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

We Tested Comma AI's OpenPilot

thedrive.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 163 posts

Re: We Tested Comma AI's OpenPilot

#131

Post by netsharc »

bambax wrote: post #26
izacus wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why exactly would be concerning? You need to physically plug cables in the car you yourself own. If anything, every access to hardware you own SHOULD be this easy.

Well, not exactly. Once you have plugged this device into your can, it can be hacked. It's just a phone after all, and it has normal wireless connection options available.

It seems the system only works when the driver activates the cruise control, which hopefully Honda has programmed correctly: i.e. if cruise control is deactivated, steering inputs from the CAN-bus will be ignored.

So the driver can still regain control from a hacked device by deactivating cruise control, which s/he can do by moving the steering wheel or pressing one of the pedals.

Re: We Tested Comma AI's OpenPilot

#132

Post by bipson »

ska wrote: post #128
bipson wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no such thing as high quality chip tuning , unless you are replicating 100% what the manufacturer just disabled for your MCU (e.g. unlocking some kW your motor is in principle capable of outputting). But then again, e.g. BMW uses different, more reliable mechanic parts (camshaft, head, etc.) on motors that have these kWs unlocked, so you are still risking ruining your motor in the long run. Chip tuning alway…

I think you are missing the point; perhaps there are bunch of kids just fiddling with their ECU on an otherwise stock car where you live. In my experience though, tuning is mostly done in conjunction with changing other parts (headers, ports, cams, add a turbo, fuel kit etc.) so the manufacturers long consideration of the best balance for the stock engine is no longer relevant. You have to retune to get proper perfor…

Let me try to explain:

Where I live, cars need certification/a license to be operated. The manufacturer does that for you, so you can obtain the required document quite easily for your car.

Aftermarket parts are regulated - you can't install what you want, it needs to be certified for your specific make and model (and motor variant, etc.) - otherwise your car is not legal anymore.

This applies to chip tuning as well. Since you're modifying a certified part, it looses the certification - obviously.

What new cars are allowed to emit, is strictly regulated.

Further, since this very month, we have a carbon-based tax on new cars (based upon the aforementioned certification from the manufacturer). Thus if the emissions of car are changed, you're basically evading taxes as well.

Where I live, chip tuning is almost only done to get a few HP on the cheap. And it is unfortunately very popular and nobody really cares.

Edit: You can seek in individual certification for some modifications, added to your documentation, but a tampered with ECU is not one of them I think.

Re: We Tested Comma AI's OpenPilot

#135

Post by giobox »

yardie wrote: post #34
ezconnect wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

CAN bus is the standard physical interface. What is not standard is the message being passed, so each car will have it's own message for car information. What surprised me about OpenPilot is how some of the electric steering system can be tricked into turning using false sensor data. It's actually amazing that almost all cars now can be driven by software the only thing missing are more accurate and complicated senso…

This is actually quite common with aftermarket tuning for the past decade. Traditional ECU tuning you replace your car's ECU with one with a modified (chipped) ECU. Now, there are bolt-ons that connect through the OBDII port. They modify shift points, change timings, and air fuel mix ratios. And do this without voiding the warranty. [0] https://www.racechip.us/

Virtually all of these devices void warranty. The trick of course is to put the original ECU back in before any service where it would be noticed, however unlikely.

Re: We Tested Comma AI's OpenPilot

#136

Post by dogma1138 »

foiblesprickly wrote: post #46
dogma1138 wrote: post #43

I wonder how regulators and most insurers treat those. It won’t surprise me if these might not be “road legal” modifications, or at least modifications that may incur additional criminal liability Im also pretty sure that insurers can use these to deny claims if accidents happen.

ive been looking at getting this for my CRV for about 1 year. most insurance companies are fine with adding this device to your plan as ive inquired and read about several experiences with it.

I wonder if they think it’s the same as aftermarket ADAS systems like MobilEye while it isn’t since it requires you to essentially flash your car.

