You're right, it doesn't. At the very least, you needed a
smiley.
Even so, the criticism of the idiots behind this remians. I looked through their "how we did it" links, and I didn't see a mention of any of the safety issues present in such a system. And the list of ways this could obviously go wrong is pretty impressive:
Lose comms and car keeps doing what it did till you get comms back.
Someone hits Disable and the above happens till you enable.
Someone hits the Stop button and the above till you power cycle the cRIO.
Power is lost and the above till you restore power. (On a moving car)
In fact you similarly lose some/all control of the car if you: trip a breaker, lose power to the radio, lose power to the side car, disconnect the side car, overcurrent the jaguar, kill the watchdog in your code, and anything else that would stop a motor on an FRC bot. Plus more exotic failure mechanisms they've introduced:
Lose a pot and that servo runs away in one direction (full/no gas or brake, or sharp turn).
Lose the analog bumper or power and get the above x3.
I'm sure I've managed to miss a lot of failure modes here, but those are enough to make me question the sanity and common sense of these "engineers". Yes, the car was mostly moving slowly, but it's still going to be a serious problem if it suddenly decides to make a hard left while you're oh so intelligently standing on top of it.
The FRC controller is not an industrial controller. The whole system is set up to operate a very specific kind of robot safely. It can do this because the GDC has written the rules to force you to use it safely. All motors and moving parts are nearly directly controlled by the cRIO. So when the cRIO or any subsystem is disabled, motion stops. Motion doesn't continue doing what it was doing. This is the fundamental error these people made. They used a motor to operate the controls of a much larger machine. So when your tiny machine breaks, the larger on just keeps on plowing through pedestrians.
If they put even the tiniest bit of thought into making this even a little safe, they'd have done the obvious and simple thing. Use a spike to switch on a normally closed relay, and run the car's igition and run signals through this relay. No cRIO, no spike, relay opens and car turns off. It's crude and means the car would then coast until it stopped, but that's still better than a cross-country escapade under full power.
In case it's not obvious, I'm seriously unimpressed with these people claiming to be engineers. And don't get me started on that ridiculous disclaimer. Whether it's legally sound or not, it'd be a pretty poor excuse if someone tried this and got hurt.