I love this paragraph of the Request:<p>> The singular includes the plural; the plural includes the singular. The masculine gender includes the feminine and neuter genders; and the neuter gender includes the masculine and feminine genders. "And" as well as "or" shall be construed either disjunctively or conjunctively, to bring within scope of this Special Order all responses that might otherwise be construed to be outside the scope. "Each" shall be construed to include "every", and "every" shall be construed to include "each". "Any" shall be construed to include "all", and "all" shall be construed to include "any". The use of a verb in any tense shall be construed as the use of the verb in a past or present tense, whenever necessary to bring within the scope of the document requests all responses which might otherwise be construed to be outside its scope.<p>I've seen similar paragraphs on other legal documents, but this is the most thorough I've seen. It's basically just a huge middle finger to all (any?) armchair lawyers who want to weasel out of the order.
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: <a href="https://www.scribd.com/document/329218929/2016-10-27-Special-Order-Directed-to-Comma-ai" rel="nofollow">https://www.scribd.com/document/329218929/2016-10-27-Special...</a>). Like, how dare the government try to have basic standards for multi-ton hunks of metal hurtling down the highway without human input.<p>I've been trying to convince people lately that Silicon Valley isn't all delusional technolibertarian assholes, but guys like this sure aren't making my case easy.
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.<p>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.<p>As soon as you touch critical national infrastructure (Telcom, NTSB, Healthcare, finance) then you have to deal with the government, which never forgets to remind you of the threat of authorized violence and financial penalties.<p>If you want to play at the high stakes tables, you have to pay the blinds. If that's too scary, then stay at the smaller tables.<p>The unfairness commentary here is pretty naive.
Something seems fishy to me. Cruise which GM bought for $1B a few months back was working on similar tech. Having only raised $3M he could have EASILY sold his tech/team to Chrysler or Ford or Hyundai, or any other car company for $100M and made his investors super happy and himself very rich.<p>So why "quit" when the feds ask you to deal with regulations that involve passenger safety. Its not like he had to spend $20M on clinical trials.
I find it interesting that he was on This Week in Startups only a few weeks ago calling every company he found unconvincing "losers" <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2zy_07g2IrM" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2zy_07g2IrM</a><p>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...<p>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 press or on Amazon? People who want refunds? Not to mention the literal horror of a car crash. To borrow a term injected into this election season, you gotta have Stamina.
It's difficult to be sure about George.<p>He spoke so derisively about other companies that failed to deliver, and now because of the inevitable paperwork that comes with a product that takes over your car for you at times (level-3 autonomy iirc), he too fails to deliver.<p>If he leaves to join Tesla, it seems pretty irresponsible, given that he's raised $3.1M and has a team of employees relying on him.<p>But that's all speculation until we see what comes next.<p>Perhaps I'm unimaginative at ~1:30am, but I can't imagine what he wants comma.ai to do, unless he sells or licenses the product to automakers who can do the paperwork for him.
Wow, sometimes I wish HN came with a "context, please" button. ;)<p>It's a self driving car (or rather a prototype of an "autopilot" feature like Tesla's), AFAICT.<p>From [1]:<p>> After a couple miles, Hotz lets go of the wheel and pulls the trigger... Hotz shouts, “You got this, car! You got this!”<p>> The car does, more or less, have it. ... Amazed, I ask Hotz what it felt like the first time he got the car to work.<p>> “Dude,” he says, “the first time it worked was this morning.”<p>[1] <a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/features/2015-george-hotz-self-driving-car/" rel="nofollow">http://www.bloomberg.com/features/2015-george-hotz-self-driv...</a>
Wow. If he really moves his project to China to take advantage of a lax regulatory environment even though he couldn't pass the scrutiny in the US, he's being very immoral and cavalier about people's lives in China.<p>I don't understand how a startup like Cruise can get past this regulatory hurlde in the US but Hotz can't.
Given how reasonable the NHTSA request looks, to give up so quickly is a bit suspicious. In products like that it is likely that the first 50% looks much more approachable, and then as you try to reach something that can actually be shipped to customers, you have to solve huge problems incrementally, and it is very hard. So looks like a bit of an excuse to stop it: if you have the working thing you try harder before giving up IMHO.
