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

151–160 of 163 posts

Re: We Tested Comma AI's OpenPilot

#151

Post by muzika »

m463 wrote: post #109
retSava wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's mandated by regulation in all cars after..2002? It's a port most often situated close to the steering wheel, the interface is a bog standard CAN bus. Where it differs between cars is what command sets are used and allowed (eg sometimes proprietary ones are used, and controlling things may not be possible). It's common to extract diagnostics about the car from this port. For example, when buying a used car this i…

mandated for cars that have emissions requirements. I think the obd connector on tesla doesn't do anything

Teslas don’t have an OBD port.

Re: We Tested Comma AI's OpenPilot

#152

Post by ezconnect »

bitbyt3r wrote: post #146
ezconnect wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OpenPilot pretends it's the ADAS and some cars you can pass the torque sensor on the custom serial bus used by the cars. There's not much difference in tricking or pretending or overwhelming the serial bus with another data message to make the steering system respond to OpenPilot.

The message it's sending is distinct from the torque sensor reading. There is a dedicated message ID for automated steering inputs, usually used for lane keeping assist and for jiggling the wheel as a departure warning.

I tried programming a module for my car without a lane assist ADAS system. I only stopped because it was my daily driver. I am still saving up for another car so I wont be afraid to break my car.

Re: We Tested Comma AI's OpenPilot

#153

Post by ezconnect »

numpad0 wrote: post #120
bipson wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is actually concerning that you can inject false sensor data this easily. I mean, sure, the messages on the CAN will not be encrypted or signed in any way, I know, but still...

Not much of false sensor data, they use existing endpoints used by ADAS. Steering or gas or brake ECUs on older cars without fancy adaptive automatic thingy don’t accept remote control, units in such cars only take analog user inputs and only report statuses on the bus. Since ADAS is complicated and developed independent to the rest of the car, car manufacturers expanded those actuators to incorporate remote control…

Yes I agree with you, I only call it false data because the ADAS sensor is replaced with OpenPilot. I tried OpenPilot with my car without ADAS and adaptive cruise control and you need the extra wire for the module to give false pedal position and trick the steering. I only stopped because I am afraid to break my daily driver, but it does work and it's amazing.

Re: We Tested Comma AI's OpenPilot

#155

Post by anonyxyz »

lightbendover wrote: post #140
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…

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.

Back in the early days of csaw it was easy as hell. There wasnt a lot of competition.

Re: We Tested Comma AI's OpenPilot

#157

Post by azinman2 »

shiftpgdn wrote: post #117
azinman2 wrote: post #115

L4/L5 or crash. Anything below is dangerous because of the propensity for humans to rely on what seems to be working the majority of the time and artificially trust it, especially with a population trained to need to check their phones. We saw this with the infamous Uber training driver crash in AZ, we saw this with the Apple employee in the Tesla, and we'll continue to see this over and over again until we can final…

Nonsense. Airplanes can do 99.9% of their flying without human intervention, but we don't hear about planes slamming into mountain sides because a pilot was texting or browsing the internet. The problem is any idiot can get a drivers license that let's them pilot around a 5000lb steel cube for about $200 and 20 hours of training time. And punishments are extremely lax for when mistakes are made.

Flying in the air above the clouds and mountains is nothing like driving on a road with pure unpredictability all around you and needing to solve close to AGI in order to achieve it.

Re: We Tested Comma AI's OpenPilot

#158

Post by jinzo »

bipson wrote: post #121
jinzo wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really wish to know where you live that the quality of chip-tunin is so bad. In developed world (EU), the owners are accountable for their vehicles. Including emission controls. But the problem is on the enforcing side, from the people actually doing the enforcing to the (un)avability of appropriate measuring devices that are able to detect the prescribed levels. EDIT: As I saw that you are from AT. You do know tha…

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 can guarantee you that there are some notable counter examples to your theory. I can tell you that manufacturers (BMW, VW,...) found out that it's a lot cheaper to manufacture the same physical engine and just limit it in software for different 'levels'.

BMW E90 series for example, from around 2008 onwards the 116d and 118d have exactly the same engine (per BMW part numbers mind you) but a different power output, even 120d only has one part difference (the ones with N47 engine that is). On VW part, new-er VW Caddy and VW Transporter with diesel engine option(s) have the same physical engine (in the model year) with widely different power outputs -> because they differentiate it for different segments via software.

And even moving from that, because of regional rules in NL for example, the cars with up to 140HP are prelevant and ofcourse VAG is not making a new engine just for NL, they limit one of their exsisting ones.

So yes, I believe that cars like this can be safely tuned without _any_ significant unwanted consequences for the longeviety of the engine/car. Mostly because the maps/factors can be adapted from their siblings with more factory power.

Regarding the black smoke/soot - no I believe that this is a (very) bad tune or something physicaly wrong with the car. It could be that they removed the DPF/EGR for some reason or something like that. But this is a whole other can of worms.

Re: We Tested Comma AI's OpenPilot

#159

Post by jinzo »

bipson wrote: post #132
ska wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.…

Oh as I just remembered one thing that I forgot to add in the other reply - ofc I agree with most of your reasoning here. But I think that (regarding emissions) we need to find a better way to test/confirm this. As I believe you should be able to modify stuff you own.

But I just remembered regarding certification - BMW is selling official performance/tuning kits (Sometimes called M-Performance tuning kit), where you get a whole new ECU with more power (and maybe some other parts, but nothing major for sure). And now I really wonder how is the legality of that. And also adds another point, that there are valid and reasonably safe tuning options.

Re: We Tested Comma AI's OpenPilot

#160

Post by DesolationJones »

bipson wrote: post #21
kriro wrote: post #5

Very nicely executed device with a good price point. Of course it's an utter nightmare with regards to privacy and I'd be very nervous regarding security and safety when I'd hand over the controls of my car to basically an android phone. Maybe I skimmed over it but I'd be interested in knowing which phones they use exactly. So I applaud the engineering but it's not a device I'd buy (and yes I do own and carry around…

My main concern would be that the architecture of an OTS Android system does not offer any guarantees regarding real-time i.e. hard deadlines. Ever had an android app or even the whole phone locking up? Even if it is only for a second or two, I don't want this to happen to a device that feeds live data into my car's controller. Even if this is only level 2 driver assist. If a car would get a bogus "you are crossing a…

Check out the safety architecture section. https://medium.com/@comma_ai/how-to-write-a-car-port-for-ope...

The driving model runs on the modified android OS (NEOS), but the safety critical code runs separately real-time on a SIL2 STM32 microcontroler. Comma strives for ISO26262 compliance.

The next comma hardware will ditch android and phones though.

Post reply on HN