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

281–290 of 298 posts

Re: Autopilot on Cars for $999

#281

Post by commaai »

coddle-hark wrote: post #122
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…

It's a monorepo. The "should work" commit you are referring to is about the formatting of the SSIDs in the WiFi network selection menu.

https://github.com/commaai/openpilot/commit/34ff2951d4172710...

Re: Autopilot on Cars for $999

#282

Post by DesolationJones »

bri3d wrote: post #277
DesolationJones wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is what Geohot said in a reddit post. "We have done most of the ISO26262 analysis, we're hiring someone right now to get it written up nicely and open sourced. (those interested can find the job posting) It's one of our goals for openpilot 1.0" They have a slightly more in depth explanation of their safety model in the "Background — safety architecture" section of this post. https://medium.com/@comma_ai/how-to-w…

Thank you! This is the first place I've seen this acknowledged - and, bizarrely, I read most of the PRs and commits to the `safety` part of Panda, and didn't find a single reference to the checklist in that Medium post (and, only some of the requirements seem to be implemented in most cars). It feels really late to me to be doing this, and it seems like they could use a good docs person and some, well, leadership in…

>and didn't find a single reference to the checklist in that Medium post

Yeah, I always thought safety.md in the panda repo was lacking and the points from the medium post should be included. Perhaps someone should make a PR. I doubt anyone who has worked on panda code hasn't seen that medium post though.

>(and, only some of the requirements seem to be implemented in most cars)

May or may not be what you're referring to, but the majority car brands, don't support openpilot's longitudinal control, and maintain the stock ACC system while openpilot just controls steering. That's why you may not see any acceleration/deceleration safety code. Some brands also have lkas torque severely limited by the the eps firmware, which should already be ASIL D rated. Honda for example will get around 5 degrees of max steering at highway speeds despite what openpilot says it wants, so there's no real need to add steering safety code to the panda.

I think you would mostly likely see code review on merged PRs done by the community. Like look up almost any PR by deanlee. Comma employees most likely do have most of their communications side-channeled though.

More code documentation does seem to also be a goal for 1.0 https://twitter.com/comma_ai/status/1255932750671953921

I think they aim for self documenting code though. It's mostly pretty readable.

Re: Autopilot on Cars for $999

#283

Post by elil17 »

jedberg wrote: post #209
elil17 wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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".

My 2019 Insight (Civic hybrid) keeps me perfectly centered in the lane when I’m going higher than 45 mph

Re: Autopilot on Cars for $999

#284

Post by betaclass »

cyrux004 wrote: post #258
betaclass wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm still unclear as to the benefit given that you're required to attend to the road and it detects distracted people in the driver's seat?

do you find benefit in dynamic cruise control in slow moving traffic. Now add the lane centering logic and you dont have to apply a lot of torque on the wheel either, because the system does adjustments for you.

So the benefit is strictly in slow-moving traffic?

And it's never occurred to me that steering wheel torque is an issue. And so many of these processes -- lane centering, not bumping into the car ahead of me -- are subconscious for me at this point, but I've been driving for decades.

May I ask how good is the technology that notices when someone is distracted and forces them to attend to the road?

Re: Autopilot on Cars for $999

#285

Post by betaclass »

Gys wrote: post #255
betaclass wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But if you still need to keep your attention on the road, what is the actual gain? What else can you be doing that gets past the distraction detection?

As someone else here wrote: until I tried a good L2 system. ACC and LKA are pure value adds. Lower the number of moments where your focus snaps back in as you are meandering out of the lane or creeping up on the person in front of you.

So where has your focus been when it has needed to snap back in?

Re: Autopilot on Cars for $999

#286

Post by luplex »

camjohnson26 wrote: post #191
luplex wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tesla guarantees that an attentive driver can safely take control. Comma does not.

They don’t guarantee it they just provide a disclaimer. There’s plenty of driver monitoring solutions they could provide but don’t. Combine that with deeply unethical promises of full self driving coming just around the corner, feature complete by 2020, fully autonomous road trip by 2017, and you’re left with a dangerous product and customers that overestimate its abilities.

