141–150 of 298 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So it's like Tesla?
Like 20% of the features only for certain cars. Pretty bold claim ;P
Not sure I'm so keen on Python driving my car. I've looked through some of the code and I think for me to buy into the safety the quality of the code would need to be improved, well commented, and audited.
Haha I just had a horrifying throught about troubleshooting broken virtualenv installs and deadlocked dependencies, while on the side of the road with a car that refuses to start.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah - I don't think this would hold up, you can't really have it both ways. Either you're selling something and taking some responsibility for certain failures, or it's research that you don't want people to use on the road. This comes across as them selling a product they know could fail in dangerous ways, but they don't want to be responsible for any of it. Basically, "don't use this on the road" wink wink, but we…
> Yeah - I don't think this would hold up, you can't really have it both ways. I don't think they would have any legal problems due to this. They sell it but clearly label it as experimental, for research only, and urge buyers to comply with local regulation. And the law pretty much everywhere states that the driver is responsible for driving the car and for the outcomes of any modification brought to the car that wa…
This isn't true, FSD has always been a 'coming soon' feature you can prepay for distinct from autopilot. Autopilot has always been advanced lane assist. "Autopilot" in planes just holds the same flight pattern and doesn't really do anything sophisticated, autopilot in Tesla is similar.
Shady alert: I just clicked on one of the testimonials ("Jason S Co") and it seems apparent that it is an employee of Comma, all retweets of comma's main twitter account.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah - I don't think this would hold up, you can't really have it both ways. Either you're selling something and taking some responsibility for certain failures, or it's research that you don't want people to use on the road. This comes across as them selling a product they know could fail in dangerous ways, but they don't want to be responsible for any of it. Basically, "don't use this on the road" wink wink, but we…
> This comes across as them selling a product they know could fail in dangerous ways, but they don't want to be responsible for any of it. This is just a safety precaution. Why wouldn't they put this in there? It may not hold up in court but it can't hurt. I don't think this means they "know it could fail in dangerous ways". The safety model in comma.ai is actually quite brilliant. It can't perform any action faster…
If you sell someone something with a nudge-nudge, wink-wink, and they get killed using it, it absolutely hurts. You may be able to weasel out of being held accountable for it, in which case it won't hurt you, but the larger issue here is that this kind of misleading copy can lead to people making poor decisions.
You may have put it in the fine print that it's not a real product, but the whole point of nudge-nudge wink-wink is to strongly imply that it's a real product worth real money, and thus you are going out of your way to encourage people to try it and take chances with real lives.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>THIS IS ALPHA QUALITY SOFTWARE FOR RESEARCH PURPOSES ONLY. THIS IS NOT A PRODUCT. It is weird that one of the only things I see above the fold on the company's home page is a "Buy Now" button considering they don't actually sell "a product".
Yeah - I don't think this would hold up, you can't really have it both ways. Either you're selling something and taking some responsibility for certain failures, or it's research that you don't want people to use on the road. This comes across as them selling a product they know could fail in dangerous ways, but they don't want to be responsible for any of it. Basically, "don't use this on the road" wink wink, but we…
This is at least what I remember from a years old Wired article when the comma one was being developed.
Whether that will actually hold up in court is TBD, considering how closely coupled the software is to the company and hardware.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is still very early in its development stage so they do not want much liability.
Most software developers have mostly operated in largely unregulated domains, so there's a MIS understanding of how manufacturer responsibility works in industries like automotive. Saying "I AM NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR ANYTHING" in the automotive software space is the product liability equivalent of Michael Scott screaming "I DECLARE BANKRUPTCY" in The Office.
Would you drive to Tahoe in the snow with this?
https://comma.ai/faq Why even ask? Long trips means spending a lot of time boringly driving on the highway with clear weather. I do not care for help in the more difficult first 15 min or last 15 min. I care about having help during the many hours in between.
What else can you be doing that gets past the distraction detection?
Okay, anecdotes aside... What level of autonomy does this provide? Is it just basically lane assist?