[krosaen]

I find this product appealing, but aren't you taking on full liability when using it? Not having the company I buy a product like this from have any liability seems like bad incentives and makes me nervous, currently wouldn't drive with my family in the car especially. For instance, what if there was a bug that caused the system to make an abrupt right turn off the road? Seems highly unlikely, but again, if they are confident it is safe, can they not have some legal skin in the game to prove it?

[alnwlsn]

Is this different than any other time?

you crash your car (mechanical problem) -> Ford says "not our fault, we're not paying" -> you sue Ford -> court decides

you crash your car (FSD problem) -> Tesla says "not our fault, we're not paying" -> you sue Tesla -> court decides

you crash your car (Comma problem) -> Comma says "not our fault, we're not paying" -> you sue Comma -> court decides

[insaneirish]

Maybe it's me, but I think in the worse case scenario (criminal liability), a jury will be more sympathetic to a person (acting in good faith) that had an issue because of the car manufacturer's provided system than they would to a person who installed a DIY/open source self-driving system.

And I say this as someone who considered trying out the project.

[tzs]

> you crash your car (FSD problem) -> Tesla says "not our fault, we're not paying" -> you sue Tesla -> court decides

That's only if you sent Tesla a written notice within 30 days of purchasing that you wished to opt out of the binding arbitration clause in the purchase agreement you had to agree to to get the car.

[threeseed]

> but aren't you taking on full liability when using it

Of course. And if you were to do something stupid like take your hands off the wheel it would constitute reckless driving. Which means in an accident your warranty is void, insurance claims extinguished and you would be criminally liable for any bodily damage/death.

I will never understand the logic of anyone using a product like this.

[krosaen]

GM will take responsibility for accidents with super cruise if it was being used as intended [1] - and that includes eyes on road, hands free driving. Hands free means a very bad bug where it jerked off the road with no warning seems like it falls in that bucket. I wouldn’t consider my inability to grab the wheel instantly in that scenario stupid. With comma, in that scenario, it would still just be, hey, you are running open source software you installed at your own risk, right?

Comma could come installed with open pilot and some limited liability, but it puts it all on you having you install it yourself. That is making less and less sense to me as they mature. I would think they could take on some liability, and still have the ability to defend themselves in cases where an accident was due to reckless use (e.g circumventing eyes on road tracking) or improper installation.

[1] https://blog.moseleycollins.com/will-gm-take-responsibility-...

[sathackr]

You're responsible for what your car does period. Using anything to help you drive does not absolve you of your responsibility to operate your vehicle in a safe manner.

Any autopilot/self driving/driver assistance system with a couple of very narrow exceptions(waymo etc..) is only an assistant and does not remove your responsibility to operate your vehicle safely.