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

381–390 of 449 posts

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

#381

Post by senordevnyc »

darby_nine wrote: post #290
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…

Wait how do they justify having an even more expensive ride with fewer people to pay? The whole point of cutting the driver out is to save on cost, without that the entire project is no better than uber or lyft (which already overcharges by an arm and a leg)

without that the entire project is no better than uber or lyft

Obviously not, because consumers appear willing to pay a premium to not have a driver.

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

#382

Post by senordevnyc »

lopkeny12ko wrote: post #241
schoen wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you accept any historical development that reduced demand for some kind of labor (or human interaction) as potentially positive? There are a lot of those. (I'm happy to hear if the answer is "yes".) For example, most kinds of shops were (like jewelry stores today) apparently historically not self-service, so you had to ask the shopkeeper for every item individually, and the shopkeeper would have to retrieve it…

This is not a reasonable comparison. In Tesla's model, you buy a Tesla, and allow it to operate as a robotaxi when you're not using it. It generates income passively for you. The technology has introduced automation that might have displaced your job responsibility but not your means of generating income. In Waymo's model, you have completely displaced both the job itself and the means of generating income. This is a…

Putting aside the fact that Tesla's robotaxi model will likely never actually ship, I don't see how you're not displacing a driver's job by operating your car as a robotaxi instead of letting it sit idle.

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

#383

Post by PlutoIsAPlanet »

katbyte wrote: post #348
paulryanrogers wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are you proposing? No speed limits outside cities in the day time? Or speed limits that change based on circumstances? Don't we already have school zones which are 20mph when kids are around and higher otherwise?

People tend to just ignore speed limits and drive at the speed they feel safe and comfortable. If you want people to drive slower you just design the road to slow them down.

I'm sure emergency services would like that idea

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

#384

Post by PlutoIsAPlanet »

Workaccount2 wrote: post #286
scrollaway wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're the one calling them faceless bureaucrats. Most speed limits are set in place by a mix of safety boards and urban planners, who do take these limits into account. Explain to me what makes them faceless and detached from the situation?

Because everyone drives 40mph on that main road that is marked 25mph, and there is no string of accidents or fatalities after decades of this.

All it takes is for a driverless car speeding to hit a pedestrian for the industry to be dead in its tracks.

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

#385

Post by sheepscreek »

throwaway7ahgb wrote: post #291
sheepscreek wrote: post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Man. My daughter's head would sometimes detach from her body and fly around the room by itself. Is this satire, or am I missing something (going by the serious replies)? Not sure I would ever use this phrasing to describe anything serious - much less about my own child.

Search "Why is my baby crying bloody murder" aka witching hour. If you've never experienced this, you are very lucky.

Ah, thanks - So satire it is. Thank goodness my kid didn’t scream like that as a baby. Although we’ve had our own share of unusual challenges - she was/is a loud crier and could go on for 20-40 mins in the middle of the night. Not murder screams but still loud enough that my Apple Watch would warn me of prolonged exposure to loud noise :-/

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

#386

Post by kjkjadksj »

Workaccount2 wrote: post #378
kjkjadksj wrote: post #367

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Once you are doing 40 or 50 any accident you do have with a pedestrian is almost sure to be fatal. Lower speeds offer more of a chance.

Not driving cars at all offers the lowest. There has to be a degree of nuance when evaluating this. Ironically in my town, we did have a "string" (3 people in 5 years) of pedestrian fatalities. All of which took place downtown where people actually do drive 25.

Well its not a sure rule of thumb that lower speeds are safer. People die falling bad from standing too. But it sure as hell makes it a guarantee you kill someone if you hit them at that speed. Especially some of these newer suvs where the front end is effectively a wall at pedestrian height.

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

#387

Post by marssaxman »

michaelt wrote: post #287
paulryanrogers wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It has been explained to me that cars are an extension of ones personality, a social signal, and a hobby. So for some apparently what kind one rides in is significant.

I'm pretty sure I don't get any "social signal" from using fancy taxis. I think you've got to own the vehicle for that to happen. Much like buying a museum ticket to see a famous painting isn't comparable to owning the same painting.

If that were true, I don't know how you could explain the persistence of town car and limousine services.

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

#388

Post by cyberax »

toast0 wrote: post #232
cyberax wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> 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. They can. My local state operated ferry plays an announcement on every ride that if you harass the staff, they will issue a no trespass order banning you from the service for 60 days. Violating the order is criminal tresspassing. Of course, enforcement isn't easy…

> They can. My local state operated ferry plays an announcement on every ride that if you harass the staff, they will issue a no trespass order banning you from the service for 60 days. Violating the order is criminal tresspassing.

I might believe that for ferries, they have personnel for that.

Our local bus drivers were told that fentanyl fumes are not harmful, and that asking the state to do anything about junkies smoking _on_ _the_ _bus_ is systemic racism or something.

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

#389

Post by marssaxman »

tomp wrote: post #268
worik wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "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

There is approximately 0% chance that the speed limit decreed by faceless bureaucrats is the optimal speed for the current circumstances on a given road.

It has always seemed strange to me that restrictive speed limits persist in a supposedly democratic nation despite the functionally unanimous opinion of the citizenry, expressed through actual driving behavior, that the legally prescribed safety margins are excessive. I doubt you could find any other issue on which Americans of varying political persuasions would demonstrate such a high level of practical agreement.

In comment threads like these, one invariably views vigorous venting of virtuous vitriol versus the vice of velocity, but simply getting out on the road and having a look around - pretty much anywhere in the country - will show that such opinions must either be hypocritical or held by a small minority.

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

#390

Post by nickzelei »

quectophoton wrote: post #117
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.

> 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".

This is exactly what they do. They don’t drive slower, they drive the speed limit. I’ve taken a lot of Waymos and their priority is safety, for everyone.
Post reply on HN