371–380 of 498 posts
I find it interesting that he was on This Week in Startups only a few weeks ago calling every company he found unconvincing "losers" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2zy_07g2IrM Maybe they're all losers and you're a winner, but perhaps being an elite hax0r isn't all that's needed to go to market... If you can't reply to a regulator letter, how are you going to deal with supply chain or cash flow issues? Bad reviews in…
He's currently throwing a temper tantrum on Twitter, and all because the NHTSA wanted to ask him a few questions about the product (you can see it here: https://www.scribd.com/document/329218929/2016-10-27-Special... ). Like, how dare the government try to have basic standards for multi-ton hunks of metal hurtling down the highway without human input. I've been trying to convince people lately that Silicon Valley isn…
It's the government that's stifling innovation by burying it with so called regulations to the benefit of the monolithic automotive industry. His follow up tweets imply he's moving on to China, since they're less likely to be a major hamper of innovation. And we wonder why the United States' influence is in decline...
Another way to look at it: western foreigner looks to beta test a product with the lives of Chinese citizens. I'm not sure how well that's going to go over.
I find it interesting that he was on This Week in Startups only a few weeks ago calling every company he found unconvincing "losers" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2zy_07g2IrM Maybe they're all losers and you're a winner, but perhaps being an elite hax0r isn't all that's needed to go to market... If you can't reply to a regulator letter, how are you going to deal with supply chain or cash flow issues? Bad reviews in…
The comments in this thread make me realize that there is a large amount of HN readers who have never had to deal with the government. Yes, the penalty is scary looking, but it is par for the course. You don't get exposed to it if you are doing amateur/freelance/e-commerce. As soon as you touch critical national infrastructure (Telcom, NTSB, Healthcare, finance) then you have to deal with the government, which never…
I feel like another part missing in the comments here is that most US regulations allow an individual pretty extensive free reign when it comes to risky ventures (see experimental aircrafts, make your own guns, electronic devices and a couple others). The regulation hammer really kicks in once you start trying to market it to other people, or 'what are you actually selling to people.'
He's currently throwing a temper tantrum on Twitter, and all because the NHTSA wanted to ask him a few questions about the product (you can see it here: https://www.scribd.com/document/329218929/2016-10-27-Special... ). Like, how dare the government try to have basic standards for multi-ton hunks of metal hurtling down the highway without human input. I've been trying to convince people lately that Silicon Valley isn…
Holtz's Twitter rant is at [1]. Cruise Automation was very lucky to be acquired by GM before they got a similar letter. Similarly, Otto being acquired by Uber. They were both proposing to sell similar add-on systems. Their valuations would have been much lower after receiving such letters. NHTSA has it right. "It is insufficient to assert, as you do, that 'your product does not remove any of the driver responsibiliti…
He's currently throwing a temper tantrum on Twitter, and all because the NHTSA wanted to ask him a few questions about the product (you can see it here: https://www.scribd.com/document/329218929/2016-10-27-Special... ). Like, how dare the government try to have basic standards for multi-ton hunks of metal hurtling down the highway without human input. I've been trying to convince people lately that Silicon Valley isn…
Exactly. The NHTSA memo seems extremely reasonable to me. If you're going to put to market a product where the smallest malfunction could easily kill many people (both those using your product and those around them), answering a couple regulation questions seems like a small hurdle to pass. Nothing here is saying "we want to shut you down", it's saying "we want to make sure you pass the most basic safety standards".…
Which article of the Constitution is that? I don't seem to recall it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And bribery
Bribery to overlook certain numbers and results perhaps , but I think it'd be a unlikely to hear that the NHTSA just completely skipped on all regulatory checks entirely, which is what geohot wants.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
He chose the launch date without making sure he was legal first.
Do I have to check with every relevant government agency for permission every time I do something? If an endeavor not specifically outlawed, it should be presumed legal.
If he couldn't answer these very basic questions 2 months away from shipping these things, WTF is he even doing. If he hadn't proactively initiated communications with NHTSA long before now, WTF is he even doing. These are all excruciatingly, painfully obvious things to do, and the fact that it never occurred to him to do them brings into question his judgement about pretty much everything, from technical issues to basic life choices. At this point I don't think I'd trust this guy to mow my lawn, much less develop autonomous vehicle software. His reaction to all of this and how he deals with adversity is just as revealing about his competence as everything he's done so far.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Actually even the $21k fine should be nothing if he got $3M in venture capital. What's questionable is whether somebody can build safely an almost-self-driving car without a good team and with many years of experience in the field.
$21K per day. Four months to consume $3M entirely.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Exactly. The NHTSA memo seems extremely reasonable to me. If you're going to put to market a product where the smallest malfunction could easily kill many people (both those using your product and those around them), answering a couple regulation questions seems like a small hurdle to pass. Nothing here is saying "we want to shut you down", it's saying "we want to make sure you pass the most basic safety standards".…
> That's an obvious part of a government's duty to keep it's citizens safe. Which article of the Constitution is that? I don't seem to recall it.