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

141–150 of 255 posts

Re: Comma Two Devkit

#141

Post by heavyset_go »

Fricken wrote: post #32
rvz wrote: post #11

If there is anything about Comma.ai that I have seen beyond the hype of self-driving cars, I see this as substance, unlike the rest of them AI self-driving cars (Except Tesla). The idea to turn your existing car into self-driving rather than spending $$$ on a new one makes sense for those saving money. Comma.ai is for cars what Linux is for PCs, meaning that you use open-source software and a hardware kit to make you…

Comma and Tesla do driver assist, neither are self-driving.

From Tesla's own promotional video[1]:

> The person in the driver’s seat is only there for legal reasons. He is not doing anything. The car is driving itself.

[1] https://www.tesla.com/videos/autopilot-self-driving-hardware...

Re: Comma Two Devkit

#143

Post by bathtub365 »

DesolationJones wrote: post #123
gautamcgoel wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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"

It's also definitely not for everyone who figures out what it is. They should be up front about what it does and the legality around using a device in that capacity.

Re: Comma Two Devkit

#144

Post by bathtub365 »

eloff wrote: post #122
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.

It seems irresponsible for an engineering company to avoid regulators.

Re: Comma Two Devkit

#145

Post by aeyes »

aza05001 wrote: post #25
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…

Seriously. The website does a pretty crappy job at explaining what the product actually is.

It isn't an actual consumer product, it is a development kit.

Re: Comma Two Devkit

#146

Post by bathtub365 »

derefr wrote: post #119
etaioinshrdlu wrote: post #16

Comma.ai represents a strange attitude towards life in which you try to turn hard, serious problems (like self-driving), into trivial problems (write some Python and run it on Android phones and plug it into your car!) and try get away with it. It only has a chance of working if you are cool enough in SV such as geohot. I interviewed there once and it was extremely off-putting how clear their demand for fast progress…

> If you ran comma.ai in your car and had a serious crash, you could possibly be found criminally negligent. I don't know that it's much different than using cruise-control and then having a serious crash. If there's criminal negligence when using cruise control, it's because you weren't aware-enough to shut it off when the conditions cruise-control is built for no longer applied; the mere fact of using cruise-contro…

What if the crash is caused by the device failing? In the case of your car's built in systems, they've been approved by regulators and you probably wouldn't be held liable. If it was an unregulated device that you installed into your own car that caused the crash, I bet the legal circumstances would be different.

Re: Comma Two Devkit

#147

Post by DesolationJones »

heavyset_go wrote: post #141
Fricken wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Comma and Tesla do driver assist, neither are self-driving.

From Tesla's own promotional video[1]: > The person in the driver’s seat is only there for legal reasons. He is not doing anything. The car is driving itself. [1] https://www.tesla.com/videos/autopilot-self-driving-hardware...

That's not available to the public.

Re: Comma Two Devkit

#148

Post by m0zg »

chews wrote: post #97
ehaisnfn wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah he's a bit of a piece of shit

Now now, this human is responsible for some serious computational exploits. However abrasive he isn’t Palmer Lucky.... now that’s a piece of work.

What's so "abrasive" about non-lethal border security?

Re: Comma Two Devkit

#149

Post by eloff »

bathtub365 wrote: post #144
eloff wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

It seems irresponsible for an engineering company to avoid regulators.

On one hand yes, on the other the company wouldn't exist. Regulators are important, but they also serve incumbent interests as they raise the barrier to entry for newcomers. It's a way to pull the ladder up behind you once you've achieved success. I don't know how we can better balance those seemingly conflicting aspects.

Re: Comma Two Devkit

#150

Post by missosoup »

bathtub365 wrote: post #144
eloff wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

It seems irresponsible for an engineering company to avoid regulators.

Not necessarily.

Regulatory capture is a thing. Regulators, at least in part, exist to maintain a barrier to entry for any new players trying to enter a field dominated by large players.

Several major tech companies only exist because they broke rules in their early days. And most people agree the outcome was a net benefit to society.

Post reply on HN