Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Cancelled Comma One Would Have Embarrassed the Car Industry

thedrive.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 135 posts

Re: The Cancelled Comma One Would Have Embarrassed the Car Industry

#11

Post by ethanbond »

noonespecial wrote: post #2

There's 2 possible reasons. 1) It really is near vaporware just being shown off in perfect conditions to seem exceptional. 2) It actually does work that much better with only $1000 worth of hardware and responding would give away the secret sauce. I don't give much credit to the theory that they didn't see this coming and were caught flat-footed by the sudden requirements. Oh and: Final speculation: there’s a reason…

Or, you know, the gigantic field of possibilities between those two things: it works a little bit under some conditions.

Fortunately for us and unfortunately for Hotz's ego, regulators look down upon things that work a little bit under some conditions when they also happen to control two ton metal cages capable of traveling at 120mph.

> it's [the] NHTSA that remains behind the curve in evaluating the myriad different technologies

Uhhh... that was exactly what they were requesting to do with their letter.

Re: The Cancelled Comma One Would Have Embarrassed the Car Industry

#12

Post by semi-extrinsic »

kesselvon wrote: post #5

This is a bit of weak spin on the obvious news that they probably couldn't comply with the government requirements.

Yeah, this article is pretty shallow and has pretty significant levels of fanboy-ism. Like

"The little meaningful criticism of Tesla Autopilot (with its state-of-the-art “Autosteer") is rooted in what critics deem insufficient transition warnings"

... the fact that it killed someone notwithstanding.

TFA also seems convinced that there is a large difference between the autonomous capabilities of the Model S vs. other luxury cars, when it's pretty well documented that the main difference lies in more or less conservative safety choices and marketing.

Re: The Cancelled Comma One Would Have Embarrassed the Car Industry

#13

Post by LeanderK »

>Hotz's initial tweets suggested his move was in response to an inquiry from NHTSA, stating that he "would much rather spend life building amazing tech than dealing with regulators and lawyers,"

well, this is not some stupid web-app that can't harm anyone even if it tried (except from maybe overheating your smartphone). This can kill people, i can't seriously buy dangerous stuff from somebody that says something like this. What's next? Producing food without following proper hygiene regulations? Disrupting the medicine-industry by testing your headache-pills on your customers (those regulations are only slowing us down!)?

Re: The Cancelled Comma One Would Have Embarrassed the Car Industry

#14

Post by shadowshadow »

tptacek wrote: post #7
kesselvon wrote: post #5

This is a bit of weak spin on the obvious news that they probably couldn't comply with the government requirements.

They weren't given any government requirements, with the the possible exception of the FHMVSS rule that you can't remove the rear-view mirror of the car. The NHTSA Special Order asked only for documentation of extremely basic test plan stuff (road, speed, weather, and traffic limits for the device, along with user documentation).

The Special Order might be of the "we're looking for a justification to fine you and issue a recall" type, which it looks like they often are.

Re: The Cancelled Comma One Would Have Embarrassed the Car Industry

#16

Post by cameldrv »

empraptor wrote: post #6

I'm wary of self-driving systems based only on cameras. He should really wait until cheap LiDARs are available in a few years.

The comma only works on a few (maybe just one) Honda car that has a built-in front facing radar that they're able to tap into. With that, comma is using roughly the same sensor package as the V1 Tesla autopilot.

Re: The Cancelled Comma One Would Have Embarrassed the Car Industry

#17

Post by ubernostrum »

shadowshadow wrote: post #14
tptacek wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They weren't given any government requirements, with the the possible exception of the FHMVSS rule that you can't remove the rear-view mirror of the car. The NHTSA Special Order asked only for documentation of extremely basic test plan stuff (road, speed, weather, and traffic limits for the device, along with user documentation).

The Special Order might be of the "we're looking for a justification to fine you and issue a recall" type, which it looks like they often are.

Typically when you get to the point of getting one of those it's because you've been blatantly ignoring regulations or regulators up until now and they feel like they need to get your attention.

Re: The Cancelled Comma One Would Have Embarrassed the Car Industry

#18

Post by Animats »

We don't need another crap Level 2 system. Lane keeping plus auto braking just isn't enough. (Crap auto braking, as with Tesla, is even worse. Four collisions with big, obvious stationary vehicles so far.)

The NHTSA, Google, and Volvo have it right. Systems where the driver has to back up the automation will not work in practice.

Re: The Cancelled Comma One Would Have Embarrassed the Car Industry

#19

Post by donmatito »

LeanderK wrote: post #13

> Hotz's initial tweets suggested his move was in response to an inquiry from NHTSA, stating that he "would much rather spend life building amazing tech than dealing with regulators and lawyers," well, this is not some stupid web-app that can't harm anyone even if it tried (except from maybe overheating your smartphone). This can kill people, i can't seriously buy dangerous stuff from somebody that says something lik…

You would have won so much Irony Points if only you had written "Producing food without following proper hygiene regulations? Disrupting the medicine industry with revolutionary tests without sufficient scientific validation?"

Re: The Cancelled Comma One Would Have Embarrassed the Car Industry

#20

Post by jimjimjim »

noonespecial wrote: post #2

There's 2 possible reasons. 1) It really is near vaporware just being shown off in perfect conditions to seem exceptional. 2) It actually does work that much better with only $1000 worth of hardware and responding would give away the secret sauce. I don't give much credit to the theory that they didn't see this coming and were caught flat-footed by the sudden requirements. Oh and: Final speculation: there’s a reason…

bonus points for mention of c64

LOAD "",8,1 or even more old-school LOAD "",1,1

Post reply on HN