That kind of defeats the argument of the article then.

They're still in development and testing

Dang looks like the class already started.

Would it be worth it to formally enroll in the class if you're trying to get into the industry?

why would someone pick a guy who did this over an MS grad from Stanford

You've posted a ton of unsubstantive comments to HN. We eventually ban accounts that do this, so would you please stop?

It's an important question, though. I see a lot of interest in MOOCs, the Udacity nanodegree etc. on the internet, but I can't see my employer/me hiring someone whose only qualifications are online courses. I know absolutely no one in my entire department who does not at least have an MS. And we are doing exactly the jobs that people who take these courses want to get hired for.

I like to do MOOC courses to get an overview of / intro to a certain topic I am interested. But once people charge a substantial amount of money for a degree, it is absolutely pertinent to question whether the degree is worth it. E.g. IMO udacity is very close to being fraudulent with the promisses they make in their advertizements of their nanodegree.

Ok, but an important question deserves a substantive comment.

lol i'm not sure if you are being sarcastic

I think you start with a a commercial product, which doesn't exist right now.

> How many of these does one need in a self-driving car?

I think that definitely depends on the company you talk to. Tesla right now says 0. Other companies have been seen with 1-5.

This is intended to replace the 64, and I've never seen more than one of those on an autonomous test vehicle.

Imagine you are potentially the first autonomous car maker to market. You need to build a car that assumes no other cars can talk to it. The idea you have is good, but is probably a solution that gets addressed much farther down the road.