>> How is this relevant to self driving cars in 2016 and the following decades?
My point is that basic lane following can be done quite trivially, but it's nowhere near something one should entrust with the safety of human beings. Your question implies that you think all modern systems being deployed involve some really sophisticated AI. You don't know that.
But you stated that anything using LIDAR was not capable of robust tracking. Perhaps you meant that anything using LIDAR was doing so because camera-based tracking is not very robust. But that's not the straightforward interpretation of your statement.
>> But that's not the straightforward interpretation of your statement.
Yes, that would be a communication problem of mine. It's something I'm working on ;-) But I would counter that LIDAR isn't going to fully make up for the problems of the camera based system with the result being a simple sounding statement like "if they're using LIDAR it's not good enough", or grossly oversimplified to "LIDAR sucks".
I will admit that LIDAR could conceivably enhance a really good vision system by offering better depth perception, but I don't believe that's why people are using it today.
My point is that basic lane following can be done quite trivially, but it's nowhere near something one should entrust with the safety of human beings. Your question implies that you think all modern systems being deployed involve some really sophisticated AI. You don't know that.