Nobody who is familiar with George is surprised by this. It's unfortunate that his ego has a scapegoat, however. I guess this time he couldn't find anyone on IRC to finish the hard parts for him and let him take the credit.
a little more detail from techcrunch: <a href="https://techcrunch.com/2016/10/28/comma-ai-cancels-the-comma-one-following-nhtsa-letter/" rel="nofollow">https://techcrunch.com/2016/10/28/comma-ai-cancels-the-comma...</a><p>It seems that Hotz said, “dealing with regulators and lawyers… isn’t worth it.”<p>Which seems very unfortunate/shortsighted due to how useful this tech could be. Why not hire someone to deal with them for you?
Hopefully his example is shown to every engineering class along side the Tacoma Narrows bridge collapse example.<p>He is truly an example of an irresponsible engineer and a great lesson to learn from.
The dude is brilliant no doubt... But this space requires brilliance and a lot of spine. That is what makes someone like Musk so unique. Someone thats willing to risk it all, and won't let doors closing in their face and public opinion hinder them. I hope Hotz can put his ego aside and go work with someone that can handle the bureaucracy and red tape. He is surely a prodigy and it would be a shame if the world can't benefit from his ideas.
I'm not involved in the machine vision field but I found his commitment to open and transparent academic publishing very admirable.<p>He published a paper with their summer intern here:
<a href="https://arxiv.org/pdf/1608.01230.pdf" rel="nofollow">https://arxiv.org/pdf/1608.01230.pdf</a>
Haven't we heard this story countless times from projects on sites like Kickstarter before? There is a huge difference between tinkering in your garage and creating a production product.<p>Whether it's something that falls under government regulations like Hotz's project, or transitioning from a couple of 3D-printed models in your basement to an injection molded factory, making things (at scale and in the real world) is hard.
I'm just amazed at what a bad name that is. <i>"Comma One"</i>... Did they never think that it would be called the <i>The Coma One</i> after even the slightest inevitable incident? Or that a segment of people will be innocently misspelling it as "Coma" everywhere? and how quickly it could catch on?<p>It's so obvious it seems almost Freudian ...
Do I think Hotz has a viable product? Yes. (A comment over at Jalopnik linked to a Tweet where an actual human rider / journalist experienced the Hotz vehicle and was quite impressed)<p>Do I think there's significant political pressure to have his product, ahem, driven into the ground as to not be a viable competitor to larger firms? Yes.<p>Do I think it's a sign of immaturity to pack up your stuff and leave when confronted by a small challenge? Yes.<p>Do I think dealing with the NHTSA (and potential NTSB) is a small challenge? No.<p>Am I still a fan of George Hotz as both an inventor, innovator, and persona? Yeah, I can see where he's coming from.<p>Do I think it's hilarious that a vocal contingent here criticizes him for taking a "path of least resistance" (regulation) in his development and iteration process? Absolutely.
The attitude in the tech industry is to ship buggy products before they are complete. I'm so tired of wasting my time with buggy crap.<p>I think it's awesome that a government agency said that this practice is not acceptable when someone's life is at stake.
