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

California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 1001 posts

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#281

Post by michael_nielsen »

Waterluvian wrote: post #208
Lonestar1440 wrote: post #120

From my perspective as a person who lives in San Francisco and also drives a LOT (10-20k miles per year, and many small drives within the city): Cruise cars do not perform acceptably. They manage to avoid collisions by driving extremely conservatively, but the way they traverse, say, a left turn against traffic is absurd. They slow everyone down, including emergency vehicles and public transit, by performing far belo…

Are these autonomous vehicles so littered throughout California that you run into them weekly? I realize I don’t have a real concrete sense of just how many of these there are. Like is this a whole thing already? Edit: thanks for the responses…. Good gravy…

I expect to see one every few minutes in San Francisco. When I counted in August, 4 of 100 vehicles going past my house were self-driving (https://twitter.com/michael_nielsen/status/16873429948135628... ). I don't recall the exact time period, but believe it was just under half an hour.

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#282

Post by fragmede »

Waterluvian wrote: post #208
Lonestar1440 wrote: post #120

From my perspective as a person who lives in San Francisco and also drives a LOT (10-20k miles per year, and many small drives within the city): Cruise cars do not perform acceptably. They manage to avoid collisions by driving extremely conservatively, but the way they traverse, say, a left turn against traffic is absurd. They slow everyone down, including emergency vehicles and public transit, by performing far belo…

Are these autonomous vehicles so littered throughout California that you run into them weekly? I realize I don’t have a real concrete sense of just how many of these there are. Like is this a whole thing already? Edit: thanks for the responses…. Good gravy…

It is limited to San Francisco, rather than the whole of California, but they do just drive around the city, especially after 9pm. As a rider, the future is here. Instead of just checking Uber and Lyft for prices to get somewhere, now I check the Cruise and Waymo app for prices too. (Well, not Cruise anymore.) But yes, it's a thing. I call a car, sometimes it doesn't have a driver, and it takes me to where I need to go in the city when I'm unable, or don't want to drive. Or more likely, don't want to deal with parking. I'll take the bus when I'm going that way but the bus doesn't always go in the right direction.

Can't wait for them to be able to take freeways over to Oakland and down to Cupertino.

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#283

Post by aaron425 »

mint2 wrote: post #271
Waterluvian wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are these autonomous vehicles so littered throughout California that you run into them weekly? I realize I don’t have a real concrete sense of just how many of these there are. Like is this a whole thing already? Edit: thanks for the responses…. Good gravy…

They aren’t littered through CA, in CA they are exclusively in SF. In SF they are common and as they seem to drive nonstop, take more road time than a comparable number of normal cars. They don’t stop and wait between fares, they seem to drive aimlessly in routes like ghosts or lost souls.

There are some in LA as well, although at a smaller scale.

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#284

Post by ryandrake »

bonestamp2 wrote: post #214
RC_ITR wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with what you said, BUT From my perspective as a person who lives in San Francisco and also bikes a LOT: human driver also do not perform acceptably. I counted 14 cars without headlights on after sunset on a 2 mile bike ride yesterday. I counted 5 cars parked in either a bike lane or active traffic. 2 cars took blind rights (no stops) onto Polk from various alleyways. This was a good day, FWIW. Cruises have o…

> I counted 14 cars without headlights on after sunset on a 2 mile bike ride yesterday. This one could be fixed tomorrow by adopting regulations that other advanced countries have had for decades.

We have the regulations. What we need is enforcement of existing regulations. The only thing that seems to get enforced around where I live is speeding, and very unevenly: one time a month or so you see them out giving tickets like gangbusters. On all other days and for all other laws, it seems like the highway is a free-for-all: Stop sign rolling, running red lights, playing with your phone while driving, weaving in and out of traffic, burnouts, excessive noise, coal rolling, go right ahead--nobody is stopping you.

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#285

Post by Solvency »

tmpz22 wrote: post #231
Waterluvian wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are these autonomous vehicles so littered throughout California that you run into them weekly? I realize I don’t have a real concrete sense of just how many of these there are. Like is this a whole thing already? Edit: thanks for the responses…. Good gravy…

> Are these autonomous vehicles so littered throughout California that you run into them weekly? In SF yes. Even small amounts of driving in certain areas will have multiple daily interactions with these vehicles.

Where can I see videos (in the wild, not corporate) of this? I've never seen one in my life, though I'm in LA.

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#286

Post by LegitShady »

carbocation wrote: post #79

This is just anecdote, but having taken trips in both Waymo and Cruise in SF, I feel very comfortable in Waymo: it drives carefully but confidently. It alerts me when cyclists are near when I'm getting out. It navigates coned-off work areas. Cruise required a lot of (remote) human intervention during my trips.

the passengers in the cruise were never in danger. The pedestrian dragged by the cruise, unfortunately, cannot say the same.

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#287

Post by tialaramex »

RC_ITR wrote: post #224
PH95VuimJjqBqy wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If humans aren't the baseline then what is?

IDK, no fatalities caused by cars?

That's a fine baseline if your plan is to otherwise eliminate cars.

Otherwise "it's better than humans" is in fact a win.

When I had Hodgkins, I found out there is no baseline data for untreated patients. Scientific medicine was invented after the first cures for Hodgkins, so by the time anybody knew "We should measure properly what happens if you do nothing so we know whether we're improving on that outcome" it would be unethical because you're giving people a death sentence in order to do science, which, you know, we outlawed that because of the Nazis.

We can assume not treating Hodgkins is extremely bad but we don't have scientific data, because all the untreated people in a civilised country self-selected - they said "No" having been told that means they'll almost certainly die, and right soon if they say "No". That's not a normal sample, that's... crazy people maybe? Very religious people? Not normal. But we don't have actual baseline numbers.

However, although we don't have a baseline, we do run trials, they compare against what we're currently doing, called the Gold Standard, in my case ABVD. When I was treated, trials were investigating Stanford V, the fifth attempt by a team at Stanford to improve on the existing treatment regime. It was similarly effective at curing Hodgkins, but the side effects were, if anything, worse, so, no dice.

For cars that "Gold Standard" in the US is basically every adult except the very poor and the blind. If an AI can do better than the Gold Standard, even if it's not as good as you'd like, it's an improvement.

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#288

Post by KennyBlanken »

darkerside wrote: post #266
pj_mukh wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“The woman got dragged 20feet” With respect this part is not clear. Only that the woman moved 20feet. The DMV has not made clear whether she moved 20feet from the location of original Collision (ie with the human driver) or she was dragged 20feet as the cruise car kept driving. They’ve let the audience fill in the blanks and we’ve collectively come to the more exciting conclusion.

I'm pretty sure Cruise's statement worded this intentionally vaguely, and it's natural to assume they are trying to gloss over their responsibility in the most horrific part of the story.

They had the balls to write "pulling the individual forward"

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#290

Post by pj_mukh »

lamontcg wrote: post #133
pj_mukh wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Amen. Really wish there was a way for tech (especially new AI tech) to wholesale abandon the city. Even just move south to the actual Silicon Valley. The city picking winners and losers like this is untenable

Cruise picked themselves as a loser by screwing up publicly and then trying to hide their problems.

“Screwing up publicly”

How else are they supposed to screw up?

If the city needs more information from the cars, they should sue for it not indefinitely suspend operations.

The city is looking to regulate all this like it regulates new housing (ie out of existence), there has to be consequences for it.

Post reply on HN