Live data from Hacker News

Waymo in Dallas

waymo.com

241–250 of 752 posts

Re: Waymo in Dallas

#241
post #240
post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you read your article? > Waymo does not provide information or data to law enforcement without a valid legal request, usually in the form of a warrant, subpoena, or court order. Waymo is no more required to turn over data to the government than you are.

What percentage of “valid” legal requests are granted versus denied?

Presumably Waymo complies with their legal obligations...

The point is that there's a process, it applies both to Waymo and to you as a rando. The police don't have special access to Waymo cameras.

Re: Waymo in Dallas

#242
post #238

As someone who works in commercial real estate, involved in about $300M of housing development, some of it affordable, i will say without any doubt that driverless cars are a very effective affordable housing policy that is not being considered or discussed by anyone. Any public dollar that gets contributed to housing, basically adds a 50% cost factor and assume whatever it is used for will take 2-3x as long to deliv…

> provide these vehicles for use by affordable tenants in properties with limited parking Translation: Poors are allowed to exercise their freedom of movement iff they stay in a huge corpo's good graces.

"huge corpos" - obviously you don't know what you're talking about. Most affordable housing is owned and operated by non-profit organizations or entities, most of which are very small.

plus, the government needs to solve for affordable and workforce housing. The market can deliver plenty of market rate units if you don't be stupid and over regulate it.

Re: Waymo in Dallas

#243
post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://gizmodo.com/waymos-driverless-cars-revealed-to-be-na...

Did you read your article? > Waymo does not provide information or data to law enforcement without a valid legal request, usually in the form of a warrant, subpoena, or court order. Waymo is no more required to turn over data to the government than you are.

Irrelevant. They turn it over.

Re: Waymo in Dallas

#244
post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have one of the most inefficient EVs and it's only 2.4x hungrier than the cybercab. It can comfortably carry 6 adults. I've been in Tesla 3s as Ubers before. They only need 31% more energy than the cybercab. If the cybercab was 1/5 the price it would be $14k. It won't be $14k.

The Waymo I-Pace is much less efficient than the regular roadgoing I-Pace. One X user posted a pic of the dashboard of a Waymo with 111,000 miles on the odometer, and it averaged 1.0 kWh per mile [1][2]. This is about 2.5x worse than the EPA rating of a normal Jaguar I-Pace. Probably the difference is because the Waymo has tons of compute and the sensors have a surprisingly large impact on aerodynamic efficiency. I w…

Referring to the example from the Twitter post you cited, wouldn't the KWh per mile simply be a lot higher because these vehicles are engaging in much less efficient travel overall? City driving itself is often pretty inefficient because of all the stopping and going, and these vehicles likely are driving in a lot of the rush hour traffic and high density areas everyday. Not to mention they probably idle around a lot more than a normal persons car would in a day.

So wouldn't that be the reason the figures would look 2.5x worse than the regular Jaguar? I'm sure there are other factors of course since running the computer systems, lidar and all the other features will also consume more power, so I'm sure from a baseline it will be less efficient anyway, I just think because of the kind of driving it engages in, this will make it also look far less efficient.

Re: Waymo in Dallas

#245
post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There is value in uniform rule of law Sure. OP's point is these products and investments are accruing disproportionately to red cities and states. Sinking together isn't a great pitch.

> these products and investments are accruing disproportionately to red cities and states Is this true at the city level? > Sinking together isn't a great pitch. Surely it's a worse pitch to suggest that companies can ignore laws they don't like, and operate above the law?

> it's a worse pitch to suggest that companies can ignore laws they don't like, and operate above the law?

It’s also worse to murder kittens. That isn’t the choice at hand.

The difference is between states adapting with a regulatory framework and those sticking with economic incumbents.

(Also, when the taxi medallion industry was at its peak, lenders did run roughshod over the law.)

Re: Waymo in Dallas

#246
post #236

As someone who works in commercial real estate, involved in about $300M of housing development, some of it affordable, i will say without any doubt that driverless cars are a very effective affordable housing policy that is not being considered or discussed by anyone. Any public dollar that gets contributed to housing, basically adds a 50% cost factor and assume whatever it is used for will take 2-3x as long to deliv…

America, the place where they will try anything except for building good public transportation, walkable and bikeable neighborhoods.

I get what you're saying, but in this particular case we're talking about Texas. The people down there think that bike lanes and walkable neighborhoods are a plot to send in UN soldiers who will forcibly vaccinate them with 5G nanobots. I'm only slightly exaggerating.

