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

Waymo in Dallas

waymo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 751 posts

Re: Waymo in Dallas

#271

Post by randomblock1 »

cyberax wrote: post #252
eagleinparadise wrote: post #232

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…

Self-driving cars will kill off your kind of real estate developers once and for all. Because there is no such thing as "affordable housing". All housing on the market is by definition "affordable". If someone buys it, then somebody can afford it. The proper term is _subsidized_ housing. Anything subsidized is destructive in the long run. Fortunately, self-driving cars and mild carpooling (3-4 people per car) will el…

By your definition a Lamborghini is affordable, because someone can afford it. I don't think that holds up.

Re: Waymo in Dallas

#272

Post by s1artibartfast »

Lammy wrote: post #260
filoleg wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Translation: Poors are allowed to exercise their freedom of movement iff they stay in a huge corpo's good graces. Would it placate you, if we did it for non-poors instead then? I am a non-poor, and I would like a free/subsidized waymo with priority mode set for sharing with my neighbors. My belief is that it would help the poors more than me, but if doing so is oppressive or freedom-restricting or smth like that, I…

The point is that some people have other options. Personally I will always choose to go where I want, when I want, in the privacy of my own vehicle. Even if Waymo were completely free I'd still choose those things, and I am thankful I have the option to choose.

Would you rather have that or be living on the street? Maybe let people without housing have that choice

Re: Waymo in Dallas

#273

Post by runako »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #245
runako wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.)

In context, your comment reads as a defense of companies ignoring laws:

>> that big companies are (sometimes) bound by the same laws that bind the rest of us

> Not if they’re stupid laws!

States won't adapt to new technologies at the same time, this is embedded in the design of federalism.

Re: Waymo in Dallas

#274

Post by Barbing »

nixass wrote: post #264
eagleinparadise wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

You seem braggy too much

Eh, the more details they’re willing to reveal the better. It’s probably their reality.

Re: Waymo in Dallas

#275

Post by ultimoo »

I was talking with someone visiting from Florida the other day and they were talking about how Waymo is slurping money that would have otherwise stayed in the local economy. E.g. you pay an uber driver, the uber driver pays the grocery store, etc.

This is something that had never occurred to me since I love taking Waymos here in the bay area. I guess Waymos operating in Florida need local labor to maintain and clean the cars? How are others thinking about this?

Re: Waymo in Dallas

#276

Post by deepsun »

lokar wrote: post #130
cortesoft wrote: post #60

I live very close to LAX, and we have hundreds of Waymos in our area. At first i was a little weary, and kinda weirded out by all of them. They have become completely normal, and cause WAY fewer traffic incidents than human drivers. They are very predictable, and will always let you pull in front of them when changing lanes (unlike a lot of other LA drivers). I have seen a few incidents where they seem 'stuck', and i…

I took one to a show at the Hollywood Bowl. Chaotic traffic environment: lots of cars, cones, people directing traffic, pedestrians everywhere. It did great.

In chaotic environment it was probably human driving, or rather directing the car remotely.

Re: Waymo in Dallas

#277

Post by infecto »

SoftTalker wrote: post #266
eagleinparadise wrote: post #232

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…

I'd go further and say that in most smaller cities that try to run a bus service but just don't have the ridership to support adequate service they would be better off just subsidizing Ubers or Waymos or whatever is available. Pare down the bus service to only the heavily used routes and run them way more often.

100%. Most bus routes are terribly expensive to run, multiple drivers, benefits and then the physical equipment. It would be interesting if you could work out a subsidy program for low income riders.

Re: Waymo in Dallas

#278

Post by jrapdx3 »

oblio wrote: post #237
amazingamazing wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Too much capex

Ok, self driving buses on fixed routes. Likely 10-1000x cheaper to implement than fully autonomous cars.

You're probably right about comparative costs. But the problem of getting to an autonomous bus will remain a significant barrier to public transportation use.

My neighborhood is close to the city center. Even so, bus service is very sparse, recently reduced to just twice a day. In addition walking to bus stops is long and difficult, or even impossible, for many elderly or disabled residents.

I envision a Waymo-like car service transporting people to/from destinations or if it's more practical, a transit center. I concur car services wouldn't be the cheapest option but may well be the most effective.

Re: Waymo in Dallas

#279

Post by Lammy »

SR2Z wrote: post #270
Lammy wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The point is that there's a process That is the opposite of reassuring, because here are the stats for those processes as a whole (just ‘requests for user information’, not broken down by data type or Google product). Currently at 84% accepance rate i.e. the ‘process’ is a formality lol: https://transparencyreport.google.com/user-data/overview?hl=...

I don't know what to tell you. The subpoena system has been around for a VERY long time before Google even existed. You seem to be unfamiliar with it so I'd encourage you to read up before you call it a "formality." This is not some newfangled shiny thing. If you hold records that are important to a court case you can be forced to give them up by court order. This is true regardless of who "you" happens to be. If pol…

Why are you conflating “valid legal request” with subpoena? If they meant ”in response to subpoena” then they would say subpoena lol

The linguistic ambiguity is always where the creepy extrajudicial shit seeps in.

See also: ‘We do not provide any government agency with direct access to our servers’ RE: Snowden/PRISM

Re: Waymo in Dallas

#280

Post by Lammy »

s1artibartfast wrote: post #272
Lammy wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point is that some people have other options. Personally I will always choose to go where I want, when I want, in the privacy of my own vehicle. Even if Waymo were completely free I'd still choose those things, and I am thankful I have the option to choose.

Would you rather have that or be living on the street? Maybe let people without housing have that choice

Yes those are definitely the only two possibilities.
Post reply on HN