[slg]

Comma is bragging about 6 million miles drive. Tesla's Autopilot has over 2 billion miles driven. This has two cameras (EDIT: and apparently 1 radar that already exists in the vehicle). Tesla's has 12 cameras, 12 sonars, and 1 radar. This is backed by a company that apparently has received $8 million in funding. Autopilot is backed by a company with a market cap of $84 billion. You are welcome to your opinion of Tesla's product, but if that is garbage, I can't image the word you should use to describe this because the two products are in no way comparable.

[missosoup]

You're listing specs which are a proxy for how much money the incumbent has, and saying that the regulatory barrier should be set at those specs for some reason.

None of those specs give any indication to the relative safety of the two systems though. And this is exactly what incumbents want. They want a small player to have to match their massive cash holdings to enter their market, even if the small player has a better product.

Here's some food for though: Tesla has been slapped with multiple lawsuits for misleading advertising of Autopilot. Regulators all agree that Autopilot is just an SAE level 2 system, same like those found on much cheaper cars with far less hardware and none of the marketing oversell.

[slg]

I listed miles driven. That is a direct indicator of safety.

I also listed the number and type of inputs each system has. This might correlate with money, but it clearly also correlates with safety. One simple example, it is impossible for the Comma system to have 360 degree visual coverage of what is around you with just two cameras in the locations they are in.

[DesolationJones]

Tesla does not use 12 cameras for autopilot. It just uses radar and 1 or 2 of the front facing cameras depending on the version. Not really different from OpenPIlot.

[reitzensteinm]

A selling point of HW3 is that it will use all of the cameras, so that's likely to eventually change.

[missosoup]

You're making a lot of really wild assumptions about what correlates with safety without a shred of evidence to back it up.

Humans have two eyes, a pretty narrow field of view, no radar, no sonar. By your logic they're even worse, yet theyre so much better than Autopilot that it's unattainable for it to match.

[slg]

>You're making a lot of really wild assumptions... without a shred of evidence to back it up.

>Humans have two eyes... yet theyre so much better than Autopilot that it's unattainable for it to match.

These two statements are pretty ironic back to back.

I'm not sure if we are ever going to convince each other of anything if we can't agree that there is a clear difference in track record when one product has been used for 2 billion miles and the other for 6 million.

[taneq]

I haven't seen any videos of OpenPilot vehicles swerving towards gore points or ploughing into stopped vehicles, though.