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

Comma Two Devkit

comma.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 255 posts

Re: Comma Two Devkit

#121

Post by Barrin92 »

DesolationJones wrote: post #116
Barrin92 wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Their tech is within the top two right now, how can anyone make that statement in the same breath as declaring that dodging regulators is fine? Who the hell evaluates the quality of the product if not regulators? Are we supposed to take George Hotz's or the companies word for it?

It's open sourced. Everyone is able to evaluate quality.

The people who are consumers of these products are not necessarily software engineers, so no everyone cannot evaluate the quality of these products. Secondly, the models are not open source, and even if they were looking at them tells them nothing about the quality of the product.

The only way to actually access the quality of these products is through independent testing by a body that is qualified and reputable enough to do so. Which in my opinion should happen before even a single one of these devices is actually allowed to participate in regular traffic.

Re: Comma Two Devkit

#122

Post by eloff »

iMuzz wrote: post #19

Quick bit of feedback for any Comma employees lurking: It took me a very long time to realize that this was a self-driving solution for existing vehicles. The hero just says "Driven over 6 million miles" and then a "Buy Now". When I scrolled down and looked at the product and read: > We’ve added an infrared camera to provide 24/7 driver monitoring, an integrated panda, a custom cooling solution, and an OBD-C port wit…

I think this is deliberate. It's also why you have to download and install the self driving software separately. AFAIK regulators stepped in and killed comma as a self driving solution, so this is their way of still going forward and trying to maintain plausible deniability. It might not pass muster in a court of law, I don't know, but it should probably keep the regulators off their back.

Re: Comma Two Devkit

#123

Post by DesolationJones »

gautamcgoel wrote: post #89
iMuzz wrote: post #19

Quick bit of feedback for any Comma employees lurking: It took me a very long time to realize that this was a self-driving solution for existing vehicles. The hero just says "Driven over 6 million miles" and then a "Buy Now". When I scrolled down and looked at the product and read: > We’ve added an infrared camera to provide 24/7 driver monitoring, an integrated panda, a custom cooling solution, and an OBD-C port wit…

Came here to make this comment! Seems like a cool product - but most visitors to the webpage will never learn what the product does, since it is buried in the page.

It's vagueish on purpose. They only want smart people using. It's still a dev kit. Not consumer product yet.

From comma's discord:

"if people can’t figure out what it is, it isn’t for them"

Re: Comma Two Devkit

#124

Post by chris11 »

bransonf wrote: post #31

Can anyone here comment on actually using a Comma product? I don’t even drive a car, but I don’t see why anyone would buy something like this yet. My point being that it’s not full self driving, and frankly its safety is entirely questionable. Self driving is supposed to make driving less stressful, but does having a system like this actually do that? Or does it make you more stressed because you have to be conscious…

I have an eon and love it for highway driving. It makes long trips relaxing. It's basically the combination of really good adaptive cruise control and active lane keep assist. And I feel it's safe within those limitations.

Open Pilot keeps me in my lane on the highway following a safe distance behind other cars. I have a Toyota with TSS 2.0, so the steering is powerful enough on curves. My only complaint about steering is that on tight turns like highway onramps it will slow down a little too much.

While I was driving my last car I got in an accident when I was driving down the highway at highway speeds and everyone in my lane came to a complete stop. I'm convinced I would not have gotten in that accident if I was driving my current car with open pilot active.

Re: Comma Two Devkit

#126

Post by aetherspawn »

Well, hey, for $1000 I’d almost buy this for the “Tesla experience” but alas it doesn’t support my car (2014 Lexus).

Well done for finding the right price point. You have a solid business case here.

Not commenting on safety like everyone else because it seems from the ISO 26262 (not easy to comply) and architecture that you’ve put some thought into this. Will be good to see it improve further. I understand that you need to sell units to do so, so I do not hold that against you.

Re: Comma Two Devkit

#127

Post by [deleted] »

DesolationJones wrote: post #116
Barrin92 wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Their tech is within the top two right now, how can anyone make that statement in the same breath as declaring that dodging regulators is fine? Who the hell evaluates the quality of the product if not regulators? Are we supposed to take George Hotz's or the companies word for it?

It's open sourced. Everyone is able to evaluate quality.

[deleted]

Re: Comma Two Devkit

#128

Post by DesolationJones »

Barrin92 wrote: post #121
DesolationJones wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's open sourced. Everyone is able to evaluate quality.

The people who are consumers of these products are not necessarily software engineers, so no everyone cannot evaluate the quality of these products. Secondly, the models are not open source, and even if they were looking at them tells them nothing about the quality of the product. The only way to actually access the quality of these products is through independent testing by a body that is qualified and reputable eno…

It was made fully opened sourced last year.

https://medium.com/@chengyao.shen/decoding-comma-ai-openpilo...

Re: Comma Two Devkit

#129

Post by parsimo2010 »

alpb wrote: post #63
iMuzz wrote: post #19

Quick bit of feedback for any Comma employees lurking: It took me a very long time to realize that this was a self-driving solution for existing vehicles. The hero just says "Driven over 6 million miles" and then a "Buy Now". When I scrolled down and looked at the product and read: > We’ve added an infrared camera to provide 24/7 driver monitoring, an integrated panda, a custom cooling solution, and an OBD-C port wit…

Count me in as well. I came here to make that comment. I've had to scan the entire website and still cannot find a reference to a simple term like "self-driving" anywhere in the website. It seemed like a dashcam that warns the driver.

While the website doesn't directly state it, the entire purpose of the Comma hardware is to run the OpenPilot self-driving software (or "driver assistance" software, whatever you want to call it). Sure, you can run other software with it, but it works really well with the software that has already been written for it and is available on the same website.

The FAQ clears some of this up (https://comma.ai/faq), but I agree with the idea that it is purposefully obtuse to keep regulators off their back.

Re: Comma Two Devkit

#130

Post by cranky_coder »

pbreit wrote: post #117
Barrin92 wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Their tech is within the top two right now, how can anyone make that statement in the same breath as declaring that dodging regulators is fine? Who the hell evaluates the quality of the product if not regulators? Are we supposed to take George Hotz's or the companies word for it?

The quality of a product is pretty much always determined by the marketplace, not regulators.

I feel like the Boeing 737 MAX situation is a clear demonstration that this isn’t really the case, especially in the realm of safety regulations.
Post reply on HN