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

351–360 of 449 posts

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

#351

Post by rootusrootus »

Karrot_Kream wrote: post #32
athoun wrote: post #26

In my experience Waymo has been much worse compared to Lyft/Uber for longer rides. A big problem with Waymo in its current state is how its routes are terribly inefficient. It purposely avoids freeways and higher speed roads, opting to take more inefficient routes without regards to the number of stop signs, hills, and other factors which will inevitably lead to a longer travel time. It's almost like it's using a wor…

I get around by bike, foot, transit, and car in that order and have mostly lost my ability to not get motion sick in a car when I'm not driving. I prefer taking Waymos any time I'm not in a hurry in SF, but usually traffic is bad enough during the hours I take it that it's not a huge factor anyway and if you can get a MUNI that's close to your start and end points, it's significantly faster. Rideshare and taxi driver…

> ability to not get motion sick in a car when I'm not driving.

As someone who lives in a city without Waymo, I'm curious -- are you allowed to ride in the front seat?

I can generally tolerate riding in the front passenger seat, as long as the driver is competent, but I suffer a bit riding in the rear. And don't get me started on what it's like riding in a limo...

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

#352

Post by dpkirchner »

notatoad wrote: post #193
firloop wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

10% slower on a 30-minute journey is 3 minutes. if i'm in the back of a taxi, i'm on my phone or reading a book or something. getting there 10% slower really just doesn't matter. humans drive fast becuase when they're late it makes them feel like they're doing something to solve their problem, but the time savings are almost always inconsequential.

It's probably not even 3 minutes -- it depends at least as much on how many red lights you hit.

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

#353

Post by katbyte »

throwaway7ahgb wrote: post #298
bluefirebrand wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So it's a bad driver then, because matching flow of traffic is more important and safer than stubbornly following the exact speed limit

Flow of Traffic vs Speed Limit Dangers Many believe the myth that as long as we’re going with the flow of traffic, we’re not doing anything wrong. It makes sense– everyone else is going the same speed, so why shouldn’t you? There’s no way a cop could pull you over if you’re just going with the speed of traffic. Wrong. If you argue that you were just driving with the flow of traffic, then you are essentially admitting…

So in following the law vs being safe you say “follow the law and make the roads more dangerous” because… why?

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

#354

Post by nojvek »

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…

Easier to scale and make tech cheaper than humans cheaper.

Waymo just doesn’t want the backlash of them replacing human jobs right now.

Slightly expensive than humans for a premium consistent service is a good play.

Kudos to consistent execution for Waymo.

Wish we could say the same for Tesla.

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

#355

Post by aeonik »

amanda99 wrote: post #300
drivebyhooting wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hard disagree. Time savings from speeding comes from discontinuities like beating traffic lights. Also 3 minutes is huge if you’re almost late to a 30 minute private lesson.

> discontinuities like beating traffic lights Sometimes you beat them, sometimes you don't. It's not always in your favor, it averages out.

This is only true if they are random, which they aren't.

You can also pay attention to them, and learn the cycle lengths, timing patterns, and pedestrian patterns.

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

#356

Post by labrador »

ra7 wrote: post #310
labrador wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So I've learned but it's not reassuring because the safer option would be to give a remote operator the ability to take over

That would be the least safe option due to network latencies involved.

Drone operators in Ukraine seem to do fine and besides, I'm talking about having the option, not using it 100% of the time

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

#357

Post by refulgentis »

YeGoblynQueenne wrote: post #275
leumon wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are only taken over in certain edge cases, and even then the remote operator is only placing the next destination, he is not actually remotely "driving" the vehicle. More on this here: https://waymo.com/blog/2024/05/fleet-response/

>> Fleet response can influence the Waymo Driver's path, whether indirectly through indicating lane closures, explicitly requesting the AV use a particular lane, or, in the most complex scenarios, explicitly proposing a path for the vehicle to consider. The Waymo Driver evaluates the input from fleet response and independently remains in control of driving. This collaboration enhances the rider experience by efficien…

> In my reading this is trying very hard to put a self-driving spin on an interface that allows a human operator to set waypoints for a robot to follow.

I can 100% confirm you're reaching way too far to find excuses to indicate Waymo isn't self-driving.

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

#358

Post by kristjansson »

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.

Uber/Lyft/Taxi drivers as sin-eater is one of their great values. Rider gets all the benefits of drugging like an asshole with none of the social/moral shame

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

#359

Post by abecedarius »

dventimi wrote: post #339
abecedarius wrote: post #332

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know this feels right, but introducing tip culture into a market currently free of it is bad. Where there's a norm of tipping, it doesn't make the servers more money than where there is not; what you should expect it to do is to decrease the quoted price and increase the variance of income to the servers. And incidentally increase the mental overhead for everyone, increase the artificiality of interactions, etc.

> I know this feels right, but introducing tip culture into a market currently free of it is bad I couldn't possibly agree with this less. My view is that "it depends." Level salaries in San Francisco and I'll consider not tipping. Until then, I'm comfortable with my choices.

Do what you wish, of course. But you seem to think this helps to level income, given the "level salaries" bit. What I'm saying is it doesn't. Markets equilibrate; they adjust when the form of payment changes.

I'd agree that after tipping culture is definitely established in a field, then stiffing someone is unfortunately bad, unless you can coordinate on reversing this harmful cultural norm. This is just very different from not helping to establish the harmful cultural norm, which is a positive, prosocial good; I believe you are doing the opposite of a prosocial good here, without realizing it. Of course I'm a fallible human.

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

#360

Post by ra7 »

labrador wrote: post #356
ra7 wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That would be the least safe option due to network latencies involved.

Drone operators in Ukraine seem to do fine and besides, I'm talking about having the option, not using it 100% of the time

Surely, it's obvious that Waymo operates in a different safety critical setting? It's a 5000 pound vehicle with pedestrians and other vehicles around it. You can't depend on a network connection to prevent injuries and deaths.
Post reply on HN