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

201–210 of 298 posts

Re: Autopilot on Cars for $999

#201

Post by sfblah »

leesec wrote: post #168
jabroni_salad wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've seen a few videos of it. It really is just a half step up from active lane keeping. It will proactively keep you centered and manage your speed with no interaction, whereas normal lane keeping only kicks in if you are about to drift out of the lane.

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?

Re: Autopilot on Cars for $999

#202

Post by bko »

gkop wrote: post #186
bko wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh I didn't know that. Can you point me to their liability policy? [EDIT] this was the best I could find > You are always ultimately responsible for driving in a safe manner, even when using Pilot Assist. https://www.volvocars.com/uk/support/topics/use-your-car/car... I don't think comma.ai should be faulted for being open. I have trouble finding any statements on liability on any other lane assist technology. Would…

Volvo sells a car with an optional feature that has hardware and software components. If you can prove that the hardware or software is “unreasonably dangerous” in design or implementation, you may have standing to sue Volvo. Comma sells only some hardware (with some limited software?). Comma suggests, but is careful not to encourage for street use, that customers modify the hardware with open source software that ma…

> If you can prove that the hardware or software is “unreasonably dangerous” in design or implementation, you may have standing to sue Volvo

I imagine this is true for comma as well. I don't think their little waiver and notice that it should only be used in a research setting would hold up in court. Much like "incense" were banned despite being marked "not for human consumption".

> My beef is that Comma-the-product imposes an externality on our roads by bringing experimental driver assistance software to the mass market that is not backed by the software product’s developers (or any other entity).

I think their product is safe and I'm glad it exists out there. They claim 35 million miles driven and I am yet to see one serious accident. So I think the risk is overstated.

People like Thiel often complain about the lack of innovation. This is real innovation and could transform society. I think we should applaud the people that have the audacity to tackle hard problems that can change people's lives. The only way you'll get there is real miles driven on real roads. As a society, we should not have a zero risk attitude, otherwise nothing would ever get built.

Re: Autopilot on Cars for $999

#203

Post by colejohnson66 »

onion2k wrote: post #70
madamelic wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Does this mean that if I build an AI controlled gun turret to shoot people who walk across my lawn it shouldn't be news when it kills someone because people get shot by other people quite regularly? In my opinion the application of technology, and (more importantly) the delegation of human responsibility to a computer, should be something that's part of the national conversation.

Not the same. The people wouldn’t’ve gotten shot in the first place. The idea with self driving is that it’s safer than a human, not that people will die regardless. So in your scenario, unless you’re just shooting everyone that walks by for some weird reason, and your turret is less accurate, it’s not the same.

Not arguing for either side.

Re: Autopilot on Cars for $999

#204

Post by sfblah »

matthewowen wrote: post #71
focusgroup0 wrote: post #9

Would you drive to Tahoe in the snow with this?

Not sure that's the right question to ask. It takes two hours to get from San Francisco to Auburn, and it's highly unusual to have snow there. Setting aside that I80 is generally cleared of snow very quickly, two hours of lane assist seems nice before tackling the remainder. And in most cases, it's more like "use this all the way to truckee and then drive the last 30 mins to squaw valley"

I use my Nissan LKA all the way to maybe Colfax. Beyond that I'm skeptical any modern system can tolerate the relatively tight turns and varying road conditions even in the summer. Still, getting 2+ hours with LKA is really helpful.

Re: Autopilot on Cars for $999

#205

Post by ncallaway »

yannoninator wrote: post #98
slg wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Be my guest if you want to argue the merits of one system over another based on some technical specs or design decisions. My point is that the track records are not long enough to draw any statistical conclusions and the Tesla and Uber have killed people but Comma hasn't argument is at best wildly misleading given the large differences in miles driven.

> 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.

Re: Autopilot on Cars for $999

#206

Post by jedberg »

strin wrote: post #190

is the "retrofit" strategy living in the past? living in 2021 it seems a bad choice to buy gasoline cars. Most new cars coming out will have some kind of driving assist (L2 autopilot).

It's the opposite. I already own a compatible gas car. Instead of wasting resources on a new car, I can just retrofit the one I already own.

Also, I desperately want an electric car. But I need a minivan because (post-pandemic) I'm often driving six people around who are elderly or children and can't climb into an SUV.

There is no such electric van. This is the only way I can get "autopilot" in a van.

Re: Autopilot on Cars for $999

#209

Post by jedberg »

elil17 wrote: post #48
jabroni_salad wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've seen a few videos of it. It really is just a half step up from active lane keeping. It will proactively keep you centered and manage your speed with no interaction, whereas normal lane keeping only kicks in if you are about to drift out of the lane.

Honda LKA keeps you centered and lets you take your hands off the wheel.

Only if you want to look like a drunk driver. I wish it worked like that, but all it does is jerk back to the center of the lane about half the time and then complain that "steering is required".
Post reply on HN