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

Cyclist hit by driverless Waymo car in San Francisco, police say

sfgate.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 750 posts

Re: Cyclist hit by driverless Waymo car in San Francisco, police say

#251

Post by armada651 »

soraki_soladead wrote: post #204

Agree that's not a great look for the supervisor. Cyclists have a bad rep in SF because many (not all) ride quite dangerously. It's a common sight to see cyclists running four-way stop signs and lights without even yielding. I live adjacent to a four-way stop and there's an incident where a cyclist fails to yield nearly hourly. Meanwhile, Waymo has millions of incident-free miles and of all the self-driving car compa…

> Cyclists have a bad rep in SF because many (not all) ride quite dangerously.

Cycling in the US is almost by definition riding dangerously, since there are very few places with actual safe bicycle infrastructure. This is a self-selecting pressure, because it means that the only cyclists that actually dare to cycle in the city are risk-takers.

> I live adjacent to a four-way stop and there's an incident where a cyclist fails to yield nearly hourly.

You can blame the cyclist or perhaps a four-way stop with a nearly hourly cyclist incident needs to be redesigned.

Re: Cyclist hit by driverless Waymo car in San Francisco, police say

#252

Post by pb7 »

CobrastanJorji wrote: post #185

I'm disappointed in all the folks immediately blaming the cyclist without further information, and I'm similarly disappointed in all the folks blaming Waymo for the same reason. But, unless they somehow have extra information we're not privy to, I'm much more disappointed in the S.F. Supervisor quoted in the article, Shamann Walton, for immediately going online to say "so much for safety." Us internet weenies are alw…

[flagged]

Re: Cyclist hit by driverless Waymo car in San Francisco, police say

#253

Post by genocidicbunny »

dmix wrote: post #242
genocidicbunny wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only if you have right of way. You still treat it as a yield, which means if you don't have a right of way, you stop completely.

Rolling is usually slow enough to stop on a dime from my experience. The problem is cyclists who continue at full speed and then decide to react last second.

And I am willing to concede that on a bike, as long as you are just slow rolling and not impinging on the right of way such that it confuses other drivers, it's fine. But I have also seen plenty of cyclists who slow roll into the middle of the lane and then act indignant when they get honked at for blocking traffic; At that point, there's very little difference from having just blown through the intersection at full speed.

Re: Cyclist hit by driverless Waymo car in San Francisco, police say

#254

Post by cozzyd »

Retric wrote: post #139
km3r wrote: post #11

So the scenario (as described by waymo, surely with some spin): "Driving through a 4 way intersection, while a large truck is also going through the intersection. As you go through, a biker quickly passes behind the truck with minimal time to react once in sightlines." A human driver would take significantly longer to react, and could be deadly. Waymo managed to hit the breaks before the collision, potentially leadin…

I think the most critical bits are left out here: “The cyclist was occluded by the truck and quickly followed behind it, crossing into the Waymo vehicle’s path. ” Was the Waymo car turning or was the cyclist? Because if the cyclist swerved into oncoming traffic there’s likely little any driver could do, but if the waymo car was ignoring the possibility that a cyclist was behind the truck that seems like a significant…

I feel like Waymo would have said something if it was the former, no?

Since there's a bike lane on 17th street, it's possible that the cyclist entered the intersection parallel to the truck on the bike lane but the truck overtook it. It's even possible that the cyclist was in the crosswalk for some reason...

edit: according to https://www.theverge.com/2024/2/7/24065063/waymo-driverless-... the truck was turning?

Re: Cyclist hit by driverless Waymo car in San Francisco, police say

#255

Post by ra7 »

CobrastanJorji wrote: post #157
aaomidi wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is one of those things that should be legally required tbh.

Well, maybe. It should definitely be required that they turn any accident records over to regulators, other parties in the accident, and police. But to the public? Imagine if it were gruesome. I doubt I'd appreciate video of a family member violently dying going viral.

Any accident involving a self driving car is already reported to regulators (CA DMV and NHTSA). It’s required by law. These records end up in a public database.

What’s not public is the video footage. It’s still shown to the regulators when they want to examine, it’s just not publicly released.

Re: Cyclist hit by driverless Waymo car in San Francisco, police say

#256

Post by rahimnathwani »

CobrastanJorji wrote: post #185

I'm disappointed in all the folks immediately blaming the cyclist without further information, and I'm similarly disappointed in all the folks blaming Waymo for the same reason. But, unless they somehow have extra information we're not privy to, I'm much more disappointed in the S.F. Supervisor quoted in the article, Shamann Walton, for immediately going online to say "so much for safety." Us internet weenies are alw…

Nothing should surprise you about Shamann Walton. This is the man who refused to adhere to the City Hall's security procedures (on camera) and allegedly threatened the person who asked him to comply: https://sfstandard.com/2022/08/05/video-supervisor-shamann-w...

