S.F. says incidents by Cruise, Waymo driverless taxis are ‘skyrocketing.’ • Hacker News Board

Re: S.F. says incidents by Cruise, Waymo driverless taxis are ‘skyrocketing.’

#181

Post by NickM » Fri, Jul 14, 2023, 9:50 PM UTC

gruez wrote: post #148

NickM wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I hear "skyrocket" I think "several orders of magnitude in a very short time". The article actually has quantitative data that shows reports of "incidents where driverless cars disrupt traffic, transit and emergency responders" rising by a couple orders of magnitude in a year. Yeah, the city officials have to cover their asses and make disclaimers about what they can and cannot conclude, because all they know is…

>"incidents where driverless cars disrupt traffic, transit and emergency responders" rising by a couple orders of magnitude in a year. Right, but how much is that in absolute terms? If last year you had 0 incidents, and this year you had 1, that's an infinity% increase.

If you actually look at the article, it has the numbers in absolute terms. In April '22 (the earliest month on the chart) there were 3 reports. Following that, we have something that looks like an exponential curve leading to a year later where it's nearly 100 per month.

We can split hairs all day about what constitutes an order of magnitude or what percentage increases mean or whatever, but this doesn't appear to just be statistical noise.

Re: S.F. says incidents by Cruise, Waymo driverless taxis are ‘skyrocketing.’

#182

Post by m00x » Fri, Jul 14, 2023, 9:51 PM UTC

They include incidents where the car has caused traffic disruption. Recently, people have been throwing cones on top of the cars causing them to stop and impede traffic. This includes SF city officials, which is wild.

Look for #weekofcone on Twitter.

Re: S.F. says incidents by Cruise, Waymo driverless taxis are ‘skyrocketing.’

#183

Post by reaperducer » Fri, Jul 14, 2023, 9:51 PM UTC

bshipp wrote: post #34

slashdev wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Uber’s driverless vehicle killed someone jaywalking at night in another state. So you can’t say they’ve never killed anyone. Plus Teslas have killed their own occupants plenty of times.

I'm debating about renewing my truck license for this reason. If it's taking this long for automobiles to be approved and accepted, it'll be 30 years before trucking is automated. The two decades during which human oversight of automated systems will be mandatory would be long enough for me to finish off my career getting paid to drive while I sit in a cab writing code, periodically checking over the status of my lea…

I'm debating about renewing my truck license for this reason. If it's taking this long for automobiles to be approved and accepted, it'll be 30 years before trucking is automated.

Trucks and cars are different. They've been running automated big rigs between Dallas, Houston, San Antonio, and El Paso for a few years now.

Re: S.F. says incidents by Cruise, Waymo driverless taxis are ‘skyrocketing.’

#184

Post by pessimizer » Fri, Jul 14, 2023, 9:51 PM UTC

gruez wrote: post #148

NickM wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I hear "skyrocket" I think "several orders of magnitude in a very short time". The article actually has quantitative data that shows reports of "incidents where driverless cars disrupt traffic, transit and emergency responders" rising by a couple orders of magnitude in a year. Yeah, the city officials have to cover their asses and make disclaimers about what they can and cannot conclude, because all they know is…

>"incidents where driverless cars disrupt traffic, transit and emergency responders" rising by a couple orders of magnitude in a year. Right, but how much is that in absolute terms? If last year you had 0 incidents, and this year you had 1, that's an infinity% increase.

There's a chart at this link: https://www.sfchronicle.com/sf/article/driverless-taxi-cruis... that shows incidents going from 3 to 91 during April '22 to April '23.

Re: S.F. says incidents by Cruise, Waymo driverless taxis are ‘skyrocketing.’

#185

Post by II2II » Fri, Jul 14, 2023, 9:52 PM UTC

dekhn wrote: post #115

"Skyrocket" is a word people use when they don't have the data to support their claim, but want to make it sound as extreme as possible. When I hear "skyrocket" I think "several orders of magnitude in a very short time". But the source of the quote with skyrocket, basically admits that they didn't have any quantitative evidence to support a massive change in incidents. Remember: reality is banal. Things are far bette…

The numbers they gave is more than a doubling, while they were quite clear about the limitations of their data. That includes not knowing how many AVs are on the road, which is something that the companies should be able to provide.

Also look at the claims that AVs have not caused death or serious injury. (I noticed that they did not claim that AVs have not caused injury.) That is great, except I would not expect any given corporate vehicle fleet, autonomous or human controlled, to have a record of causing death or serious injury over a short period of time. The sample size is just too small.

Either way, there's not enough data to prove anything. On the other hand, we have a group with a clear conflict of interest (the makers of AVs) up against a group which has noted concerning incidents but has not been provided with the data they need even when it should be available. Then we have a third group who are being asked to let an experiment on the general public proceed. I doubt that it would pass many academic ethics committees, but if you have money, well, go ahead!

Re: S.F. says incidents by Cruise, Waymo driverless taxis are ‘skyrocketing.’