I'm pretty sure the disclaimer does nothing. If they put out a product they need to expect people will use it, and they need to take actions to keep those people safe.

At least that's how I think it works in Germany.

Re: Autopilot on Cars for $999

#287

Post by DesolationJones »

luplex wrote: post #176
tjoff wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "with you also paying attention." So no guarantees whatsoever then. Because you are always responsible and are always expected to recover from anything the autopilot might ever come up with. Teslas do fail in deadly ways. Everyone that cares to look knows this. Yet Tesla is fine with it, even while knowing that humans can't reason about safety when the car drives perfectly the other 99% of times.

Tesla guarantees that an attentive driver can safely take control. Comma does not.

They do guarantee that.

https://medium.com/@comma_ai/how-to-write-a-car-port-for-ope...

"No ADAS system currently on the market has safety guarantees on perception or planning algorithms.

So, what must be guaranteed is the ability of the driver to easily regain full control of the vehicle at any time. In openpilot, this is done through the satisfaction of the 2 main safety principles that a Level 2 driver assistance system must have:

1. The driver must always be capable to immediately re-take manual control of the vehicle, by stepping on either pedal or by pressing the cancel button;

2.The vehicle must not alter its trajectory too quickly for the driver to safely react. This means that while the system is engaged, the actuators are constrained to operate within reasonable limits."

Re: Autopilot on Cars for $999

#288

Post by Piskvorrr »

coddle-hark wrote: post #122
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…

That essentially boils down to the color of the bits. In other words, what git log says is a different bit color (technical) from what the EULA (legal) says, and you can't meaningfully use the legal-colored bits in a technical context and vice versa. In other words, if it breaks, you get to keep all the nasty pieces, not the company, because the EULA says so.

("colored bits" metaphor is from this seminal essay: https://ansuz.sooke.bc.ca/entry/23 )

Re: Autopilot on Cars for $999

#289

Post by Piskvorrr »

bko wrote: post #217
beambot wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Autonomy is going to require a lot more than a CAN bus & some video interfaces. The specific sensors matter. The framerates matter. The field of view & mount points matter. The specific compute platform matters -- and it certainly shouldn't run on an Android or iPhone without automotive-rated components, realtime guarantees, etc. All of these things argue strongly for a wholistic vehicle design rather than an afterma…

That's fair. But I think for their current use case, lane keep assist, they make due with less. They're comfortable in level 2 self driving. For anything above that you're probably right, but I would love to see big auto outsource much of it a company dedicated to self-driving. Specialization is essential in these sensitive fields and automakers already rely on suppliers heavily. Very few can get away with the Apple…

Yet they do-the-tesla trick and present the product as fully SDV. Disingenuous to the point of fraud: "here's a car in public traffic, with nobody at the wheel, nudge nudge [small print: it's level 2 and you get to clean up all those nasty pieces, nothing to do with us at all, you're only supposed to run it in tightly controlled, isolated private environment]"

Re: Autopilot on Cars for $999

#290

Post by Piskvorrr »

chii wrote: post #185
Miraste wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No reason self-driving technology should be bundled with a car It seems to me that there are many reasons it should be bundled, and I'll bet that in the long run all self-driving cars will be integrated systems. It's not a good place for inconsistent installations or a modding mentality--imagine multiplying Uber and Tesla's programs a thousandfold with fewer resources and less accountability.

or, imagine if there's standard interfaces between the motors/control system and the "brains" of self driving. Like how CDs and peripherals don't all need to come from the same manufacturer ('cept apple's!), because there's an industry standard for interoperability.

The mistake seems to be "there's a standard [and it Works more than 80/20]." There are multiple to choose from, and in versions, and each has revisions, and now Foo v2.1 doesn't want to work with Foo 2.0, except on even Mondays, and don't get me started on Foo 3.x with Bar 1.5.x!

You're handwaving away all the inherent complexity, but shoveling it off into a box labeled "standardization" doesn't make it go away.

In other words, the interoperability is very much "try to swap these components, if they work, yay, if not, try swapping them for something else until you get a combination that works." And that's for non-critical components.

Post reply on HN