He also bought a home outside San Francisco, with a mortgage condition that says it must be his principal residence. But if doesn't live in SF, how can he represent the people of SF?

https://susanreynolds.substack.com/p/where-does-shamann-walt...

Re: Cyclist hit by driverless Waymo car in San Francisco, police say

#257

Post by slg »

Fricken wrote: post #189
slg wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's be honest, anyone making any type of conclusion based off the information in the article is just giving in to their biases. None of us know enough to actually have any serious opinion on this specific collision.

I'm drawing the conclusion that this is a non-issue, or would be if autonomous vehicles hadn't got to be so political over the last year in San Fransisco. There are many people out for blood, they want a follow-up to the Cruise scandal. One fact of the matter is that the cyclist wasn't seriously hurt, and Waymo has had many minor contact events in its 10 million+ miles of driving on public roads. We're hearing about…

You are just proving my point. You are pro-autonomous vehicle so you are interpreting the few facts we know in way that benefits your side of the debate.

Referencing the cyclist not being seriously hurt is the most obvious example. It doesn't take much for a car to seriously injure a cyclist. It often just comes down to luck of the cyclists physical position and where they fall. Onto the hood of the car is safest, but they could have easily been caught under the vehicle, pushed into other traffic, or dangerously thrown down to the pavement. A cyclist walking away from this collision doesn't necessarily mean the next time a Waymo hits a cyclist will be just as safe. If there is some fault in the system that increases the odds of it hitting a cyclist (something that is impossible for us to know) it would be only a matter of time until an unlucky cyclist gets seriously hurt.

Re: Cyclist hit by driverless Waymo car in San Francisco, police say

#258

Post by godelski »

soraki_soladead wrote: post #204

Agree that's not a great look for the supervisor. Cyclists have a bad rep in SF because many (not all) ride quite dangerously. It's a common sight to see cyclists running four-way stop signs and lights without even yielding. I live adjacent to a four-way stop and there's an incident where a cyclist fails to yield nearly hourly. Meanwhile, Waymo has millions of incident-free miles and of all the self-driving car compa…

> I live adjacent to a four-way stop and there's an incident where a cyclist fails to yield nearly hourly.

When I see systematic things like this I often get suspicious and think there is something more going on (or selection bias. We are human). I think the common model is attributing actions to reckless behavior and people not thinking. This very well may be true! But if people are consistently engaging in a specific behavior (reckless or not) there's usually a reason to it. Reason doesn't mean good reason btw, and it can be as dumb as the previous chimps getting hosed every time they try to get the banana, but that's still a reason. I think if the underlying reason can be found it significantly increases the chances of rectifying the situation.

> Until more evidence comes out I'll be taking Waymo's side here.

Until more evidence I'm holding out on taking a side. I think Waymo's safety record is orthogonal to the conversation as with the general safety record of driverless cars (which I am a big fan of fwiw).

Re: Cyclist hit by driverless Waymo car in San Francisco, police say

#259

Post by genocidicbunny »

cozzyd wrote: post #190
elwebmaster wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cyclists are just dangerous and until we look at statistics we can’t assume that AI does worse than humans in protecting cyclists. As a driver, it took me many years to get into the habit of shoulder checking when turning right from the right lane. I always have my turning signal but to cyclists it doesn’t mean much, they will always try to pass me on the right on the intersection. Cyclists sometimes behave as though…

generally it's the motorists who are dangerous to the cyclists... when's the last time someone in a car was injured by a bicycle?

Directly? Don't know that I have. But just a few days ago I saw someone that had to slam on their brakes to avoid hitting a cyclist that did not have right of way through an intersection, slide off the road into a tree. I don't know if they were injured physically, but the financial damage was probably not insignificant.

Re: Cyclist hit by driverless Waymo car in San Francisco, police say

#260

Post by orange_county »

dmix wrote: post #232
CobrastanJorji wrote: post #185

I'm disappointed in all the folks immediately blaming the cyclist without further information, and I'm similarly disappointed in all the folks blaming Waymo for the same reason. But, unless they somehow have extra information we're not privy to, I'm much more disappointed in the S.F. Supervisor quoted in the article, Shamann Walton, for immediately going online to say "so much for safety." Us internet weenies are alw…

The supervisor is up for election in SF so probably trying to sound important or useful.

No he's not. He's termed out.
Post reply on HN