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

Autopilot on Cars for $999

comma.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 298 posts

Re: Autopilot on Cars for $999

#221

Post by mike_d »

delightful wrote: post #18

Is it correct Comma.AI sees this as the following statement below appears to say, or am I missing something? If so, why would anyone be using this product outside of a test environment that’s fully controlled? — “Any user of this software shall indemnify and hold harmless comma.ai, Inc. and its directors, officers, employees, agents, stockholders, affiliates, subcontractors and customers from and against all allegati…

> why would anyone be using this product outside of a test environment that’s fully controlled?

Comma.ai is WallStreetBets for self-driving cars.

Re: Autopilot on Cars for $999

#222

Post by mike_d »

sjburt wrote: post #214
mmglr wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If anything it sounds to me as if the comma provided a false sense of security. Drawing from experience driving 9 hours is already grueling. At hour 10, 11 or 12 would you have been able to take control during a failure of the system?

I have one. It's fairly limited so you are forced to pay attention all of the time and think about whether you need to take over. You just aren't doing the menial tasks of keeping the car centered in the lane or keeping a safe following distance. If the system does something you don't like you just grab the wheel or touch the gas/brakes (the control messages it sends are lower priority for the car than driver inputs)…

> you are forced to pay attention all of the time and think about whether you need to take over

The same people who cram an orange in to their Tesla's steering wheel will just download a sketchy repack of the open source software that disables the attention checks.

Re: Autopilot on Cars for $999

#223

Post by beaconstudios »

mike_d wrote: post #222
sjburt wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have one. It's fairly limited so you are forced to pay attention all of the time and think about whether you need to take over. You just aren't doing the menial tasks of keeping the car centered in the lane or keeping a safe following distance. If the system does something you don't like you just grab the wheel or touch the gas/brakes (the control messages it sends are lower priority for the car than driver inputs)…

> you are forced to pay attention all of the time and think about whether you need to take over The same people who cram an orange in to their Tesla's steering wheel will just download a sketchy repack of the open source software that disables the attention checks.

if you override the safety precautions, aren't you inherently taking your safety and the safety of your passengers into your own hands? I don't think you can hold that against any manufacturer.

Re: Autopilot on Cars for $999

#224

Post by chris11 »

sfblah wrote: post #201
leesec wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A "half step up" doesn't really do it justice. Most current LKA + Adaptive Cruise Control on cars will only keep you in the lane for a few seconds before requiring human engagement. The Comma Openpilot has already driven intervention free for hours.

Is there a video of that I can watch?

There's a lot of drives on youtube available. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=22y-LaiDkrM I love it for freeway driving. I don't really use it for city driving though. If you would find cruise control annoying on some road open pilot probably wouldn't help you.

Re: Autopilot on Cars for $999

#225

Post by meibo »

treelovinhippie wrote: post #180
Justsignedup wrote: post #23

Okay, anecdotes aside... What level of autonomy does this provide? Is it just basically lane assist?

Level 2. But it's rapidly evolving opensource software.

There's only so much you can do with a single, front facing camera. For example, automatic lane changes are impossible with this.

Additionally to the fact that I kinda want to avoid rapidly evolving open source software that runs on Android 8 steering my 140km/h death machine.

Re: Autopilot on Cars for $999

#226

Post by naebother »

kstrauser wrote: post #92
naebother wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's interesting. I'm the complete opposite. Highway driving is the least taxing -- I can do it subconsciously. It's the more difficult first/last 15 mins of stop and go that I want automated. I could care less about the highway in clear weather. I might even enjoy that bit occasionally.

I generally agree, but heading north on I-5 from LA to SF is bumper to bumper traffic constantly swinging between 50 MPH and 75 MPH. Normal cruise control is worthless here because you're never going the same speed long enough to be a net benefit. I would absolutely love adaptive cruise control plus semi-automatic steering in that one scenario. Stick me out in the middle of nowhere and I'm perfectly content driving f…

This is purely anecdotal, but I've found driving like a "grandma" makes the drive completely stress free even in bumper to bumper traffic on the freeway. Just pick the center lane and set the cruise control to just around the average speed of that lane. Sure, I might arrive 5 mins latter and annoy some impatient people, but it does the trick most days. Hopefully more people start doing this and we can reduce phantom traffic jams.

Re: Autopilot on Cars for $999

#227

Post by chris11 »

sabujp wrote: post #208

so let me get this straight, this is a single camera, single point of failure device that you mount under your rear view mirror and trust your life with? ok...

It requires a car with adapative cruise control and also uses data from the cars stock radar.

Re: Autopilot on Cars for $999

#229

Post by yannoninator »

ncallaway wrote: post #205
yannoninator wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Anyone know if this has killed someone yet? > ...Tesla and Uber have killed people but Comma hasn't... So no then. This is the correct answer, thank you.

This seems to deliberately ignore the pretty reasonable argument being made. If you can't address the argument the other person makes, it seems like the more reasonable thing to do is acknowledge that fact, rather than just ignore their point entirely.

Everything else that person said was irrelevant to this thread.

I'm looking for straight answers, not going around points, but getting straight to them.

> ...it seems like the more reasonable thing to do is acknowledge that fact, rather than just ignore their point entirely.

The fact that Tesla and Uber has more deaths than Comma? That I can agree with.

Re: Autopilot on Cars for $999

#230

Post by yannoninator »

slg wrote: post #112
yannoninator wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Anyone know if this has killed someone yet? > ...Tesla and Uber have killed people but Comma hasn't... So no then. This is the correct answer, thank you.

I just started an aerospace company making planes in my garage. My company has killed less people than either Boeing or Airbus. Does that mean I make safer planes than either of those two companies? A sentence can be technically correct while also being actively misleading.

> A sentence can be technically correct while also being actively misleading.

So we can say no deaths by comma, until proven otherwise.

Definitely not misleading.

Post reply on HN