Re: We Tested Comma AI's OpenPilot

#137

Post by dogma1138 »

nojvek wrote: post #49

I am willing to bet that the nimble AutoPilot selling Waymo and Tesla have some hope. Cruise and Zoox are burning VC money like crazy with little to show.

MobilEye has been selling ADAS kits for about a decade now. I’m not entirely sure why CommaAI is a special case here.

Re: We Tested Comma AI's OpenPilot

#138

Post by dheera »

netsharc wrote: post #130
dheera wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Because that means not only you (the owner) can do it. Not when it requires physical wires. This isn't some wireless TCP/IP stack connected to the internet. Car entertainment/air conditioning systems usually also use a physically separate CAN bus so internet-connected dashboard devices don't get access to the engine and steering controls. They may share 12V power and that's it. Comma.ai gets access to the "secret"…

To chime in (I'm not the original commenter you're replying to), in theory someone could develop an Internet-connected gadget, break into your car without being detected, plug said gadget in, and then drive you into a wall or off a cliff, maybe that's what the grandfather poster is worried about. But in reality, no one's develop that sort of tech, and if a baddie wants to kidnap or kill, they'd probably spend their r…

> Internet-connected gadget, break into your car without being detected, plug said gadget in, and then drive you into a wall or off a cliff

If someone wanted to make you drive off a cliff, they don't need a fancy internet-connected gadget. They could just loosen some screws on your steering column and leave.

If you have physical access to something you can always compromise it.

Re: We Tested Comma AI's OpenPilot

#139

Post by meowface »

KentLane wrote: post #129
meowface wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I watch and very much enjoy his Twitch streams, and he's definitely and obviously very intelligent, but I'd say not necessarily more than a top ~70th percentile HN commenter who works in software engineering. I don't think he's necessarily a genius, but just super curious and motivated and confident in his ability to learn anything if he dedicates enough time and practice. You can see his learning and motivation proc…

Hotz won CSAW singlehanded, a one-man team against multi-person teams. And he won by an enormous margin. He is clearly way above the 70th percentile.

You're right, I shouldn't downplay his abilities, and he's definitely well over 99th percentile when it comes to results and accomplishments at the very least. I've competed in CSAW and some other CTFs and winning as a one-person team is definitely a massive achievement.

Just to counter a tiny bit, he didn't necessarily win by an enormous margin. CMU's PPP has overwhelmingly dominated every collegiate CTF since forever, and he was a CMU student and I wouldn't be surprised if he trained closely with PPP members. He got 5100 to PPP's 4800, which, to play Devil's advocate, depending on the particular point weights of the solved challenges, could potentially mean he solved one additional challenge over PPP (though possibly more; I didn't dig to find the exact breakdowns). I believe he also deeply specialized in low-level RE from a young age (as demonstrated by the iPhone and PS3 exploits), and from my perception that was less common among collegiate CTF competitors and gives you a huge leg up. But of course mastering something that difficult so young and being at CMU are itself huge achievements, as is outmatching PPP on anything at all entirely by yourself.

Obviously insanely impressive, and exponentially better than I could've done (and did do) at that age or could do today. Be it intelligence or endless drive and work ethic or all of the above, he's clearly an extremely skilled polymath. I guess I just didn't want people feeling too demotivated over genetic factors, which play a big but not a full role. He may very well be a genius, though.

Re: We Tested Comma AI's OpenPilot

#140

Post by lightbendover »

meowface wrote: post #110
arc0 wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He streams on Youtube/Twitch fairly regularly, just from watching it is totally obvious that he is a genius-level programmer. The speed with which he reads and comprehends academic papers is incredibly impressive.

I watch and very much enjoy his Twitch streams, and he's definitely and obviously very intelligent, but I'd say not necessarily more than a top ~70th percentile HN commenter who works in software engineering. I don't think he's necessarily a genius, but just super curious and motivated and confident in his ability to learn anything if he dedicates enough time and practice. You can see his learning and motivation proc…

With every halfway decent engineer you personally know, go compete in a major competition he won by himself in his early 20s and then repeat your statement. The archives are all online, take your time.
Post reply on HN