Re: Waymo in Dallas

#247
post #141

Elon may have been technically correct about 'if humans can do it with vision only then theres no reason why vision-only cannot work' but turned out to be the wrong strategy for learning how to get there. lidar gives you a constant stream of data to check your vision yourself against and interatively learn. Once trained you turn it off. whereas teslas strategy ended up having to rely on human drivers for error feedba…

Why would we want to have robot cars that only drive as good as humans can?

Re: Waymo in Dallas

#248

As someone who works in commercial real estate, involved in about $300M of housing development, some of it affordable, i will say without any doubt that driverless cars are a very effective affordable housing policy that is not being considered or discussed by anyone. Any public dollar that gets contributed to housing, basically adds a 50% cost factor and assume whatever it is used for will take 2-3x as long to deliv…

> Any public dollar that gets contributed to housing

... in the US

> Building housing with no parking is not feasible for 95% of deals. You simply won't get financing

Because of completely broken land use, transportation polices, building regulation in the US, they are very feasible in many other parts of the world.

> if you could hand to your investors and lender an agreement which provides a car for every 3 units

Or some kind of vehicle that comes by every 15min and connects to a network of other transports that are time interval based.

Or have car share vehicles attached to the property. Something that is routinely done in Europe for decades.

> it's way more efficient than building $100 billion in transit that will take 200 years to build.

Except it doesn't last that long and is not that expensive unless you are incompetent and live in a broken society.

Cities in China added 100s of miles of metro since 2010. Making bad excuses and doubling down on car dependency are a big part on why its not happening.

And btw. the US has so many fucking roads already (btw they are also very expensive, but I guess that money doesn't count), if the were competent they could spend 6 month and few 100 million and build absolutely amazing bus transit system. But of course taking a lane away from cars wouldn't be acceptable, better give money to waymo so people can sit in traffic in a Waymo vehicle.

It is not about cost, its about political will and the societal believe that public transit is for the unwashed poor and racially inferiors, spending money on it is charity, not transportation policy, and that any upstanding citizen in a car needs to have unlimited freedom to drive everywhere and never get into trouble.

> That car can be full time serving 4-10 units daily?

This has been done for many decades with carsharing already, its standard practice in many developments. What exactly does Waymo or self driving change here from an investor perspective? Ok maybe if its really close buy the Waymo can go back when you don't need it anymore. So maybe you need half as many. But of course the Waymo vehicle is also much more expensive and has capacity you don't need.

But of course, even with that carsharing concept, the far better solution that almost everybody in the developed world does, outside the US, is to simply have good public transport, you build it first, and then build the new housing around those transport links. Car sharing is only for very niche situations and that's a good thing, because more cars in cities are bad.

Re: Waymo in Dallas

#249
post #236

As someone who works in commercial real estate, involved in about $300M of housing development, some of it affordable, i will say without any doubt that driverless cars are a very effective affordable housing policy that is not being considered or discussed by anyone. Any public dollar that gets contributed to housing, basically adds a 50% cost factor and assume whatever it is used for will take 2-3x as long to deliv…

America, the place where they will try anything except for building good public transportation, walkable and bikeable neighborhoods.

i know multiple developers with public dollars to build housing $800k-$1.2M per unit. so i don't know, maybe come up with a better solution I'd be happy to hear your idea that is realistic and will deliver more units at a lower cost.

Re: Waymo in Dallas

#250
post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> provide these vehicles for use by affordable tenants in properties with limited parking Translation: Poors are allowed to exercise their freedom of movement iff they stay in a huge corpo's good graces.

"huge corpos" - obviously you don't know what you're talking about. Most affordable housing is owned and operated by non-profit organizations or entities, most of which are very small. plus, the government needs to solve for affordable and workforce housing. The market can deliver plenty of market rate units if you don't be stupid and over regulate it.

> "huge corpos" - obviously you don't know what you're talking about.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1652044/000165204426...

Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity: $595281000000.

How big to they have to be before they count as ‘big’ to you? In your ideal world, getting your Google account banned not only means losing all your photos, documents, contacts, conversations, and access to all your other accounts (GMail) but now also means you can't go anywhere besides what you can reach on foot, via whatever anemic local transit exists, or via similarly-expensive Uber/etc. Super cool; sign me up.

Post reply on HN