I just youtubed this guy and found a 10hr video of him programming for this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Hlb8YX2-W8
Kind of cool it's Python and OpenCV. I've mucked about with that and it's quite beginner friendly.
Autopilot on Cars for $999
261–270 of 298 posts
Re: Autopilot on Cars for $999
#262Anyone know if this has killed someone yet?
I don't think it has yet. It's also one of the safer assist systems because it observes the drivers eyes to check they are looking where they are going, unlike Tesla say.
Re: Autopilot on Cars for $999
#263Earlier 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…
This ridiculous assertion any self-driving == better than humna is just ridiculous too. This is a website selling a self-driving devkit with a big "buy it now" sign that also has a disclaimer saying "Well you're not really buying it, if you kill someone, we've never met". Sure, self-driving cars that were better than humans would be good, but what we have right now is self-driving cars that are maybe better than huma…
I don't think many people assert self driving is better than human driving presently. But as technology advances it may well become so.
Re: Autopilot on Cars for $999
#264Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not gonna debate the "appropriate level of liability." My point has to do with what you're signalling. If a thing is alpha-level, and real humans can get killed, I wouldn't let random people buy it and use it in their cars, period. Informed consent is deeply problematic for a product like this: Very few people have the expertise to look at the code and the hardware and properly evaluate the risks, right down to u…
So your main problem is about the disclaimer and that its called alpha. I provided a source that rates it the best product among all other competitors and the highest score on keep driver engage. And they have the most miles of any other lane assist technology. So I think its safe. I think the alpha is more tongue in cheek and is not a term that means anything really apart from, as you say, a wink and a nod. For the…
I'm against just heaving that technology out over the fence into the hands of consumers and leaving it up to consumer reports and/or individual consumers to decide if it's safe enough.
Safety is a 'picking up nickels off of railway tracks" problem. A thing might work 10,000 times in a row, but then suddenly, catastrophically fail because something is different that hadn't been tested before, like dealing with a woman walking her bike across a multi-lane road.
this is not a good scenario to leave up to consumers to decide whether a thing is safe. Not even with consumer reports to help out with testing.
Now as to ABS, the comparison is not even close. I do not buy ABS by purchasing brakes and then flashing some ROM with code I download from the internet. ABS is covered by all sorts of regulatory frameworks around the world, it isn't simply cooked up and offerred for download like it's an MP3 player skin.
Even though it's a much more mature technology, the problem with ABS is again, consumers cannot give informed consent to a disclaimer when purchasing it from some random person.
When I buy it as part of an automobile from a manufacturer that complies (I'm looking at you, VW) with regulations, I'm consenting to trusting something in a completely different way than when I download code and there's an MIT license or whatever weasel-wording somebody em ploys to say, "If you die, sucks to be you. If you kill someone, it's your soul that will be in torment."
Your equivocation of 1. downloading code for a safety feature from the internet that's marked "alpha" and has been tested according to whatever the author feels like testing because it's not offered as a "product," with 2. purchasing an automobile that has ABS brakes which are tested and maintained within a global safety regulatory framework...
You're entitled to whatever workdview you like, but on this pointI believe our discussion ends. There is a fundamental axiomatic belief I hold that is not compatibvle with a fiundamental axiomatic belief you hold.
I don't want to spend all day trying to explain why I believe Volvo selling a three-point harness is not the same as some random person knitting a seta -belt, selling it on etsy, and leaving it up to you and I to read the consumer reviews to decide whether it's safe enough.
You believe the free market plus informed consumers will sort all this out. I do not.
Re: Autopilot on Cars for $999
#265Earlier quoted context omitted.
The most fundamental part of the system, the one which makes driving decisions, is not open. I did not say anything about whether or not this was "better" than the product being fully closed source, only that it is not truly open, and I fully believe this. "Open source autopilot" implies to me that the autopilot is open - that an end-user can inspect, audit, and attempt to understand the decisions their vehicle is ma…
When you say not everything is open source. I assume you mean the training code is not open source? I'm curious what you would want to learn from that? You wouldn't be able to actually train a model since you wouldn't have access to the data. The end-user can inspect, audit and understand the decisions their vehicle is making. All you have to do is see how the neural network behaves for different inputs. That's the c…
Comma don't even say _how_ the model works! What layers are there? What learning strategies are they using? What do they do? It's literally a black box! "All you have to do is see how it behaves for different inputs" is just black box reverse engineering! Machine Learning is NOT a magic black box.
