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

California Approves Waymo Expansion to Los Angeles and SF Peninsula [pdf]

cpuc.ca.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 424 posts

Re: California Approves Waymo Expansion to Los Angeles and SF Peninsula [pdf]

#121

Post by jmward01 »

ericmcer wrote: post #83
tempest_ wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> people underestimate how much of a quality of life improvement these are for people even when compared to Uber/Lyft I do underestimate it. What are quality of life improvements? Seems to be the same thing from a customer perspective. I guess if you are concerned for your safety from the uber driver it is an improvement but it is the only one that comes to mind.

For now they are still just cars with no driver. Once they are fully trustworthy though, the interior of the car could be repurposed in some interesting ways. Take out all the driving controls, add a desk, move the climate/radio control to a central console, captains chairs. The possibilities are endless.

I've been thinking exactly along these lines myself. I bet a lot of people are thinking that self-driving + electric will bring van life to a whole new level. It may become the reality that a large number of people actually, purposefully, live in self driving vehicles/homes since removing the 'car' part greatly improves the living part.

Re: California Approves Waymo Expansion to Los Angeles and SF Peninsula [pdf]

#122

Post by s1artibartfast »

skyyler wrote: post #87
deprecative wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's pedantic to most, I'm sure. Just FYI, though, antisocial is to be opposed to society - like Timothy McVeigh. Asocial is probably what you're looking for.

To be extra pedantic, I believe you meant Ted Kaczynski. Timothy McVeigh was trying to make the US government pay for specific things it did to "his people"; Ted Kaczynski was lashing out at the industrialised world after living in isolation in his cabin in the woods.

IMO, Anti-social is defined in context of and from the perspective of the dominant social structure.

Both individuals and groups who are in opposition and sufficiently disruptive are anti-social, hence the distinction.

Asocial = a loner

Anti-social = against society, either as an individual or group.

Re: California Approves Waymo Expansion to Los Angeles and SF Peninsula [pdf]

#123

Post by hiddencost »

dkjaudyeqooe wrote: post #84
matsemann wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While autonomous driving helps a bit on safety, that's just one of the many issues with the car dependence in our society. It might even expand the issues, if it ends up with less people using public transport and relying on these kinds of things.

Waymo is public transport, but you mean mass transit. People don't use mass transit because it sucks, blaming other modes of public transit doesn't cut it. The design and implementation of it is what keeps people from using it. The good news is automated vehicles will add flexible options for new types of public transport that are between single-trip taxies and mass transit and will lower costs to all kinds of public…

It sucks because we don't fund it. Europe does fine.

Re: California Approves Waymo Expansion to Los Angeles and SF Peninsula [pdf]

#124

Post by madeofpalk »

matsemann wrote: post #34
zk wrote: post #14

This is incredible news. In the next 10 years more and more transportation will shift to self driving and save thousands of lives and prevent many more injuries. Already in San Francisco waymo's are and feel much safer than human driven rideshare.

While autonomous driving helps a bit on safety, that's just one of the many issues with the car dependence in our society. It might even expand the issues, if it ends up with less people using public transport and relying on these kinds of things.

My biggest objection with cars is parking them. It's wasting space dedicated to inefficiency.

Self driving cars have much less use for parking garages in the middle of the city, so I think it's a net-positive.

Re: California Approves Waymo Expansion to Los Angeles and SF Peninsula [pdf]

#125

Post by tobinfricke »

hamandcheese wrote: post #112
standardUser wrote: post #70

I was very bummed on a recent trip to SF to find there was a waitlist for Waymo and I couldn't use the service! But I've since been 'accepted' so my next West Coast trip I'll definitely be taking a driverless car. I was a long time SF resident so I'll use my local knowledge to choose the most ratchet route possible. The potential for self-driving cars to bring down the cost of rides is very exciting to me. I've been…

For now, Waymo in SF costs significantly higher than Uber. I just checked and was quoted double - $25 to go from the outer richmond to Japantown.

Hmm, in my (limited) experience, I've seen Waymo being within +/- $1-2 of Uber.

Re: California Approves Waymo Expansion to Los Angeles and SF Peninsula [pdf]

#126

Post by sbuttgereit »

clay_the_ripper wrote: post #9

As a resident, I don’t support this at all. Waymos are annoying to have on the road - they go extremely slowly (with good reason) and make weird traffic moves. Do we want our roads getting clogged up with super slow taxis that steal jobs from ordinary people and give them to the tech industry?

I regularly drive on roads with driverless Waymo cars and they're fine, at least where I live in San Francisco. They do drive the speed limit and, as compared to other drivers, they don't take the same sorts of chances that I see typically taken... which I appreciate. The only discomfort I have with them when I'm in a driving situation (as a driver) is that I find comfort in seeing the other drivers around me see me: if I make eye contact with someone I can hope there is awareness of my presence. That might not be a completely rational thing to get comfortable with... that person may have seen you or seen right through you... but it does ease my emotional tension right or wrong. Natrually, with a Waymo, that can't happen.

But all in all I've not had a problem with them doing anything unexpected or strange when I encounter them on the road. My couple rides in a Waymo at this point over the past several weeks have been great.

Needless to say, I wholeheartedly support their presence on the road and am glad to hear the program is expanding.

Re: California Approves Waymo Expansion to Los Angeles and SF Peninsula [pdf]

#127

Post by afhjafh3883 »

jseliger wrote: post #23
austinkhale wrote: post #8

Fantastic news. I use them all the time in Phoenix. My mom uses them to get to her doctor appointments. I think people underestimate how much of a quality of life improvement these are for people even when compared to Uber/Lyft.

I use Waymo all the time in Phoenix and Scottsdale too, and it's great.

Dumb question but does it have a person monitoring in the driver seat? Or are you the only one in the car?

Re: California Approves Waymo Expansion to Los Angeles and SF Peninsula [pdf]

#128

Post by standardUser »

fragmede wrote: post #107
standardUser wrote: post #70

I was very bummed on a recent trip to SF to find there was a waitlist for Waymo and I couldn't use the service! But I've since been 'accepted' so my next West Coast trip I'll definitely be taking a driverless car. I was a long time SF resident so I'll use my local knowledge to choose the most ratchet route possible. The potential for self-driving cars to bring down the cost of rides is very exciting to me. I've been…

I don't know about bringing down costs. The amount of money that's been invested in this wants to get paid back, so they're gonna be charging as money they can for this to be worth it.

As long as there is competition the prices will be low (eventually). Labor is almost always the most expensive part of any service and these technologies reduce the need for labor considerably.
Post reply on HN