Micron CEO Sanjay Mehrotra made his prediction during the company's recent earnings call. He said that self-driving cars will represent a new segment that demands huge amounts...
  • GreenKnight23@lemmy.worldEnglish
    38 minutes

    it’s funny because I can run a coral TPU on 4gb that can identify obstacles in live streams.

    I’m a fucking genius for figuring it out. make me the CTO of Micron and I will share my knowledge.

  • humanspiral@lemmy.caEnglish
    6 hours

    This is not credible. A self promoting stock pump and dump PR. Vision AI models are smaller than text models. They do need fast/faster GPUs, but less memory. Very narrow purposed AI/Neural Network models need less memory because the memory is more about storing facts than logic/reasoning capability. LLM breakthroughs in benchmark score/GB are currently having more gains by smaller models than frontier largest models. 32gb is a reasonable ceiling for memory requirement. Robots can swap in task specific AI models as well.

  • melsaskca@lemmy.caEnglish
    9 hours

    What the hell does the President of France know about RAM!? /s

  • sleet01@lemmy.caEnglish
    11 hours

    Ah, yes, the ol’ “X needs 300 of whatever it is I sell” gambit.

  • IphtashuFitz@lemmy.worldEnglish
    10 hours

    Didn’t Musk promise like a decade ago that Tesla self driving would run fine on their “hardware v2” computer, then a few years later that it would require v3, and then v4 before he finally stopped making such promises?

    • Voroxpete@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      8 hours

      Micron make RAM. I don’t think we should give any more credence to their claims than we do to Elon’s. Their goal here is to pump their share price, nothing more.

  • Blackmist@feddit.ukEnglish
    11 hours

    Nah, it just needs a team of Indian guys to step in whenever the collision alarms go off.

    • Omgpwnies@lemmy.worldEnglish
      1 day

      With the current level of tech in a car, you’re already likely pushing 300GB in total. There’s dozens of high-compute ECUs doing all sorts of things, running some *nix OS and using anywhere from a couple GB to well… way more.

      to reach full driverless capability, those will need to become more powerful, the software will require more memory, and the number of compute modules will likely increase as well for sensors and other stuff.

      300GB IMO is probably a conservative estimate.

      • GamingChairModel@lemmy.worldEnglish
        10 hours

        With the current level of tech in a car, you’re already likely pushing 300GB in total.

        The actual article (and the call it is reporting on, with statements from the CEO) says that 16GB is the average in new cars today. No need to make stuff up.

      • YiddishMcSquidish@lemmy.todayEnglish
        24 hours

        I’m not trying to sound angry at you, but I’m told I come off that way. So please let me start this with an advanced apology.

        We have the esp32 in very common circulation. We have seen what is required to keep a thing fucking airborne, and it is so beyond what I thought was possible twenty years ago. And they did it with <1 gig.

        • Omgpwnies@lemmy.worldEnglish
          23 hours

          No worries, nothing grouchy sounding there :)

          My statement is sourced by me working in R&D in the automotive industry on these modules… an ESP32 does not come close to the amount of computing resources needed to move and process the absolute boat load of information required to make decisions for autonomous driving.

          Flying around doesn’t need the same level of object detection, path-finding, decision making and so on that a vehicle that is capable of killing anyone in or around it needs. And on top, it has to be able to do that at highway speeds, without ever making a mistake - because of the killing everyone in or around it part.

          Further, it needs to deal with all the random stuff all those people are doing around it all the time… again, without ever making a mistake.

          So it needs to be able to see something, identify if it’s something it needs to be concerned about, figure out if it might be doing something that needs to be addressed, make a plan, then execute it… in like a few milliseconds. with a virtually unlimited number of potential obstacles, while obeying traffic laws, and still get the occupant to their destination.

          Without killing anyone.

          And that’s just the ADAS subsystem.

          • YiddishMcSquidish@lemmy.todayEnglish
            22 hours

            Yeah, I guess I didn’t take into account that airborne is easier considering encountering randomly moving objects.

            But 300gigs is a bad number on at least 2 different levels.

  • BaraCoded@literature.cafeEnglish
    1 day

    Each will also need a portable nuclear reactor and a swimming pool filled with the blood of innocents and ice cubes made out of children’s tears, for cooling purposes.

    • SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.caEnglish
      11 hours

      People still think we’ll be driving them on Mars. Elon Musk had incredible penetration with idiots.

    • CaptPretentious@lemmy.worldEnglish
      1 day

      This is an idea that should be shelved for a good 20-30 years, honestly.

      We’d need global collaboration to come up with a universal standard applied to all cars (regardless of price). If it can’t be a standard, then it’s a bullshit idea. Competing standards and companies simply means abandoned tech everywhere and everything, thinking their tech is best, nothing works together, issues across the board, and high cost to customers.

      • Soup@lemmy.worldEnglish
        1 day

        We should just build walkable cities. It doesn’t even require any new knowledge, we can start right now and there are even many places in the US, the shittest of us all, where there’s honestly nothing really stopping us.

        Self-driving cars are dumb because they are a tonne of work to ultimately solve zero problems when we could do basically nothing special and improve everyone’s lives within our lifetimes.

        • VeryFrugal@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
          1 day

          Cities can be walkable and have self driving cars. We sure can have less cars, but it sure sounds better than letting everyone drive. Also, some people can’t walk & need assistance moving.

          • Soup@lemmy.worldEnglish
            12 hours

            Sure, but we’re acting like self-driving cars will save us and not like they’re a neat little extra thing. Yes, some people donneed assistance moving, but there are entire para-taxi services that could receive better funding. In Ottawa, for example, the public transit service has a whole program called “ParaTranspo” with soecialized buses and everything. People who have trouble moving, in our society, are very not going to be able to afford self-driving cars and even if they did many will not be able to get themselves into them without assistance anyway. Also, in well-built neighbourhoods, people with disabilities can get around on their own on scooters and such, even in the winter; I see this in my own neighbourhood all the time and they are so mich more free than if they were tied to a car.

            Self-driving cars aren’t much more than cheap propaganda that people slurp up so they can keep pretending that cars are a viable form of personal transport outside of edge cases. As someone with a sportscar who mostly just takes public transit and walks I can assure you, cars are largely stupid and we’re kinda dumb for wanting them.