Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Waymo Via

waymo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 277 posts

Re: Waymo Via

#121

Post by ttul »

lolc wrote: post #110

> No matter what you’re transporting or where it’s headed, Waymo Via will have you covered. Lumber haulage, on forest tracks, in winter? Snark aside, I'll be really impressed when they manage to get any service going. But that page doesn't offer anything to convince me.

Lumber hauling off road may actually be one of the easier applications because the road is usually dedicated to trucking. Logging trucks already assume they can blast along at full speed because if you use a logging road, you’re supposed to radio your position via CB to ensure the trucks know where you are and don’t hit you.

Re: Waymo Via

#122

Post by bdcs »

Pfhreak wrote: post #89

If Waymo is successful, there are potentially massive impacts to the population of the US. Trucking is a major industry. The Luddites weren't mad about the advancement of technology, they didn't destroy looms out of religious or anti-technological ideals. Many of them were skilled loom operators. They were squeezed out of their jobs by the race to the bottom, and they were angry that there wasn't any consideration fo…

>If Waymo is successful, there are potentially massive impacts to the population of the US. Trucking is a major industry.

Certainly, but we don't know if it will be positive or negative. Some studies[0] show increases in human truck driver employment with long-haul being fully automated (plus the work seems nicer).

[0]https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2018/02/uber-...

Re: Waymo Via

#123

Post by dgacmu »

ckmiller wrote: post #41

I competed in the DARPA Urban Challenge, back in 2007. While we were watching the finalists trying to sort out the world's first fully-automated traffic jam, the conversation turned to how easy it is to manipulate these vehicles. Imagine a remote stretch of highway frequented by automated 18-wheelers. All that's required to bring the truck to a screeching halt is a bedsheet and some decent timing, at which point the…

It's a mistake to think of this problem outside of the broader context of risk for shipping. Theft by external actors is just one of the many things that can go wrong when shipping goods. They can be late (leaving to spoilage in the case of perishable goods), they could be stolen by the driver, there could be an accident resulting in destruction of the goods. All of these risks get turned into pricing in the end, which is then combined with the actual cost of shipping the goods.

So the question is not whether there exist risks unique to autonomous trucking, the question is whether the cost in the end when taking all of these risks into account is lower.

Re: Waymo Via

#124

Post by pault »

tachyonbeam wrote: post #117
CPLX wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> seems to me like people just love to come up with imaginary reasons why self-driving cars/trucks can't work You do have a point. The core reality that self-driving is equivalent to full artificial intelligence and passing the Turing test should be sufficient I'd think.

I believe in incremental improvement. We can design vehicles that are increasingly more autonomous. They might never become completely autonomous (case in point, they will likely always need someone to come and repair them when damaged), but they can become autonomous enough to be useful. We're not far from the point where autonomous vehicles can become useful in specific scenarios, such as always following the same…

The thing I've always wondered about is: if governments can put street signs for humans on every road, why can't they do the same for autonomous vehicles? Sure, you could vandalize the signs and wreak havoc, but you can also remove a stop sign or hack a traffic light and do the same now. If a standards committee was formed to develop a spec for autonomous vehicle guides it seems like we could get to full autonomy far faster than waiting for AGI. Maybe you still have to drive on backcountry dirt roads, but wouldn't automating 90% of traffic be an enormous win for society?

Re: Waymo Via

#125

Post by SergeAx »

loeg wrote: post #88
gretch wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can already do this to humans pretty much just as easily, I just need some orange cones Then what? You have 20 palettes of dog chew toys or asian pears....? Some of the goods have serial/tracking numbers. The reason people don't rob 18 wheelers or trains is because it's not a good criminal enterprise

> people don't rob 18 wheelers Haven't you seen the documentary, The Fast and the Furious (2001)?

You mean "Love, Death & Robots", episode "Blind Spot"?

