The 21" monitor portrait-style in the car is fantastic.
The testing of a hacked-together system on the public road is not. He probably won't kill anyone, but if he were to I suspect he'd get the book thrown at him in the way that everyday death-by-DUI drivers don't.
Actually I'll go futher with this criticism: we've just seen drones being FAA regulated because users were unable to refrain from doing dangerous or nuisance things with them, such as flying near airports. DIY self-driving car research is similarly likely to damage the concept if it goes wrong.
But unlike drones, he is in the vehicle the entire time and can easily intervene.
The article does a good job of explaining the inherent danger someone (and those around him) faces when attempting something like this. The point is that he's attempting to push the boundaries and not asking for permission -- generally the conditions required to innovate. Maybe that should be celebrated before you bust out the "b-b-but it's dangerous!"
The testing of a hacked-together system on the public road is not. He probably won't kill anyone, but if he were to I suspect he'd get the book thrown at him in the way that everyday death-by-DUI drivers don't.
Actually I'll go futher with this criticism: we've just seen drones being FAA regulated because users were unable to refrain from doing dangerous or nuisance things with them, such as flying near airports. DIY self-driving car research is similarly likely to damage the concept if it goes wrong.