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.’

#491

Post by epistasis » Sat, Jul 15, 2023, 3:43 AM UTC

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…

I'm not very concerned with energy efficiency, at least when it comes to moving people around, honestly I think that's pretty fine.

I'm far more concerned about a more precious resource in a city: space.

Cars an atrocious, inefficient, deadly use of space. They simply do not scale to the densities needed for the amenities of a city. Sure, maybe 5% of the population can use them, but that 5% does it at a huge cost of space and safety for the remaining 95%, and greatly detract from what can be accomplished in a city otherwise.

Personal car transport is only realistic for low density, low amenity living with access to few people. Rather than cars being a gateway to freedom, their space greediness end up hemming in everyone by taking up far too much space, at least when you want a city with high culture and high access to lots of people and things.

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

#492

Post by ImaCake » Sat, Jul 15, 2023, 3:46 AM UTC

mediumdeviation wrote: post #217

dekhn wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Per mile incident rate is a measure only the companies care about. Why wouldn't the city care about an increase in the total number of traffic incidents? Especially when the self-driving cars are not displacing human drivers, so at the end of the day the roads are getting less safe.

>Per mile incident rate is a measure only the companies care about

This is a very frustrating sentence to read. If the per mile incident rate of driverless cars is 1 and the per mile incident rate for normal cars is 2. What happens when you do a 1:1 replacement of all normal cars with driveless cars? The number of incidences halves. i.e the total number of traffic incidences halves.

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

#493

Post by nycdatasci » Sat, Jul 15, 2023, 3:47 AM 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…

Data appears to be freely available here: https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/vehicle-industry-services/auto....

I reviewed a couple dozen incidents and in every case human drivers are to blame. The most extreme example of this was an incident in which a manually operated vehicle repeatedly rear-ended an autonomous vehicle out of spite, then followed it back to the dispatch lot and made a variety of verbal threats.

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

#494

Post by ImaCake » Sat, Jul 15, 2023, 3:48 AM UTC

elif wrote: post #462

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…

In terms of 911 and 311 calls: "in that month of March, dangerous self-driving car incidents increased more than 300% over the previous month (30 such incidents in February, 96 in March)." Skyrocket does not seem hyperbolic.

The parent comment is saying that the 300% increase is tied to a 300% increase in amount of driveless car activity. In which case, of course incidents increased. If you add 3x as many normal cars on the road the traffic incidents would increase in the same way!

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

#495

Post by cortesoft » Sat, Jul 15, 2023, 4:03 AM UTC

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…

Unless we suddenly get rid of cars, there is no way I am riding an e-bike around the streets of Los Angeles with my kids. It is way too dangerous, with huge cars driving very fast and recklessly. So many people I know who ride bikes around here have been hit by cars and seriously injured.

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

#496

Post by dumpsterdiver » Sat, Jul 15, 2023, 4:04 AM UTC

Aurornis wrote: post #234

cashsterling wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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. E-bikes are great for the situations, climates, and people who can use them. E-bikes are not a substitute for the majority of people’s transportation needs. I think the young, healthy people who live in moderate climates with good weather, short commutes, and little need to haul a…

Not only that, but clearly they don't live in outback, rural areas. They live in high cost of living cities. Old estimates claim that 55% of the worlds occupants live in urban areas, while 45% live in rural areas. The proposed solution leaves nearly half the population of the world shit out of luck.

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

#497

Post by TulliusCicero » Sat, Jul 15, 2023, 4:08 AM UTC

projectileboy wrote: post #426

Aurornis wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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. E-bikes are great for the situations, climates, and people who can use them. E-bikes are not a substitute for the majority of people’s transportation needs. I think the young, healthy people who live in moderate climates with good weather, short commutes, and little need to haul a…

Go ahead and downvote me all to hell, but the comments in this thread from bike enthusiasts sound like Trump apologists - they are alike in their adamant refusal to acknowledge reality. Do you think any amount or quality of bike infrastructure is going to make most people willing to bike in harsh winter climates? And no, Copenhagen nor Amsterdam have harsh winter climates. Look, I too think it’s crazy that we’ve buil…

Yes. Just look at Oulu, which is much snowier/colder than most cities in the states.

But also remember that the objective isn't to have all or even necessarily a majority of trips by bike. Not even Amsterdam has most trips by bike IIRC.

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

#498

Post by forgetfreeman » Sat, Jul 15, 2023, 4:12 AM UTC

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…

e-bikes and e-scooters are bullshit entertainment and convenience devices. For folks living outside all but the most heavily congested urban areas they serve literally no purpose.

Edit: downvotes are fine and all but any time one of y'all wants to jump in about how e-horseshit personal conveyances can credibly handle grocery shopping, car lines, or literally any other aspect of life that doesn't involve living with no children in a major metro area I'd be delighted to hear it.

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

#499

Post by forgetfreeman » Sat, Jul 15, 2023, 4:13 AM UTC

nerdbert wrote: post #262

Aurornis wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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. E-bikes are great for the situations, climates, and people who can use them. E-bikes are not a substitute for the majority of people’s transportation needs. I think the young, healthy people who live in moderate climates with good weather, short commutes, and little need to haul a…

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…

Rideshare a car line twice a day and get back to us about how viable that strategy is.

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

#500

Post by perryizgr8 » Sat, Jul 15, 2023, 4:17 AM UTC

What's the problem that autonomous cars aim to solve? Almost everybody today is able to drive. Most people are safely navigating billions of kilometers everyday. People who are physically disabled or don't want to drive for whatever reason have the option to order an Uber. So what is it that will change if we attain a 100% human-like AI driver?