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

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

sfchronicle.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 1001 posts

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

#361

Post by tapland »

14u2c wrote: post #323
nerdbert wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They work for the majority of people of all ages who live in cities where the infrastructure has been properly built to accommodate bikes. Most people rarely need to haul anything and can use carshare when they do. I've demoed a multistory house down to the bricks and re-built it from the outside in without a car. Hired someone to haul off a dumpster several times. For major materials deliveries, like beams or window…

I'm guessing you live somewhere that does not get very cold. I love my ebike but sometimes it's just not feasible.

I bike year round, from -25 to 25c. Schwalbe marathons tyres and their studded version in winter.

I slip on light windbreaker pants on top of the regular, regular winter jacket and gloves, a thin hat and a scarf.

What issues did you run into while trying?

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

#362

Post by sclarisse »

macintux wrote: post #220
cozzyd wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you can more easily prevent the bottom 10% from driving by more rigorous driving standards / more stringent revocation of licenses.

After creating a society where car ownership is a necessary prerequisite to success, it’s challenging to block people from participating.

This is literally within the boundaries of the city of San Francisco, where having a car is only a prerequisite for success if your job is “driving”.

If you’re going to lament the car-focused society we have created, I understand and sympathize emotionally — but you should really take care to relent in those places that are most like the world you would prefer.

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

#363

Post by jtriangle »

evandale wrote: post #329
jtriangle wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cool, you have an affordable, tenuously waterproofed, chinese mass produced e-bike, it's your only available mode of transportation, you need to go into the office for a meeting, and it's raining. Welcome to hell. Also, not sure if you've used public transportation recently, but man, it SUCKS. Far less time efficient than a car, often crowded during the times you want to use it, and ZERO enforcement of proper etiquet…

> Also, not sure if you've used public transportation recently, but man, it SUCKS. Far less time efficient than a car, often crowded during the times you want to use it, and ZERO enforcement of proper etiquette or rules or regulations as far as riders are concerned. I've been using public transportation for 13 years and it's better than its ever been in terms of speed, reliability, and the crowds. Where have you expe…

SF, every time I visit. LA, often when I visit. LV, when I don't feel like driving. SD, when I'm there visiting, NYC which admittedly has been several years, Chicago metro area, which admittedly is the best of all of them and still very much has all of the problems I have detailed and aside from traveling outside of the city I much prefer a cab or a car, and several places in mexico, touristy and not touristy, which weren't markedly better or worse than american examples.

That leads me to think these problems are endemic, and you, yourself, are either really lucky, or just used to the discomfort after so much time. You should treat yourself to some perspective, go out and take an uber home, then ask yourself if it was better.

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

#364

Post by lamontcg »

cashsterling wrote: post #206
throwaway9274 wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Absolutely right. To situate in terms of recent events, there have been three stages of trying to delay / influence the California CPUC robotaxi expansion approval vote: 1. Tried a politician scare campaign. Failed because it was too transparent it was an attempted distraction from their terrible public safety record. 2. Tried coning and disabling the vehicles. Failed because it was too transparently astroturfed, leg…

I don't know why the other reply to this post got downvoted to hell. THe person has a point. Fully autonomous cars are cool... don't get me wrong. But electric cars and autonomous electric/gas cars are probably not the right solution to our person transport needs. using energy to move a 4000 lb vehicle to transport one or two 200 lb humans is not energy-efficient... most of the energy is spent just moving the vehicle…

people who think public transportation/e-bikes alone can completely wipe out single vehicle trips are delusional idealists.

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

#365

Post by briandear »

sfpotter wrote: post #319
jtriangle wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cool, you have an affordable, tenuously waterproofed, chinese mass produced e-bike, it's your only available mode of transportation, you need to go into the office for a meeting, and it's raining. Welcome to hell. Also, not sure if you've used public transportation recently, but man, it SUCKS. Far less time efficient than a car, often crowded during the times you want to use it, and ZERO enforcement of proper etiquet…

The problem here is your attitude: it sucks. I’d elaborate on this, but it’s enough to read your post. Instead of baselessly concluding that everything you dislike and feel inconvenienced by will suck forever, have you considered feeling hope and optimism instead?

