4 ms·

I can't believe the nerve of some of these Silicon Valley randroids. If they're so great, why do they think a little bit of regulation is going to kill them?

by pdog 10y ago

jacquesm 10y ago
At a guess the list of questions showed Hotz just how far away he really was from having a shippable product and since the 'fun' bit was over it caused him to throw in the towel. Prototyping stuff and proof of concepts are fun, productizing much less so. Moving to China will not really change that.
- karlshea 10y ago
  And, the list of requests in the special order are not ridiculous at all. They are a bunch of basic questions that I would hope someone making driver-assist hardware would be able to answer.
  - throwaway2016a 10y ago
    I second that. Having worked with blockchain companies, I have seen much scarier letters than this and if the blockchain messes up no one dies.[1] [1] At least not as a direct cause/effect relationship.
  - khuey 10y ago
    The first three roughly boil down to "please send us a copy of the manual".
    - TeMPOraL 10y ago
      Which is something he should have in a pretty much finished form if he's about to release a product.
wyager 10y ago
Is this a joke? If not, you clearly didn't read the letter; it's more than "a little regulation", it's a huge set of requests on an unreasonably short timeline. With regard to the more general point of your post, even if it's nominally possible to eke out a profit under overburdening regulation, you're still allowed to take a principled stand against it.
- smallnamespace 10y ago
  The timeline is not unreasonable at all. They were planning to ship by the end of the year -- obviously the regulator should get involved before it's in the hands of users. I've seen requests from regulators before. If you don't have or can't produce exactly what they asked, you call them up and tell them some parts will take longer. The point is to have a dialogue; the threat of sanctions is just to make sure you work with them.
  - wyager 10y ago
    Two weeks is not reasonable for the demands made in the letter. That, plus a $21,000/day penalty, is a clear "fuck you".
    - Oletros 10y ago
      Two weeks are totally reasonable. If you intend to sell the thing in less than two months, that information should already be ready
      - wyager 10y ago
        Why would you have all the random crap the NHTSA demanded ready to go if this wasn't a pre-existing regulation?
        smallnamespace 10y ago
        What's random about it? It's basically: - What's in the installation + operating manual? - Items 1-3 - Is it safe? Did you do testing? How? Items 4-6 - What vehicles does it work on? What happens if you screw up during installation? Items 7-8 - What happens if an owner screws up and puts in an unsupported car? Item 9 - Did you think about whether this keeps the car compliant with other safety regulations? In particular, did you think about the legality of blocking/removing the mirror? Did you do testing? Items 10-12 - When are you selling/shipping it? Items 13-14 - Anything else you want us to know? Item 15 Every single item is a completely reasonable question to ask. I'd certainly hope comma.ai knew the answer to each of these questions before they sold it to the public. Again, if 2 weeks wasn't enough time, then negotiate with them and give them what you have. Threats of daily fines are often boilerplate that get tacked on to ensure that people take the request seriously; I'd challenge anyone to find an example where the regulatee cooperated with the regulator in good faith and still got fined for not responding.

I can't believe the nerve of some of these Silicon Valley randroids. If they're so great, why do they think a little bit of regulation is going to kill them?

by pdog 10y ago

I can't believe the nerve of some of these Silicon Valley randroids. If they're so great, why do they think a little bit of regulation is going to kill them?

jacquesm 10y ago

At a guess the list of questions showed Hotz just how far away he really was from having a shippable product and since the 'fun' bit was over it caused him to throw in the towel. Prototyping stuff and proof of concepts are fun, productizing much less so. Moving to China will not really change that.

karlshea 10y ago
And, the list of requests in the special order are not ridiculous at all. They are a bunch of basic questions that I would hope someone making driver-assist hardware would be able to answer.
- throwaway2016a 10y ago
  I second that. Having worked with blockchain companies, I have seen much scarier letters than this and if the blockchain messes up no one dies.[1] [1] At least not as a direct cause/effect relationship.
- khuey 10y ago
  The first three roughly boil down to "please send us a copy of the manual".
  - TeMPOraL 10y ago
    Which is something he should have in a pretty much finished form if he's about to release a product.

wyager 10y ago

Is this a joke? If not, you clearly didn't read the letter; it's more than "a little regulation", it's a huge set of requests on an unreasonably short timeline. With regard to the more general point of your post, even if it's nominally possible to eke out a profit under overburdening regulation, you're still allowed to take a principled stand against it.

smallnamespace 10y ago
The timeline is not unreasonable at all. They were planning to ship by the end of the year -- obviously the regulator should get involved before it's in the hands of users. I've seen requests from regulators before. If you don't have or can't produce exactly what they asked, you call them up and tell them some parts will take longer. The point is to have a dialogue; the threat of sanctions is just to make sure you work with them.
- wyager 10y ago
  Two weeks is not reasonable for the demands made in the letter. That, plus a $21,000/day penalty, is a clear "fuck you".
  - Oletros 10y ago
    Two weeks are totally reasonable. If you intend to sell the thing in less than two months, that information should already be ready
    - wyager 10y ago
      Why would you have all the random crap the NHTSA demanded ready to go if this wasn't a pre-existing regulation?
      - smallnamespace 10y ago
        What's random about it? It's basically: - What's in the installation + operating manual? - Items 1-3 - Is it safe? Did you do testing? How? Items 4-6 - What vehicles does it work on? What happens if you screw up during installation? Items 7-8 - What happens if an owner screws up and puts in an unsupported car? Item 9 - Did you think about whether this keeps the car compliant with other safety regulations? In particular, did you think about the legality of blocking/removing the mirror? Did you do testing? Items 10-12 - When are you selling/shipping it? Items 13-14 - Anything else you want us to know? Item 15 Every single item is a completely reasonable question to ask. I'd certainly hope comma.ai knew the answer to each of these questions before they sold it to the public. Again, if 2 weeks wasn't enough time, then negotiate with them and give them what you have. Threats of daily fines are often boilerplate that get tacked on to ensure that people take the request seriously; I'd challenge anyone to find an example where the regulatee cooperated with the regulator in good faith and still got fined for not responding.