Re: Waymo Via

#126

Post by Pfhreak »

mprovost wrote: post #118
Pfhreak wrote: post #89

If Waymo is successful, there are potentially massive impacts to the population of the US. Trucking is a major industry. The Luddites weren't mad about the advancement of technology, they didn't destroy looms out of religious or anti-technological ideals. Many of them were skilled loom operators. They were squeezed out of their jobs by the race to the bottom, and they were angry that there wasn't any consideration fo…

Did car companies have to support blacksmiths, especially the ones skilled at shoeing horses? Airlines aren’t forced to subsidise railways. Innovators aren’t obligated to support the industries that they supplant.

I didn't say have to.

But consider that there are probably 10 million+ Americans who rely on trucking/trucker incomes. If a significant portion of them are put out of work, it's a recipe for massive civil unrest. Not to mention the impact to our stretched social safety nets.

Waymo doesn't have to do anything here, sure, but if they don't then I'd expect we see Luddite 2.0.

I personally think that innovation should be done ethically, that you should proceed forward, but don't be blind to the impact you could have.

Re: Waymo Via

#127

Post by slavik81 »

gretch wrote: post #45
ckmiller wrote: post #41

I competed in the DARPA Urban Challenge, back in 2007. While we were watching the finalists trying to sort out the world's first fully-automated traffic jam, the conversation turned to how easy it is to manipulate these vehicles. Imagine a remote stretch of highway frequented by automated 18-wheelers. All that's required to bring the truck to a screeching halt is a bedsheet and some decent timing, at which point the…

You can already do this to humans pretty much just as easily, I just need some orange cones Then what? You have 20 palettes of dog chew toys or asian pears....? Some of the goods have serial/tracking numbers. The reason people don't rob 18 wheelers or trains is because it's not a good criminal enterprise

A person in the truck is the difference between a burglary and a robbery. One is a property crime, while the other is a violent crime. The law views them as very different.

Re: Waymo Via

#128

Post by samatman »

dumbfoundded wrote: post #106
positr0n wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not how trademark law works though. Just because apples are a common, 20 million year old fruit doesn't mean Apple can't trademark the brand Apple in relation to computers and personal electronics.

Trademarks matter in context a lot. An Apple branded computer is a lot stronger than an Apple branded apple. They choose a brand name bordering on descriptive. If it's descriptive, ie "Great Computer Co.", it's pretty weak. It'll be tough to own "Via" for anything in transportation.

That would be like owning the trademark "General Electric" and selling electrical equipment...

Re: Waymo Via

#129

Post by TeMPOraL »

zp33 wrote: post #96
organsnyder wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Life isn't like a movie. Anyone who has the knowledge (of the vehicle and its surveillance systems, the schedule, the cargo onboard...) and the capability (skills and resources) to pull off what you're suggesting has plenty of lucrative legal opportunities. And any cargo load valuable enough to make a Hollywood-style heist actually worthwhile would be transported by more secure means.

It doesn't take that much skill to know that a certain stretch of road doesn't have cell signal and how to set fire to a truck. It takes even less skill when you know there's no human on the truck to stop you

It may or may not work, but I have no doubt that someone will try.

Re: Waymo Via

#130

Post by fatbob »

SigmundA wrote: post #67
ckmiller wrote: post #41

I competed in the DARPA Urban Challenge, back in 2007. While we were watching the finalists trying to sort out the world's first fully-automated traffic jam, the conversation turned to how easy it is to manipulate these vehicles. Imagine a remote stretch of highway frequented by automated 18-wheelers. All that's required to bring the truck to a screeching halt is a bedsheet and some decent timing, at which point the…

Two things I don't get in the current focus on self driving: 1. Urban navigation. Obviously the end game, but just exit to exit interstate navigation would be a much better near term goal and greatly benefit truck drivers along with anyone doing a road trip. 2. Unmanned. I would think it would be a long time before you would have unmanned trucks going down the highway. Seems much more obvious to have a driver / custo…

Highway is simpler but it's worse if it goes wrong.

Plus, highway driving is safer and cheaper than average so the bar is higher for self-driving cars/trucks.

I don't think there's any middle ground for driving semi-trucks on the freeway. It's either safe enough to drive without someone watching it or it's not. There's no point in having a person in there sometimes sleeping and sometimes safety-driving.

Post reply on HN