#186

Post by NickM » Fri, Jul 14, 2023, 9:53 PM UTC

dekhn wrote: post #151

NickM wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I hear "skyrocket" I think "several orders of magnitude in a very short time". The article actually has quantitative data that shows reports of "incidents where driverless cars disrupt traffic, transit and emergency responders" rising by a couple orders of magnitude in a year. Yeah, the city officials have to cover their asses and make disclaimers about what they can and cannot conclude, because all they know is…

I dojn't think that chart represents anything informative. It's at least partly based on "social media reports" and they say it's "incomplete". Any number of alternative explanations for that chart (which isn't a "skyrocket") explain the results better, such as increased awareness of the cars, increased numbers of miles driven (so the complaint rate per mile is roughly constant), and negative press coverage of incide…

so the complaint rate per mile is roughly constant

Sure, if the complaint rate per mile is constant, but the number of driverless cars increases exponentially, then yeah we might expect the number of complaints to increase exponentially. That doesn't mean this isn't a problem.

they say it's "incomplete"

Okay, so maybe there are more problems than are represented in the chart, but that doesn't seem to paint any prettier of a picture here.

Re: S.F. says incidents by Cruise, Waymo driverless taxis are ‘skyrocketing.’

#187

Post by pessimizer » Fri, Jul 14, 2023, 9:53 PM UTC

dekhn wrote: post #146

LispSporks22 wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm with ya normally, but literally a few paragraphs in they have the chart source: the TA, going from 3 to 91 "incidents" over a year. If you turn it on its side, it kinda looks like rocket blasting off.

That's not a rocket blasting off, it's a rocket failing to reach orbit by barely clearing the launch platform. More importantly: that chart isn't normalized by miles driven. As the companies have been ramping up, you'd expect (under a random model) that incidents would go up. It could also be explained by greater knowledge of SDCs, increased news coverage, and more awareness of how to report incidents. More important…

If you have alternate information, it's better to offer it than to describe what it could look like hypothetically.

Re: S.F. says incidents by Cruise, Waymo driverless taxis are ‘skyrocketing.’

#188

Post by m00x » Fri, Jul 14, 2023, 9:53 PM UTC

medellin wrote: post #154

paxys wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> For example, I could start coning cruise cars, and cause these numbers to skyrocket And why would that not be a valid data point? Cars driving on public roads need to successfully handle all regular day-to-day situations, not just the happy path. It seems like almost every day I run into some Cruise or Waymo (mostly Cruise) vehicle stuck in the middle of the street blocking traffic, and that should not be excused a…

Depending where someone put a cone on my car i would possibly just run them over or drive off unsafely if i felt that it was an attempt to rob me or steal my car. Having things like that categorized differently makes sense because it’s caused by humans being dicks. But maybe you are right and that is the new reality we live in where none of us get to advance because of a small group of angry and stupid people.

While it is an incredibly shitty thing to do, that does not give you the right to murder someone.

Re: S.F. says incidents by Cruise, Waymo driverless taxis are ‘skyrocketing.’

#189

Post by yafbum » Fri, Jul 14, 2023, 9:54 PM UTC

dekhn wrote: post #115

"Skyrocket" is a word people use when they don't have the data to support their claim, but want to make it sound as extreme as possible. When I hear "skyrocket" I think "several orders of magnitude in a very short time". But the source of the quote with skyrocket, basically admits that they didn't have any quantitative evidence to support a massive change in incidents. Remember: reality is banal. Things are far bette…

I think it's absolutely critical that public officials report what they see: a dramatic increase in reported incidents. Maybe - probably imo - this is "just" due to an increase in miles driven, but without access to data to support it, public officials can't draw conclusions and they should talk about it. The public cannot simply entrust safety to commercial taxi operators i.e. take Waymo's word for it (or the taxicab mafia's word, for that matter).

Re: S.F. says incidents by Cruise, Waymo driverless taxis are ‘skyrocketing.’

#190

Post by scarmig » Fri, Jul 14, 2023, 9:54 PM UTC

paxys wrote: post #104

veec_cas_tant wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And why would that not be a valid data point? Cars driving on public roads need to successfully handle all regular day-to-day situations, not just the happy path Are you considering someone putting a traffic cone on a vehicle a day-to-day situation?

What would you do if you were stopped at an intersection and someone put a traffic cone in front of you? Sit there for the rest of your life blocking everyone behind you, or move it/drive around it? Same for literally every example that deviates from the happy path, no matter how minor. Construction work, something fallen on the road, a delivery van stopped on the side, temporary street closures. These cars are nowhe…

It would be amusing to see how humans react if you run up to their cars while stopped, put a traffic cone on the hood, and run away. Would most people try to shake it off while driving away, or stop in the middle of traffic? What's actually the right thing to do, both as a person and as an AV?

More pertinently, should it be legal for people to go up and put traffic cones on top of actively driven vehicles, intentionally to confuse or disrupt the driver? Or should they be punished?