> In theory, a sufficiently capable AI should be able to drive a car at least as well as a human can using the same input: vision.
In theory, cars should be use mechanical legs instead of wheels for transportation, that's how animals do it. In theory, plane wings should flap around, that's the way birds do it. My point being: the way biology solved something may not always be the best way to do it with technology.
> ”In theory, cars should be use mechanical legs instead of wheels for transportation, that's how animals do it.”
Wheels and legs solve different problems. Wheels aren’t very useful without perfectly smooth surfaces to run them on. If roads were a natural phenomenon that had existed millions of years ago, then isn’t it plausible that some animals might have evolved wheels to move around faster and more efficiently?
GP was stating that "two cameras mounted 15cm apart on a swivel slightly left of the vehicle center of geometry" has proven to be a _sufficient_ solution, not necessarily the best solution.
In theory, cars should be use mechanical legs instead of wheels for transportation, that's how animals do it. In theory, plane wings should flap around, that's the way birds do it. My point being: the way biology solved something may not always be the best way to do it with technology.