Here's what the Special Order demanded:<p>1. Describe in detail how the comma one is installed in a vehicle and provide a copy of installation instructions for the comma one.<p>2. Describe in detail the advanced driver assistance features of the comma one, including how those features differ from the existing features of the vehicles in which the comma one is intended to be installed.<p>3. Describe in detail how a vehicle driver uses the comma one and provide a copy of user instructions for the comma one.<p>4. Provide a detailed description of the conditions under which you believe a vehicle equipped with comma one may operate safely. This description must include<p>a. The types of roadways on which a vehicle equipped with comma one may operate safely;<p>b. The geographic area in which a vehicle equipped with comma one may operate safely;<p>c. The speed range in which a vehicle equipped with comma one may operate safely;<p>d. The traffic conditions in which a vehicle equipped with comma one may operate safely;<p>e. The environmental conditions in which a vehicle equipped with comma one may operate safely;<p>f. The amount and type of driver inputs necessary for a vehicle equipped with comma one to operate safely.<p>5. Provide a detailed description of the basis for your response to Request No. 4, including a description of any testing or analysis to determine safe operating conditions for a vehicle equipped with comma one.<p>6. Describe the steps you have taken or plan to take to ensure the safe operation of a vehicle equipped with comma one, including but not limited to automated shutoff of comma one features and owner education.<p>7. Provide a list by make, model, model year or year of production of each vehicle for which you support or anticipate supporting use of the comma one.<p>8. Describe in detail any steps you have taken to ensure that installation of the comma one in any supported vehicle does not have unintended consequences on the vehicle’s operation.<p>9. Describe the functionality of comma one, if any, if installed in an unsupported vehicle.<p>10. Have you done any analysis or testing of the impact or potential impact of comma one on the vehicle’s compliance with the FMVSS? If yes, please describe the analysis or testing in detail and provide supporting documentation. If no, describe why not.<p>11. Describe in detail how the comma one impacts a vehicle’s rearview mirror, including whether it requires removal of the rearview mirror or the extent to which it blocks or obstructs the rearview mirror.<p>12. State your position on how the comma one does or does not affect a vehicle’s compliance with FMVSS No 111, Review Mirrors (49 CFR 571.111), and provide any supporting information or documentation to support your position.<p>13. State the date on which you currently plan to begin selling the comma one, and provide a list of all retailers and/or websites through which you anticipate selling the comma one.<p>14. State the date on which you currently plan to begin shipping the comma one.<p>15. Provide any other information which you believe supports the safety of the comma one.
Today, I can only paraphrase George's harsh bulling destructive feedback he gave us on our startup:<p>George, "that wouldn't work" :)
I'm seeing a huge number of assumptions and assertions, but this is still "developing news". I think it's equally likely that this device will be brought to market at a later point when the start-up gathers the resources, test results, and the lawyers that can handle the regulators.
He did release the dataset and some python scripts for training the model.<p><a href="https://github.com/commaai/research" rel="nofollow">https://github.com/commaai/research</a><p>The last blog post talks about them having a system for the 2016 civic. I guess maybe they will sell it on aliexpress?
Technically it sounds more like he is pivoting to other markets and tweaking the product. I don't think he is giving the 3 million back to Andreessen.
Comma's main advantage over Tesla's Autopilot was, as I understand it, the use of cameras to collect video data. Hotz presented that as the advantage at TechCrunch Disrupt, at least, saying that he could beat Tesla's Autopilot because he had full video data from a small smartphone app that he had test users running as they drove while Tesla's vehicles had no video input.<p>I wonder if his choice to cancel Comma is related to Tesla's recent announcement that all new Tesla vehicles would ship with a full video camera outfit.
Personally, I think it's good to see this. I work on a small part of an ADAS system being developed for a large Tier 1 supplier. They won't even look at you if you haven't adhered to ISO 26262 development standards which add - easily - 2 times the work that a normal development would take. And for good reason.<p>I'd like to see GH's Failure Modes and Effects Analysis, Fault Tree Analysis, Failures in Time Analysis, etc., etc., etc.<p>This stuff is really safe and not there yet for a REASON.
When is the open source project to create self driving systems going to start? I feel very uncomfortable with private corporate AI driving me around and making decisions with my family's life in the balance. For me, I need to be able to see the code, change the code, change the weightings and priorities. I've been thinking about FOSS solutions to car computers a lot and it seems like it is really the only way to go if you care about freedom, security and privacy.
The government threatening him to pay a penalty of $21,000 per day(!) before even selling the product sure didn't inflict affection from his side.<p>[0] <a href="https://www.scribd.com/document/329218929/2016-10-27-Special-Order-Directed-to-Comma-ai" rel="nofollow">https://www.scribd.com/document/329218929/2016-10-27-Special...</a>
I've been thinking for a while now that the main threat to the existence of self-driving cars in the medium-term future is that somebody, in the rush to beat Google, jumping the gun and selling cars that kill people cause Congress to knee-jerk outlaw the whole thing.
