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

121–130 of 298 posts

Re: Autopilot on Cars for $999

#121

Post by Closi »

23iofj wrote: post #78
cbracketdash wrote: post #26

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.

Well, their legal technique is a little more nuanced.

They are selling a product which is a legal and legitimate driver assistance tool which does not have autopilot.

You, as a user, can then modify the device by flashing unregulated code onto it to give it autopilot code, which is not advised by comma.ai *wink wink*

Re: Autopilot on Cars for $999

#122

Post by coddle-hark »

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…

The latest commit in the repo [0] right now is "should work" (34ff295). Filtering by "bug" in the issue tracker gives:

Comma two freeze and reboot while engaged. I recently had an incident on the interstate where my comma two froze completely (while engaged) and rebooted. The video froze, Comma's steering torque turned off, then after about five seconds in this state, the device rebooted.

Zygote restarting while OP active. So for the past couple months, after a couple days of uptime, the comma two offroad UI will glitch out. The buttons respond with highlighting upon touch, but everything else stops working. ... This time, I left the comma two to bask in its glitched state and this ended up happening; the comma two had the spinning logo, while ALSO still driving my car. In the video below, I nudge the wheel to cause on purpose ping pong to prove it was still steering.

Spontaneous disengagement/reboot. Cruising on expressway and OP spontaneously disengaged and the comma2 rebooted

Hard braking while following the lead car. Was following the lead car on a highway traffic jam, that car was going without lights so might be a reason. Braking was really hard when he stopped, almost hit him ) I had a feeling that C2 don't see it at all.

What's more worrying is that Comma's response is often either a) declare it a hardware failure or b) basically a WONTFIX:

Comma support's response is to return/exchange the unit due to presumed hardware failure. It would be nice to know what exactly happened but I get you can't thoroughly investigate every anomaly. Folks at @commma feel free to close this issue.

@Torq_boi said that it is not a model bug, but old known problem with no time to brake as lead car accelerated and braked fast. (So could INDI tuning fix that problem?)

Closing this issue since it probably was hardware failure.

If it happens a lot it's usually a hardware failure. But try running openpilot release instead of dragonpilot before drawing any conclusions.

[0] https://github.com/commaai/openpilot

Edit: Formatting.

Re: Autopilot on Cars for $999

#123

Post by crazypython »

jeremycarter wrote: post #62

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.

> Not sure I'm so keen on Python driving my car.

It uses CPython, which is reference counted, letting them ensure predictable timing/hard real-time system.

Re: Autopilot on Cars for $999

#124

Post by stefan_ »

stjo wrote: post #100
akira2501 wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> sensationalized stories about self-driving deaths. I disagree that they're sensationalized. Self-driving systems are designed to improve user safety, but when they end up making mistakes that human drivers _wouldn't_ make then it's appropriate to thoroughly investigate these systems. > is because they were self-driving. Well, precisely. We tolerate driving accidents because we know that the mobility that cars provi…

> human drivers _wouldn't_ make But human drivers make a lot of mistakes that computer drivers _wouldn't_. If it is safER than humans - it is better. No need to be perfect.

Citation needed. So far, they have mostly driven into static obstacles on highways, the only environment where the vendors even allow to use their "self-driving" system because of the overwhelmingly favorable conditions.

Re: Autopilot on Cars for $999

#126

Post by Gys »

qbasic_forever wrote: post #56
Gys wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

It's still a perfectly valid question, how will this system work in the snow? Even flat featureless highways get covered in snow and ice.

You clearly missed my ref to their faq: https://comma.ai/faq

Re: Autopilot on Cars for $999

#127

Post by handedness »

madamelic wrote: post #33
tdeck wrote: post #4

Anyone know if this has killed someone yet?

Human life is sacred. Absolutely. but. If we are concerned with cars killing people, we should get rid of cars. This FUD around self-driving == killing people will, in the long-term, cause more deaths than the handful of sensationalized stories about self-driving deaths. The only reason those car crashes get national attention is because they were self-driving. In every other way they are boring. Bicyclists hit by ca…

For some, it feels different because of the potential scale. Watching Falcon Heavy boosters return in perfect unison is spooky in a way watching one Falcon 9 return isn't.

Put another way, consider all the IT professionals who advise their relatives to wait a month or two before performing a major OS update. When self-driving cars are the majority of vehicles on the road, and we get our first buggy software update that results in a string of crashes, how likely will people be to update if they're even given a choice at all?

Comparing human to self-driving per-mile fatality statistics like that's the primary measure for people, while ignoring the fact that we're looking at the first mainstream manifestations of a coming type of threat modeling that the species has never before had to even consider, seems a little narrow a way to view the issue.

For insurance companies and actuaries looking to define collectivized risk, spreadsheets are the right way to consider this kind of thing. For individuals who've driven their whole lives without an accident, deciding to let emerging tech take over for you when taking the kids to visit grandma is going to be a significant transition in human history.

Consider that there are very elderly people alive today who will still never fly on an airplane because of their early safety records.

Re: Autopilot on Cars for $999

#128

Post by cortesoft »

Closi wrote: post #116
gonehome wrote: post #99

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…

It’s because the standard product doesn’t have autopilot, they sell a driver assistance tool. The tool they sell does not have autopilot. The device is open, and you can flash with their open source code from GitHub to give you hacky autopilot. This is how they get around the legal issue. It’s like a “we sell you a legal product. We advise you don’t flash this code on it which we are hosting on GitHub wink wink ”

Curious to see if a court would buy that argument.

Re: Autopilot on Cars for $999

#129

Post by madamelic »

sosodev wrote: post #81
qbasic_forever wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

That actually sounds like a software developer horror story. Like goosebumps for devs.

The real Goosebumps for devs is cars willing to take driving inputs over their built-in networks from outside the car.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MK0SrxBC1xs

Re: Autopilot on Cars for $999

#130

Post by brianwawok »

mrtksn wrote: post #104
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…

So it's like Tesla?

Like 20% of the features only for certain cars. Pretty bold claim ;P
Post reply on HN