News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on The Cancelled Comma One Would Have Embarrassed the Car Industry. Parent comment

Re:The Cancelled Comma One Would Have Embarrassed the Car In... by tptacek on Monday October 31, 2016 @05:45PM (#12841223)
They weren't given any government requirements, with the the possible exception of the FHMVSS rule that you can't remove the rear-view mirror of the car. The NHTSA Special Order asked only for documentation of extremely basic test plan stuff (road, speed, weather, and traffic limits for the device, along with user documentation).
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The Cancelled Comma One Would Have Embarrassed the Car In... by TillE on Monday October 31, 2016 @05:50PM (#12841264)
That was their request for information, yes. But I have trouble believing that the NHTSA would allow you to market some half-baked crap that takes over control of your vehicle.

Maybe that's legal, though. Not great if it is. Anything short of full, reliable automation seems incredibly dangerous.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The Cancelled Comma One Would Have Embarrassed the Car In... by shadowshadow on Monday October 31, 2016 @06:02PM (#12841354)
The Special Order might be of the "we're looking for a justification to fine you and issue a recall" type, which it looks like they often are.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The Cancelled Comma One Would Have Embarrassed the Car In... by tptacek on Monday October 31, 2016 @07:37PM (#12841967)
People have a lot of theories about what this letter meant, but the people on HN who have actually worked with NHTSA orders say the order means just what it says it means, and that NHTSA is pretty reasonable to work with.

Certainly the questions in the order --- I posted them on the first thread about the comma one --- seemed pretty basic and reasonable.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The Cancelled Comma One Would Have Embarrassed the Car In... by shadowshadow on Monday October 31, 2016 @10:05PM (#12842823)
The questions were reasonable, but the cover letter was very negative.

Could you point me to comments with first hand NHTSA experience? I didn't see any.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The Cancelled Comma One Would Have Embarrassed the Car In... by tptacek on Monday October 31, 2016 @10:12PM (#12842848)
The cover letter was very "do not blow off the NHTSA". One commenter who had experience with NHTSA provided examples of orders they sent other companies with similar language.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The Cancelled Comma One Would Have Embarrassed the Car In... by shadowshadow on Tuesday November 01, 2016 @01:53AM (#12843714)
I assume you mean this comment? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12819423

The listed special orders were the pretext to $70m, $35m and $105m fines. Doesn't inspire confidence.

It might just be reporting bias, but I couldn't find an example of a special order that wasn't associated with a massive scandal.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The Cancelled Comma One Would Have Embarrassed the Car In... by jacquesm on Tuesday November 01, 2016 @06:56AM (#12844632)
The idea is that you comply with the request, not ignore it. Those fines only kick in if you decide to go ahead anyway.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The Cancelled Comma One Would Have Embarrassed the Car In... by ubernostrum on Monday October 31, 2016 @06:08PM (#12841400)
Typically when you get to the point of getting one of those it's because you've been blatantly ignoring regulations or regulators up until now and they feel like they need to get your attention.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The Cancelled Comma One Would Have Embarrassed the Car In... by EpicEng on Monday October 31, 2016 @06:21PM (#12841492)
Well if they were planning on going to market without being able to pass an audit then they deserve every bit of it. I've worked in am FDA regulated field for a little over a decade and getting in touch with regulatory bodies up front is par for the course. Sounds to me like they don't know what they're doing and are in over their heads.
[ Parent | on HN ]