Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Comma.ai will ship a $999 autonomous driving add-on by the end of this year

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 116 posts

Re: Comma.ai will ship a $999 autonomous driving add-on by the end of this year

#71

Post by pjc50 »

Fricken wrote: post #45
mortenjorck wrote: post #8

Mountain View to San Francisco Is this product actually just limited to driving 280 / 101? If so, that's a really interesting way to launch a minimum viable product in the self-driving space: Obviously you can't launch with anything incomplete in terms of safety, but you can launch with a highly restricted supported geography.

He's saying that he's done that drive without touching the wheel. It will work in other places, but he emphasizes that you still have to pay attention, as with autopilot. He gives the full talk here: https://techcrunch.com/video/george-geohot-hotz-presents-the... Yes, he's a punk and seemingly on drugs, but surprisingly, Hotz is not a bullshitter as far as I can tell.

> "you still have to pay attention"

The dangerous kind of not-really-autonomous.

Re: Comma.ai will ship a $999 autonomous driving add-on by the end of this year

#72

Post by varjag »

TD-Linux wrote: post #35
etendue wrote: post #19

> The $999 price point is designed to be affordable, and is possible because of the components Comma uses in its product, which tend to be inexpensive off-the-shelf electronics. "Inexpensive off-the-shelf electronics" aren't rated for automotive environmental conditions, nor do they have the immunity to interference (e.g., single event upsets) required for safety-critical systems.

Off-the-shelf in the context of electronics means that they didn't custom design some parts of it (for example using a SoC module rather than custom DDR layout), not that the parts are consumer rated.

It is more than just parts though. To get past the more demanding EM compatibility/immunity certs you have to design the whole product with that in mind, at which point it stops being off-the shelf or inexpensive.

Re: Comma.ai will ship a $999 autonomous driving add-on by the end of this year

#73

Post by tim333 »

Fricken wrote: post #57
jsmthrowaway wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yes, he's a punk and seemingly on drugs What makes you say this?

I guess you didn't watch the video. He goes out of his way to trash talk every big player in the industry. It's entertaining, informative, and cringeworthy. I like George Hotz, but I was attempting to preempt anyone who might dismiss his substance because they don't like his style.

It was a bit over the top and reminded me of the Silicon Valley TV show which he cited as an influence.

Re: Comma.ai will ship a $999 autonomous driving add-on by the end of this year

#74

Post by pmontra »

They say they get the video feed. I can imagine why they want it (training?) but having somebody potentially watching what's in front of your car all the time is much worse than having them know where you are. I won't buy that product. However I think that if this really works it will sell well.

Re: Comma.ai will ship a $999 autonomous driving add-on by the end of this year

#75

Post by DanBC »

pmontra wrote: post #74

They say they get the video feed. I can imagine why they want it (training?) but having somebody potentially watching what's in front of your car all the time is much worse than having them know where you are. I won't buy that product. However I think that if this really works it will sell well.

> I can imagine why they want it (training?)

Also avoiding liability.

Re: Comma.ai will ship a $999 autonomous driving add-on by the end of this year

#78

Post by gambiting »

primitivesuave wrote: post #12

I would love nothing more than for Bay Area congestion to be solved by self-driving cars, but I take this announcement with a grain of salt because it lacks any mention of liabilities and regulatory hurdles. Unless the management can answer the difficult questions, unforeseen difficulties likely await anyone who installs this device in their car. Insurance companies may refuse to cover accidents caused by the device,…

>>I would love nothing more than for Bay Area congestion to be solved by self-driving cars

How would it do that though? I'm still going to take my car to work, except that it will do all the driving. Unless you are talking about theoretical, far off in the future idea that we will remove all traffic lights and speed limits because autonomous cars will handle intersections and speeds much better than humans?

Re: Comma.ai will ship a $999 autonomous driving add-on by the end of this year

#79

Post by biofox »

joering2 wrote: post #69
mdonahoe wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You may think differently when someone you know or care about is killed by an AI controlled vehicle. Apparent reckless use of technology frightens people, regardless of the actual risk.

I'm not saying their solution is perfect. Nothing is. But will I send a hate mail to utensil factory because I cut myself with their kitchen knife? No, I won't.

This is an extremely irresponsible attitude, and I'm shocked to see it expressed on HN!

As engineers / technologists / experts, we have a duty as a community to ensure our products are safe!

Of course, end users also have a duty to ensure they use our products responsibly -- but the whole point of autonomous vehicles is that the end user has no control. They are entrusting their safety to the product.

The situations are in no way comparable.

Re: Comma.ai will ship a $999 autonomous driving add-on by the end of this year

#80

Post by joakleaf »

jmole wrote: post #58
mortenjorck wrote: post #8

Mountain View to San Francisco Is this product actually just limited to driving 280 / 101? If so, that's a really interesting way to launch a minimum viable product in the self-driving space: Obviously you can't launch with anything incomplete in terms of safety, but you can launch with a highly restricted supported geography.

The only reason they can "launch" this is because the driver will still be held responsible for the actions of the car, no matter what their system does or doesn't do. I.e, I can install a radar detector, but no way will I be able to sue the manufacturer if I get a ticket. This isn't just a minimum viable product, it's a minimum liability product.

Is it though?

If you start tampering with the hardware of the car to splice in this box, will your insurance cover even in normal situations?

Post reply on HN