the sun is shining so when the Sun shines and this is right and this is a straight line I missed quite a straight line because the vote is curved and and do we know that there's a six feet between lane markings or not or twelve feet whatever it is and now the voted students are doing they would take machine learning so instead of like writing these crazy rules for the lane marker is their say let's take an hour driving and label it and tell the vehicle this is actually the lane by hand and then these are examples and have the machine find its own rules but for lane markings are and within 24 hours now every student there's never done any programming for in this space can write a perfect Lane finder as good as the best commercial line find us and that's completely amazing to me we've seen progress using machine learning that completely Dwarfs anything that I saw 10 years ago what are your thoughts on Elon Musk's statement provocative statement perhaps that light air is a crutch so this geometric way of thinking about the world may be holding us back if what we should instead be doing in this robotics but in this particular space of autonomous vehicles is using camera as a primary sensor and using computer vision and machine learning is the primary way to look up to Commons I think first of all we all know that people can drive cars without light us in their heads because we only have eyes and we mostly just use eyes for driving maybe we use some other perception about our bodies accelerations occasionally our years certainly not our noses so that the existence prove is there that eyes must be sufficient in fact we could even drive a car if someone put a camera out and then give us the camera image with known agency we would be able to drive a car and that way it the same way so a camera is also sufficient secondly I really love the idea that in in the Western world we have many many different people trying different hypotheses it's almost like an anthill like if a noun little tries to forage for food right you can sit there as two ands and agree what the perfect path is and then every single ant marches for the most like the location of food is or you can even just spread out and I promise you the spread out solution will be better because if the discussing philosophical intellectual ends get it wrong and they're all moving the wrong direction they're gonna waste a day and then you're gonna discuss again for another week whereas if all these ants go in of any directions someone's gonna succeed and you're gonna come back and and claim victory and get the Nobel Prize about everything and equivalent is and then they will march in the same direction and that's great about society that's great about the Western society if you're not plant-based you're not central base we don't have a Soviet Union style central government that tells us where to forge we just Forge we start in C Corp you get investor money and go out and try it out and who knows is gonna win you