Comma have constructed a "stack" of models, just as you would connect a series of functions to make a kernel in the mathematics sense, or a series of algorithms or instructions to make a program. And that stack is entirely closed.
https://medium.com/@chengyao.shen/decoding-comma-ai-openpilo... here is an example of reverse-engineering the driving model. If Comma released this exact sort of documentation, including what ML modeling strategies they were using, what each input and output parameter affected, and how the model was trained, I could maybe consider the system open.
Re: Autopilot on Cars for $999
#266Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, this has been his project for many years now - he threw a fit and fled to China in 2016 when the NHTSA sent him a Special Order requesting test data for the Comma One product, which he then cancelled and released as pseudo open-source (the ML model is still a closed black box).
Yours is the very essence of a HackerNews comment. Comma is everything a startup should be. They are not wrapping a lame business model in CRUD and living off of malinvestment. They are solving ridiculously hard problem with a small team of very smart people. Their competition has burnt billions. Meanwhile, Comma is profitable, has a better safety model than anyone. Hotz is a legend and is not running from anyone.
This is a straw-man. I did not compare Comma to any other startup, or some bizarre ideal of "what a startup should be."
I strongly disagree that Comma "have a better safety model than anyone" - their entire safety model revolves around two things, an assertion that the driver is fully responsible, and a poorly documented set of callback functions in their CAN-intercept board which, depending on the vehicle, do different things, but generally try to limit angular input and introduce an emergency override. This is smart, but the code is not documented well enough to be considered a "safety model" in any commercial sense, and the system, while it has a MISRA C linter plugged into it somewhere, is not built using safety-approved hardware or to any known safety standard. Plus, the fundamental approach on most cars involving CAN message-stuffing simply cannot be as reliable as an integrated system - in that sense, the entire model is flawed and cannot "have a better safety model than anyone."
And, Hotz explicitly and openly left the United States and cancelled his first Comma product launch, rather than respond to a letter NHTSA sent him asking questions about Comma's testing protocols and safety process. Call that what you will.
Re: Autopilot on Cars for $999
#267Is the device running Android or something else? I understand this is marketed as a "dev kit". And I understand the cost benefit for shipping a COTS OnePlus phone to provide the camera and UI. But I wouldn't buy one of these due to how much windshield visibility is blocked by the device and the wire dangling from the headliner. It would be better to have the camera and wiring hidden away next to the rear view mirror…
Last time I checked, they have a stripped down Android that would run a custom Termux and a single app with UI and different threads. Some of the services in Python, some of them using C, all communicated using capnp over zeromq
Re: Autopilot on Cars for $999
#268Earlier quoted context omitted.
I expect this to end about as well as it did last time. 35 million miles is statistically meaningless.
35 million miles is more than google cars did from 2017-2020 so it’s still significant.
On public roads. We don't know how many they've done if you include closed track testing, but I'm willing to bet it's at least as many as they've done on public roads.
The real point is that Google isn't selling their system to consumers.
Re: Autopilot on Cars for $999
#269Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
That's absolutely the sane approach: shoot for the middle of the pack. It still never fails that someone races past me and cuts in, then forgets that their car also has cruise control and sucks at manually maintaining a constant speed.
Re: Autopilot on Cars for $999
#270I bought my car with the express intent of getting a compatible car for Comma. My comma absolutely increased the utility of my car to me. Been on 3 huge road trips that I wouldn’t have considered without the device. 12 hours on the road isn’t something I would do everyday, but absolutely bearable with a comma.
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?
Comma.one ranks highest in making sure the driver is paying attention and second in "unresponsive driver" according to Consumer Reports...
I remember Hotz making a big deal about tracking the driver as much as the road. Which is something Tesla is behind on.