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

Self-driving Waymos secure final clearance for expansion beyond S.F

sfchronicle.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 449 posts

Re: Self-driving Waymos secure final clearance for expansion beyond S.F

#131

Post by toomanyrichies »

babyshake wrote: post #49
rainsford wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is that a negative of Waymo or a negative of the aggressive/illegal way many humans drive? My assumption is the anecdotal speed difference you notice is Waymos actually following the speed limit, and I imagine Waymo isn't really looking to program their cars to break the law while they're trying to expand their ability to operate.

Not just humans, but Uber/Lyft drivers. It is very common for an Uber driver to perform unsafe and illegal maneuvers while driving me. I don't report them because I don't want to get them fired. Usually I don't even remark on it, unless I think they did it in a way that was especially unsafe.

This is a far-too-infrequently discussed benefit of self-driving cars. Right or wrong, I (and many others) have qualms about narc’ing on a human driver. I have no such qualms about doing so with a robot.

Re: Self-driving Waymos secure final clearance for expansion beyond S.F

#132

Post by lopkeny12ko »

verdverm wrote: post #127
lopkeny12ko wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> they do have remote navigators/coaches who tell the cars what to do if it gets stuck/confused, but they're not directly driving the car, they're telling it where to go That sounds a lot like remote operation. Waymo is notoriously tight-lipped about this. Look at the number of journalists and reporters who have, over the years, asked very basic questions, like: 1. How often do remote operators intervene? 2. How many…

> Waymo never provides answers Found this by searching "waymo stats" https://waymo.com/blog/2023/12/waymo-significantly-outperfor...

That article does not answer any of the 3 questions I proposed.

Re: Self-driving Waymos secure final clearance for expansion beyond S.F

#133

Post by josephcsible »

worik wrote: post #128
quectophoton wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Anecdotally they can be 10-25% slower than the rest of traffic I don't know anything about USA, but my understanding of other humans tells me that "Waymo is 10-25% slower than the rest of traffic" actually means "Waymo drives at the legal speed limit for that location, without surpassing it".

> "Waymo is 10-25% slower than the rest of traffic" actually means "Waymo drives at the legal speed limit for that location... Probably 100% safer too Speed is the most dangerous aspect of motor vehicles

> Speed is the most dangerous aspect of motor vehicles

Not in the way you think. If you're going 55 because it's the speed limit, but everyone else is going 70, you're the most likely driver to cause a collision. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solomon_curve

Re: Self-driving Waymos secure final clearance for expansion beyond S.F

#134

Post by TheAlchemist »

lopkeny12ko wrote: post #106
TulliusCicero wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Waymo has been pretty clear about this: they do have remote navigators/coaches who tell the cars what to do if it gets stuck/confused, but they're not directly driving the car, they're telling it where to go, like a navigator in the front passenger seat. Remote operation is considered dangerous due to possible issues with network connection latency or stability. If it was actually happening, Waymo is big enough now (…

> they do have remote navigators/coaches who tell the cars what to do if it gets stuck/confused, but they're not directly driving the car, they're telling it where to go That sounds a lot like remote operation. Waymo is notoriously tight-lipped about this. Look at the number of journalists and reporters who have, over the years, asked very basic questions, like: 1. How often do remote operators intervene? 2. How many…

Re 2 question - Tesla doesn't provide any reliable stat on miles per intervention neither, so you would not be able to compare anyway.

Re: Self-driving Waymos secure final clearance for expansion beyond S.F

#135

Post by verdverm »

lopkeny12ko wrote: post #132
verdverm wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Waymo never provides answers Found this by searching "waymo stats" https://waymo.com/blog/2023/12/waymo-significantly-outperfor...

That article does not answer any of the 3 questions I proposed.

