Live data from Hacker News

A more realistic route to autonomous driving

economist.com

41–50 of 91 posts

Re: A more realistic route to autonomous driving

#41

> In March a pedestrian was killed in Tempe, Arizona when a self-driving Uber vehicle failed to spot her as she wheeled her bicycle across an empty road at night Wrong, the car did spot her, but the emergency braking systems were turned off.

Of course no mention in the article that the pedestrian was crossing unsafely.

It's a brief mention, so I'll forgive missing details, but it's just flat-out wrong to say "the car didn't see her".

Re: A more realistic route to autonomous driving

#42
post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> especially among people who really want to get out of car ownership I have brought this up before and I still do not understand how or why this idea is so tightly coupled to fully autonomous vehicles. I don't see how removing a human driver from a car service is going to change the dynamics enough to drive legions of people who own cars to get rid of them if they haven't done so already. The only friction a human d…

There seems to be an implicit assumption that autonomous driving would somehow make the cost of effectively renting cars by the mile (and have them come to your door) almost too cheap to meter. Whereas, especially for transportation options that involve multiple people in a vehicle, the cost of a driver isn't really all that much relative to the overall cost of operating a vehicle. For any imagined scenario involving…

For renting cars there is a big advantage. You may notice that different drop offs have different fees associated. This is because people tend to collect around certain areas. This creates the need for company drivers to redistribute the cars. Being able to do that dynamically and automatically has a huge advantage. It also allows you to make the rental locations more sparse and efficiently packed.

So yes, it does lessen the cost of renting cars. But it doesn't make it anywhere near too cheap to meter.

Re: A more realistic route to autonomous driving

#43
post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> especially among people who really want to get out of car ownership I have brought this up before and I still do not understand how or why this idea is so tightly coupled to fully autonomous vehicles. I don't see how removing a human driver from a car service is going to change the dynamics enough to drive legions of people who own cars to get rid of them if they haven't done so already. The only friction a human d…

There seems to be an implicit assumption that autonomous driving would somehow make the cost of effectively renting cars by the mile (and have them come to your door) almost too cheap to meter. Whereas, especially for transportation options that involve multiple people in a vehicle, the cost of a driver isn't really all that much relative to the overall cost of operating a vehicle. For any imagined scenario involving…

> Whereas, especially for transportation options that involve multiple people in a vehicle, the cost of a driver isn't really all that much relative to the overall cost of operating a vehicle.

Do you have a source on this? It’s my understanding that most mass transit systems in the US spend a huge amount on operator compensation. BART, the one I’m most familiar with, spends $500m of its $691m operating budget on salary and benefits [0] despite the fact that BART trains already drive themselves!

[0]: https://www.bart.gov/sites/default/files/docs/FY18_Budget_Su...

Re: A more realistic route to autonomous driving

#44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The vast majority of such systems in the US are limited to people with disabilities.

This is not the impression I have. The one here is open to anyone and even sometimes runs a loop for a local taproom. I guess you could sample 10 or 100 of them and see how many impose restrictions on rider eligibility.

"Vast majority" may have been too strong, but I stand behind "majority". The two programs on that Wiki page that actually have links are for disabled passengers only. Looking at the three systems that have covered areas I have lived, Broward County Transit and New Jersey Transit offer DRT only to those with disabilities, and Dallas Area Rapid Transit has very limited DRT service for non-disabled customers.

> The one here is open to anyone and even sometimes runs a loop for a local taproom.

If it is running a loop it isn't DRT, it's a jitney.

Re: A more realistic route to autonomous driving

#45
post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The min-busses with flexible routes are a common mode of transportation in certain Eastern European countries, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshrutka They are. But that makes me wonder why we don't already see a lot of this type of thing in the US. My instinct would be the cost of a minimum wage-ish driver isn't the difference between this mode of transportation working and it not. Of course, it does exist in…

A similar service is quite common in the US: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demand_responsive_transport#Un... Lower costs there can perhaps lead to a virtuous cycle of increased service and use.

ridewithvia.com is a recent startup, doing "demand responsive transportation", for regular people, very successfully - multiple us cities, and various (new) global partnerships.

Re: A more realistic route to autonomous driving

#46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not the impression I have. The one here is open to anyone and even sometimes runs a loop for a local taproom. I guess you could sample 10 or 100 of them and see how many impose restrictions on rider eligibility.

"Vast majority" may have been too strong, but I stand behind "majority". The two programs on that Wiki page that actually have links are for disabled passengers only. Looking at the three systems that have covered areas I have lived, Broward County Transit and New Jersey Transit offer DRT only to those with disabilities, and Dallas Area Rapid Transit has very limited DRT service for non-disabled customers. > The one…

I imagine the urban systems tend to be more restrictive than the rural ones.

Re: A more realistic route to autonomous driving

#47

IMHO this is how self driving applications should start. Driving on the US freeways (say between LA and SF) isn't about your driving skills. It's mostly just about trying not to fall asleep. And machines are way better than humans at this! Even outside the US, there are many areas (like UAE), which have amazing highways, sparse traffic and there isn't rail/air connectivity to some places. Self driving "shuttles" seem…

I wonder if self-driving over highways, coordinated with jitney-on-demand for the inner city route would be feasible ?

Re: A more realistic route to autonomous driving

#48

> In March a pedestrian was killed in Tempe, Arizona when a self-driving Uber vehicle failed to spot her as she wheeled her bicycle across an empty road at night Wrong, the car did spot her, but the emergency braking systems were turned off.

Of course no mention in the article that the pedestrian was crossing unsafely.

isn't that the promise of a self driving car though? it can respond faster to dangerous situations?

Re: A more realistic route to autonomous driving

#49
post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> especially among people who really want to get out of car ownership I have brought this up before and I still do not understand how or why this idea is so tightly coupled to fully autonomous vehicles. I don't see how removing a human driver from a car service is going to change the dynamics enough to drive legions of people who own cars to get rid of them if they haven't done so already. The only friction a human d…

Self-driving people talk about this because, even if the tech worked, the costs of the hardware involved is currently so prohibitively high (~$100,000s per car) that a taxi model is the only one that makes sense.

The comment beside you says that a car has a useful lifespan of 200,000 miles, or 50¢ per mile for the tech. The internet suggests the average highway speed in the US is 70mph. That suggests that it will cost $35/hr. for the autonomy and probably that much again for the car itself.

At $70/hr., I expect people will still opt to own their own vehicle.

Re: A more realistic route to autonomous driving

#50
post #5

This is certainly more cautious, but it's not clear that this is any more realistic than Waymo's plan which involves limiting vehicles to a predefine area, mapping in great detail, etc.

It's clearly more realistic. They don't have to deal with roadworks, they have preset pickup points (no need to figure out finding a safe space to stop), they are relying on other drivers being cautious around a bright orange vehicle rather than trying to act like a real car, they have explicit screens for communication with pedestrians rather than trying to do it implicitly like we would (I.e. slow down to let a car out vs having a screen say "after you" or whatever).

Much easier (though still very hard).

Post reply on HN