Live data from Hacker News

Waymo self-driving car crashed when driver fell asleep and triggered manual mode

qz.com

121–124 of 124 posts

Re: Waymo self-driving car crashed when driver fell asleep and triggered manual mode

#121

apropos, Tim Harford is an economist and an author of multiple exceptional books on economics targeted to the general public, not a reporter. He manages to show how deeply fascinating economics is and that economic phenomena are part of the fabric of not just our societies, but the very natural world. I highly recommend his "Undercover Economist" and other books.

He also does a rather good podcast on the BBC. More or less: Behind the stats at https://podcasts.files.bbci.co.uk/p02nrss1.rss

Re: Waymo self-driving car crashed when driver fell asleep and triggered manual mode

#122
post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Firefly was a joke. They had to install steering wheels shortly after getting them. The vehicles saw very little use.

I disagree it was a "joke"; I'd say it was a concept car - their vision of the future. They need steering wheels because they're still testing them, but the Firefly is the goal.

they made a few then had to install wheels after it was pointed out it was illegal in CA to drive without them- IE, lack of basic due diligence. And they've reverted to conventional cars as a platform because that makes more economic sense. Fine to have a goal but if you never get there and make basic bungles on the way, it's a joke.

Re: Waymo self-driving car crashed when driver fell asleep and triggered manual mode

#123
post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Waymo agrees with you, that's why their custom prototype car (the Firefly) didn't even have a steering wheel.

The Firefly was a joke. They had to install steering wheels shortly after getting them. The vehicles saw very little use.

Perfect for places like Downtown San Francisco, or retirement communities.

Re: Waymo self-driving car crashed when driver fell asleep and triggered manual mode

#124
post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm thinking about actual usage, not the UX.

I'm not sure what distinction you're drawing here. It's a prototype vehicle, where the self driving features are experimental and not certified by a third party. Extra safety systems are necessary that might not be reasonable once the tech is polished and regulated.

I'm saying any self driving where the human has to monitor how the computer is doing and be ready to take over is probabbly a non starter as human nature likely dictates that they will probabbly not do a worse job at that than just driving.
Post reply on HN