It's an example of how easy it is to find some numbers they posted, countering that they "never" do

I'm not trying to answer your question because I don't want to put in the time with someone who seems to only want to be combative in conversation

Re: Self-driving Waymos secure final clearance for expansion beyond S.F

#136

Post by tanvach »

RJIb8RBYxzAMX9u wrote: post #46
tanvach wrote: post #7

We recently started using Waymo more often: - Quality of Lyft and Uber rides have gone down significantly. - Consistently spacious, clean and quiet cars. You know what you'll get. - AC always works and not up to the whim of the driver. - No chatty driver to disturb our sleeping baby. Negatives: - Rides have usually 10% mark up over Lyft and Uber. - Pick up and drop off tend to be a small walk from requested locations…

> - Consistently [...] clean [...] I don't expect this to hold true once Waymo become generally available, alas.

If they keep the 10% mark up over competitors maybe there is still hope.

Re: Self-driving Waymos secure final clearance for expansion beyond S.F

#137

Post by josephcsible »

firloop wrote: post #18
tanvach wrote: post #7

We recently started using Waymo more often: - Quality of Lyft and Uber rides have gone down significantly. - Consistently spacious, clean and quiet cars. You know what you'll get. - AC always works and not up to the whim of the driver. - No chatty driver to disturb our sleeping baby. Negatives: - Rides have usually 10% mark up over Lyft and Uber. - Pick up and drop off tend to be a small walk from requested locations…

A rarely discussed negative to Waymo is that they drive slower than human drivers. Anecdotally they can be 10-25% slower than the rest of traffic, and it's not uncommon to see human drivers do unsafe moves to pass a Waymo.

This is evidence that most speed limits are too low. The proper speed limit on any given road is the 85th percentile of what drivers actually do.

Re: Self-driving Waymos secure final clearance for expansion beyond S.F

#138

Post by alex_lav »

cyberax wrote: post #119
Alupis wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By this logic public transportation should be the cleanest of them all. But, it is unfortunately far from that.

Public transit is actually pretty clean. The main problem is that they can't refuse to board disruptive passengers, who just trash everything around them. Waymo has cameras inside, so they can fine/ban you if you litter. The driverless cars can also, well, drive themselves to a cleaning center during the night-time when it won't affect the income generation. Another interesting possible feature is to redesign cars to…

Unsure where you’ve lived but in Philadelphia/New York/LA/SF/Seattle/Portland public transit is pretty disgusting, troublesome passengers or not.

Re: Self-driving Waymos secure final clearance for expansion beyond S.F

#139

Post by tanvach »

semi-extrinsic wrote: post #99
tanvach wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We take an infant car seat and use the European belt routing (or if that fails due to short belts in American cars, American belt routing) to secure to the back seat.

WTF belt routing? Don't you guys have Isofix over there?

We do, and I have the base with isofix in my own car.

Re: Self-driving Waymos secure final clearance for expansion beyond S.F

#140

Post by KennyBlanken »

ssl-3 wrote: post #98
fhub wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You can choose a soothing music play list in the car and it automatically resumes in the next ride Oh wow! There is a non zero chance that was implemented because of some feedback I provided as a trusted tester many months ago. I napped my son in them a lot when they were free and just spent my time thinking up things they should do and reporting them in app.

Man. My daughter's head would sometimes detach from her body and fly around the room by itself. Strapping her down in a car seat and taking her for a drive usually rectified the situation. I look forward to a future where this process can become more automated. (/s, sorta)

It is automated. Has been for many decades. Hit up ebay and search for "swyngomatic." There are ones that are spring-powered and more modern ones use a couple of d-cells (or a wall wart if you're enterprising.)

That and a white noise machine (set it low, their ear canals are very straight so they're sensitive to noise, although babies get used to noise around them given time and sleep through it, which is more practical / useful.

You can also just do what people have done for tens of thousands of years: wrap your kid against your body and go about your business.

Putting your kid in a car (self driving or not) is putting them in the most dangerous situation they could possibly be in - car crashes are the number one cause of death for kids (in the US.)

Post reply on HN