Do third-party "autopilot" systems require ISO 26262 certification? I know that car manufacturers and tier-1s spend lots of time and money getting their safety-critical code certified. Do the same requirements not apply to aftermarket solutions?<p>Actually, now that I think about this more... does Tesla's autopilot have ISO 26262 certification? I hope that the recent advancements in self-driving cars isn't a result of tech companies bending or breaking the rules, but I don't know enough about when ISO 26262 is required (if at all).
I hope he backs down a bit, consults widely and work with the regulators looking into his company's product, even while exploring other markets.<p>Still personally rooting for him because I personally think his product is amazing, and is poised to be a huge success if he does ship.<p>As an outsider, his audacity, backed by proven technical smarts, seems to be the quality that should define the Silicon Valley startup scene, but over time, sentiments here at HN and other forums seem to suggest otherwise.
The following quote from his site speaks volumes about the hubris:<p>"we didn't do anything wrong, but somehow, we lost
-- nokia, or car companies in 5 years"
<<George Hotz cancels his Tesla Autopilot-like ‘comma one’ after request from NHTSA<p>What is the role of the national highway transportation safety administration wrt driver less card and trucks?<p>Can they issue rules? Can they prevent deployment? Is it for cars and trucks? Once driverless exists will there have to be a differentiator for auto/truck?
Not everything we do is a success, and there are many reasons for our failures when they happen. The trick is to lick your wounds, learn from your mistakes and get back on the horse as soon as you're able to.<p>I hope George learns all the lessons he needs from this to make whatever happens next a success.
Why does the document from the NHTSA look like a court order..formatted like something you would receive when getting sued, etc? Is this standard format to request that questions be answered?<p>It looks more intimidating and scary than a friendly "hey, we want info about your product".
In the discussion on Jalopnik (a fairly large auto-enthusiast site), someone mentioned that Alex Roy had a good experience riding in a comma one-equipped car (<a href="https://twitter.com/AlexRoy144/status/791996855114694657" rel="nofollow">https://twitter.com/AlexRoy144/status/791996855114694657</a>).<p>I thought this was an interesting perspective - Alex Roy is famous in car enthusiast circles for his driving records over the past 30 years. He's set speed records with drives across the US and around Manhattan, and has set electric/semi-autonomous records in a Tesla Model S in August 2016.<p>The point being that Alex Roy has probably spent more time thinking about driving, planning trips, and understanding traffic rules than most other people alive today. His perspective is just a single perspective, but given his massive experience with car-driver systems I think it's an interesting perspective.
The commenters on that twitter thread are critical of geohot for "rolling over easily".<p>I don't think we should presume that the guy who defied Sony, AT&T, Apple, and the DCMA is doing any such thing.<p>Maybe he discovered a flaw in the design of comma AI or something.
It's weird that he would give up on his product after one letter, specially when money is not an issue. Perhaps he already has a buyer for the tech and just wants to move on to something else.
Funny that Tesla doesn't even sell "Autopilot" anymore, as it was an off-the-shelf 3rd-party solution, but the reference persists. Talk about the power of marketing and branding.
Was this just a face-saving way to end the project, or did he really shut down a viable project that he wanted to continue over a simple request for information by a regulator?
doubt he actually cancels it and changes his mind next week, this was more spur of the moment and his investors calmed him down?, way too much attention being brought to it
It appears Hotz will now deploy his system in China, where the regulations on such devices are surely more lax. Looks like a good move for extended testing without pesky government scrutiny.
Thank goodness. It sounds like his grand scheme crumbled under a little scrutiny from a consumer safety organization. We don't need another theranos.
That reminds me of my old comment about this<p><a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12492856" rel="nofollow">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12492856</a><p>I'm really not overly negative about new things but this was predictable.
YC should take note, as a bunch of recent investments outside of pure software will likely end up in the same problem space.<p>nuclear energy, supersonic planes, etc. - applying the "disruption" and "agile" method does not work everywhere, to put it mildly.
Good. It seems exceedingly unlikely that this is a road-ready technology, and we don't need yet another software-brained megalomaniac releasing an insufficiently-developed, unproven product into the physical world, where "bugs" will actually just straight kill you.
Classic government. Self-driving technology should benchmarked against how good people are at driving (and how often they kill and injure people), as opposed to being proven intrinsically safe like a car part.