Hacker News Reader

Comment by bad_haircut72 | Hacker News Reader

Nobody is making you do this, they're not even charging you for it. Comparing to a company worth billions is disingenious.

View on HN

Those companies worth billions like GM and Tesla perform extensive testing to prove to regulators their software isn't going to kill people and does not pose an unacceptable risk to other drivers on the road. Do you get to sidestep all that if you post your code to GitHub?

Imagine if they all worked together on an open source project together.

I’m imagining it… marathon meetings, everyone worried about code standards, someone made Claude rewrite the whole thing in Prologue and is zealously arguing for it in a 900-comment PR.

And somehow half the time invested in the project is arguing about a code of conduct.

There have been dozens of fatalities due to Tesla self driving tech. As far as I know there haven't been any fatalities due to Comma tech.

Yup, because you get to be personally responsible for any outcomes just like you would be if you were driving without ai assistance. If you aren’t comfortable building and testing an open source project then it isn’t for you.

People cry daily that cybertrucks should not be street legal because they do not meet EU safety regulations but gluing plastic gadgets to your window yourself and calling it "AI assistance" is okay because the driver is ultimately responsible?

Why not? You are free to modify your vehicle in almost anyway you want as a consumer. Should someone putting some rain shields on their window require licensing and government testing for it because it might break off? Should generic brake pads or tierod ends require independent government testing or approval to be purchased and used?

Regulations don't exist to save people from their own stupid mistakes, they exist to prevent systemic abuses and dangers to the public in the pursuit of profit. And we already know from endless examples that corporations will knowingly let people die if their decision will increase profit margins. Not to mention the public doesn't have the ability to properly test or verify corporate designed and sold devices. Unless corporations provide all documentation related to the design and materials and code used, they should have special restrictions and regulations beyond what the average person does.

>You are free to modify your vehicle in almost anyway you want as a consumer.

States have window tinting laws to save people (and others around then) from their own idiocy.

States have window tinting laws to help police to pull over, harass, identify, and/or profile people in the pursuit of profit and control. The main justification for window tint laws is "protecting law enforcement", which is itself is a bad excuse, but everything beyond that is definitely complete bullcrap because the tinting laws differ so completely between states, with some states not caring at all. Many states with tinting laws have zero laws about maintenance or inspection of vehicles which is all but proof that the safety of the public is not even a real consideration. You can literally have sharp jagged chunks of rusty metal hanging off your car and its not illegal.

> they're not even charging you for it

The github repo says to use openpilot, you will need to buy a comma device[1], which they sell at $999.[2]

[1] https://github.com/commaai/openpilot?tab=readme-ov-file#usin...

[2] https://comma.ai/shop/comma-four

True. But what about the guy next to me on the 405? Or the guy driving towards me on Camino Real? They are kinda "making me do this".

Reply on news.ycombinator.com