3 ms·

I think he just used that as an example of what types of journeys can be driven. What mostly bothers me about this is his disregard to whether someone dies or

by dharma1 10y ago

I think he just used that as an example of what types of journeys can be driven. What mostly bothers me about this is his disregard to whether someone dies or not using the product. But hey, as long as they're shipping this year, under $1000, that's all that matters right? I've read their paper and it's solid ML research, he's got a few good guys on the team. And I don't really disagree about MobilEye. But there are so many other DL/RL product spaces they could have picked without risking people's lives - it kind of seems he is on a mission to prove Musk and some other companies wrong, no matter what the risks to users. I sincerely hope no one dies as a result of using this.

Fricken 10y ago
It's silly to be throwing out dire warnings about Comma's product without first going after Tesla. With a level 2 system, whether it works 90% of the time, or 99.9% of the time, the driver has still got to watch the road and be ready to respond in an instant. In fact, the less reliable the system is, the less there is the likelihood that a driver will entrust their life to it when they shouldn't.
- dharma1 10y ago
  I agree - I think the way Musk has been so bullish in public about autonomous driving is dangerous. I think Tesla needs more sensors, in particular LIDAR, and better software too, and I'm not sure Autopilot is an apt name for a level 2 system like the one on Tesla or the new Volvos. However, I think that difference between 90% and 99.99999% is crucial, and that boils down to the quality of the software and hardware, and the amount of testing. I find it irresponsible to beta test a product on users when there is a very real chance of something going wrong and people dying or getting injured.
  - Fricken 10y ago
    This came out today. Autopilot's body count just doubled: https://electrek.co/2016/09/14/another-fatal-tesla-autopilot-crash-emerges-model-s-hits-a-streetsweeper-truck-caught-on-dashcam/ https://electrek.co/2016/09/14/another-fatal-tesla-autopilot...

by dharma1 10y ago

Fricken 10y ago

It's silly to be throwing out dire warnings about Comma's product without first going after Tesla. With a level 2 system, whether it works 90% of the time, or 99.9% of the time, the driver has still got to watch the road and be ready to respond in an instant. In fact, the less reliable the system is, the less there is the likelihood that a driver will entrust their life to it when they shouldn't.

dharma1 10y ago
I agree - I think the way Musk has been so bullish in public about autonomous driving is dangerous. I think Tesla needs more sensors, in particular LIDAR, and better software too, and I'm not sure Autopilot is an apt name for a level 2 system like the one on Tesla or the new Volvos. However, I think that difference between 90% and 99.99999% is crucial, and that boils down to the quality of the software and hardware, and the amount of testing. I find it irresponsible to beta test a product on users when there is a very real chance of something going wrong and people dying or getting injured.
- Fricken 10y ago
  This came out today. Autopilot's body count just doubled: https://electrek.co/2016/09/14/another-fatal-tesla-autopilot-crash-emerges-model-s-hits-a-streetsweeper-truck-caught-on-dashcam/ https://electrek.co/2016/09/14/another-fatal-tesla-autopilot...