Hope and optimism from the climate alarmist crowd? We’ve been told since Al Gore that the world should have already ended. That people want to take us back to the 1800s in transport tech isn’t very optimistic to me. People would rather have a train than airplanes. People would rather ride a bike in crappy weather than a comfortable car. People would rather we set our thermostats to 78 degrees than enjoy whatever temperatures we want in our house. There are people exciting about eating bugs because apparently cows are going to make the planet explode.

Not much hope and optimism these days when the sky is perpetually falling.

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

#366

Post by 1024core »

cashsterling wrote: post #206
throwaway9274 wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Absolutely right. To situate in terms of recent events, there have been three stages of trying to delay / influence the California CPUC robotaxi expansion approval vote: 1. Tried a politician scare campaign. Failed because it was too transparent it was an attempted distraction from their terrible public safety record. 2. Tried coning and disabling the vehicles. Failed because it was too transparently astroturfed, leg…

I don't know why the other reply to this post got downvoted to hell. THe person has a point. Fully autonomous cars are cool... don't get me wrong. But electric cars and autonomous electric/gas cars are probably not the right solution to our person transport needs. using energy to move a 4000 lb vehicle to transport one or two 200 lb humans is not energy-efficient... most of the energy is spent just moving the vehicle…

> A 60lb e-bike can also transport a 200 lb person whilst using far less resources (both to make the vehicle and to operate it) and space.

Have you ever ridden bikes in SF? I have. Even though I was an occasional rider, I got into 2 accidents that could have seriously hurt me (just through pure luck I didn't end up with hospitalization-worthy injuries). Both not my fault (one a dooring; another a driver turning into me without looking). Ask any rider in SF, and they'll tell you that SF is quite dangerous for bicyclists.

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

#367

Post by skyyler »

14u2c wrote: post #323
nerdbert wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They work for the majority of people of all ages who live in cities where the infrastructure has been properly built to accommodate bikes. Most people rarely need to haul anything and can use carshare when they do. I've demoed a multistory house down to the bricks and re-built it from the outside in without a car. Hired someone to haul off a dumpster several times. For major materials deliveries, like beams or window…

I'm guessing you live somewhere that does not get very cold. I love my ebike but sometimes it's just not feasible.

We're talking about San Francisco.

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

#368

Post by remexre »

14u2c wrote: post #323
nerdbert wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They work for the majority of people of all ages who live in cities where the infrastructure has been properly built to accommodate bikes. Most people rarely need to haul anything and can use carshare when they do. I've demoed a multistory house down to the bricks and re-built it from the outside in without a car. Hired someone to haul off a dumpster several times. For major materials deliveries, like beams or window…

I'm guessing you live somewhere that does not get very cold. I love my ebike but sometimes it's just not feasible.

Native Minnesotan here -- I know at least 3 people who bike to work in our winters. Obviously they're all insane, but none of them are frostbitten...

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

#369

Post by onlyrealcuzzo »

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 mean, it's easy to skyrocket if you start at 1.

1 crash to 8 crashes is 800%. In percentage terms, it's kind of accurate to say "skyrocket". But in absolute terms, it might not mean anything, especially if the number of taxis is up 1000%.

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

#370

Post by scubbo »

throwaway9274 wrote: post #145
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…

Absolutely right. To situate in terms of recent events, there have been three stages of trying to delay / influence the California CPUC robotaxi expansion approval vote: 1. Tried a politician scare campaign. Failed because it was too transparent it was an attempted distraction from their terrible public safety record. 2. Tried coning and disabling the vehicles. Failed because it was too transparently astroturfed, leg…

> I am not talking my book

Today I learned a phrase, thank you!

> [Autonomous taxis are] too vital to the revitalization of SF

As an expat from London - Jesus Christ, what a fucking bleak situation. To be clear, I'm not disagreeing, I think you're probably correct - the best way to get people out and spending their tech salaries in SF's service industries is to give them a fast, cheap, convenient way to get directly from their door to the bar/restaurant/club without having to set foot on the street or (heaven forbid!) public transit - but God, what an staggering failure of public policy that this is the case.

Post reply on HN