Jump to content
The World News Media

Tesla Autopilot veterans launch company to accelerate self-driving development


Guest

Recommended Posts

  • Guest

After working on Tesla’s Autopilot team for 2.5 years, Andrew Kouri and Erik Reed decided to start their own self-driving, AI-based company rightfully named lvl5. Together with iRobot engineer George Tal, lvl5 aims to develop advanced vision software and HD maps for self-driving cars.



Founded in 2016, lvl5 was incubated at renown Silicon Valley incubator Y Combinator and later raised $2 million in seed funding from investor Paul Buchheit, who’s a partner at Y Combinator and creator of Gmail, and Max Altman’s 9Point Ventures.

lvl5-payver-self-driving-coverage.jpg

In just 3 months, lvl5 racked up almost 500,000 miles of US roadway coverage with Payver. (Photo: lvl5)

“Working with lvl5’s founders while they were at Y Combinator, it was clear they have unmatched expertise in computer vision, which is the secret sauce of their solution,” said Buchheit. “I have no doubt this is the team to make self-driving a reality in the near term.”

At the center of lvl5’s technology is their computer vision algorithms. Founder and CTO George Tall previously specialized in computer vision technology at iRobot. In addition to Tall’s experience at iRobot, Kouri and Reed’s experience at Tesla undoubtedly left them with unparalleled expertise in computer vision.



Instead of turning to expensive LiDAR technology, lvl5’s computer vision analyzes its environment for stoplights, signs, potholes, and other objects. The system can be accurate to 10cm, a notable measure considering it’s derived from simple cameras and smartphones. In comparison, LiDAR systems can cost over $80,000 but are accurate to 3cm.

3D-HD-Maps-LVL5.jpg Traffic-light-computer-vision-lvl5.jpg LVL5-Computer-Vision-Self-Driving.png LVL5-founders-Reed-Kouri-Tall.jpg

So how will lvl5 map roadways in the world using their computer vision technology? Smartphones. Well, for now at least. The company has released an app called Payver that allows anyone’s smartphone to collect data while driving and get paid between $.01-$.05 per mile, depending on a number of factors. Users of the app place their phone in a mount on their dashboard and let the app gather driving data.

The data is sent to lvl5’s central hub and processed by their computer vision technology. “Lvl5 is solving one of the biggest obstacles to widespread availability of self-driving technology,” said Max Altman, one of lvl5’s seed round investors and partner at 9Point Ventures. “Without accurate and efficient HD mapping, as well as the computer vision software that enables it, self-driving vehicles will take much longer to reach mass-market. This will delay everything from safer roads to efficient delivery services.”

GIF: lvl5

“We have to make self-driving available worldwide – not just in California,” Co-Founder and CEO Andrew Kouri said in a company statement. “Our approach, which combines computer vision software, crowdsourcing and widely available, affordable hardware, means our technology is accessible and will make self-driving a reality today, rather than five years from now.”

The company has already established pilot programs with major automakers and both Uber and Lyft. Companies will pay lvl5 an initial fee to use the maps, along with a monthly subscription to keep the maps continuously updated. “Through its OEM-agnostic approach, lvl5 will be able to collect significant amounts of mapping data from millions of cars in order to scale the technology for the benefit of drivers and pedestrians around the world,” the company’s press release states.

The post Tesla Autopilot veterans launch company to accelerate self-driving development appeared first on TESLARATI.com.

Via

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Views 346
  • Replies 0
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Popular Days

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...




  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Popular Contributors

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • … and donchew forget now … the GB now allows Sisters to come to meetings and go out in field service in slacks or Mumus.  Or slacks AND Mumus, if poundage appropriate. Did I ever mention I once dated a Sister that made Mumus out of parachutes? She was an Opera singer, and had a UN diplomatic passport. She was on “speed”, couldn’t blink, and typed 600 words a minute with 100% errors. Occasionally she would get lipstick in her eyebrows.  
    • In my perspective, when the Smithsonian Magazine covers a topic, I am inclined to trust their expertise. As for the shadows here, I see no benefit in entertaining irrational ideas from others. Let them hold onto their own beliefs. We shouldn't further enable their self-deception and misleading of the public.  
    • Hey Self! 🤣I came across this interesting conspiracy theory. There are scholars who firmly believe in the authenticity of those artifacts. I value having conversations with myself. The suggestion of a mentally ill person has led to the most obscure manifestation of a group of sorrowful individuals. 😁
    • I have considered all of their arguments. Some even apply VAT 4956 to their scenarios, which is acceptable. Anyone can use secular evidence if they genuinely seek understanding. Nonetheless, whether drawing from scripture or secular history, 607 is a plausible timeframe to believe in. People often misuse words like "destruction", "devastation", and "desolation" in an inconsistent manner, similar to words like "besiege", "destroy", and "sack". When these terms are misapplied to man-made events, they lose their true meaning. This is why with past historians, the have labeled it as follows: First Capture of Jerusalem 606 BC Second Capture of Jerusalem 598 BC Third Capture of Jerusalem 587 BC Without taking into account anything else.  Regarding the second account, if we solely rely on secular chronology, the ancient scribes made military adaptations to align with the events recorded in the Babylonian Chronicles. However, the question arises: Can we consider this adaptation as accurate?  Scribes sought to include military components in their stories rather than focusing solely on biblical aspects. Similarly, astronomers, who were also scholars, made their observations at the king's request to divine omens, rather than to understand the plight of the Jewish people. Regarding the third capture, we can only speculate because there are no definitive tablets like the Babylonian chronicles that state 598. It is possible that before the great tribulation, Satan will have influenced someone to forge more Babylonian chronicles in order to discredit the truth and present false evidence from the British Museum, claiming that the secular view was right all along. This could include documents supposedly translated after being found in 1935, while others were found in the 1800s. The Jewish antiquities authorities have acknowledged the discovery of forged items, while the British Museum has not made similar acknowledgments. It is evident that the British Museum has been compelled to confess to having looted or stolen artifacts which they are unwilling to return. Consequently, I find it difficult to place my trust in the hands of those who engage in such activities. One of the most notable instances of deception concerning Jewish antiquities was the widely known case of the ossuary belonging to James, the brother of Jesus. I was astonished by the judge's inexplicable justification for acquittal, as it was evident that his primary concern was preserving the reputation of the Jewish nation, rather than unearthing the truth behind the fraudulent artifact. The judge before even acknowledged it. "In his decision, the judge was careful to say his acquittal of Golan did not mean the artifacts were necessarily genuine, only that the prosecution had failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Golan had faked them." The burden of proof is essential. This individual not only forged the "Jehoash Tablet," but also cannot be retried for his deceit. Why are they so insistent on its authenticity? To support their narrative about the first temple of Jerusalem. Anything to appease the public, and deceive God. But then again, after the Exodus, when did they truly please God? So, when it comes to secular history, it's like a game of cat and mouse.  
  • Members

    • Pudgy

      Pudgy 2,411

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • mabbub

      mabbub 4

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
  • Recent Status Updates

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      65.4k
    • Total Posts
      159.4k
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      17,680
    • Most Online
      1,592

    Newest Member
    Techredirector
    Joined
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.