Live data from Hacker News

Waymo in Dallas

waymo.com

651–660 of 751 posts

Re: Waymo in Dallas

#651
post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Nope. Fixed routes have chaos. You would have the same problem, converging on fsd. It’s the same reason Waymo isn’t deployed everywhere now. Not to mention buses are a couple orders of magnitude more expensive than a car and would be slower for any given median occupant compared to a car.

If it was popular, it would remove cars from the road. Would that not decrease congestion for everyone?

Re: Waymo in Dallas

#652

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You could not efficiently run a bus service in most US cities at a level of “good service”. Only because you can never get the political supported needed to get there. If you somehow got the needed support people would start using it and it would turn the US city into a transit city. Note that political support needs to last for at least 5 years, in the real world there is an election every 2 years and so before yo…

Sorry no you are ignoring the most important fact. Unless you can get door to door service, people in a place like Dallas are not going to use a bus. You tell me it’s not feasible to do a rideshare small bus? Well then it’s definitely not feasible to run bus networks. I think the narrative is conflicting within itself. - if you give someone the option of a bus with a transfer or taking a car they will almost always t…

> I am trying to point out that a great bus service in a place like Dallas is not economically feasible.

I disagree. It is not politically feasible and so we won't get there, but the economics work out: a great transit network even in a place like Dallas could get enough riders to sustain itself. Problem is we need 50% of the families in Dallas Fort Worth to pay $200/month to pay for it, and nobody will stand for that - even though nearly every family in spending more than that per car.

Re: Waymo in Dallas

#653

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's far far too early to say whether it turned out to be wrong. Tesla also has a robotaxi service in Dallas, FWIW, in testing.

In testing. Waymo though is serving millions of rides for years now. Not saying Tesla won't close this gap but there's a real gap.

Waymo does 4 million rides per month.

Uber does 1 billion, for reference.

There's still a long, long way to go. Waymo has proven it can operate a high-priced service in a handful of cities in good weather, it hasn't yet demonstrated true scale and affordability.

Re: Waymo in Dallas

#654

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The most recent being when we built all these urban highways. What? Clarify please, because if you are going back to the 1950's/60's/70's you are talking about a very different country. Today all all of that you are talking about would solidly fit in the "fantasy" category. You must not be from Los Angeles. Come drive our highways for a few months. I've had better experiences in third world countries. > to run bus…

> Oh, yes, and I want to ride a Joby multicopter hailed using Uber to go to the major airports from local verti-ports. And you think I live in fantasy land. > if you are going back to the 1950's/60's/70's you are talking about a very different country. So in just a few decades we managed to radically change the way people moved and lived. Which was an extremely radical change from how everyone lived and moved just a…

>> Oh, yes, and I want to ride a Joby multicopter hailed using Uber to go to the major airports from local verti-ports.

> And you think I live in fantasy land.

Yes, you do.

https://www.uber.com/us/en/newsroom/uber-air/

> So in just a few decades we managed to radically change the way people moved and lived. Which was an extremely radical change from how everyone lived and moved just a few decades before that. And yet somehow that's just impossible to ever happen again.

You must be a software guy. Moving atoms is very different from typing words into this textbox. Also, in the US, the 1950's to 1970's was a very, very different time. That was probably the peak of our industrialization phase. You had millions of men who came back from WW2 ready to work all kinds of jobs, an industrial based that had exploded due to WW2, massive entrepreneurial drive at every level and the ability to get shit done without the nonsense that kill even the most basic projects today.

Yes, a few decades can change things radically. In the decades since the period you use as the reference for this fantasy the US, Europe and other nations have deindustrialized to an alarming degree and China has become the world's factory. We make nothing here. To be able to to things you have to make things. On top of that, our political system has welcomed bat-shit-crazy ideologies, like the current push for down-right socialism/communism who's only recorded history is the destruction of nations.

So, yeah, yours is a fantasy. This is not the United States of the 1950's, 1960's or 1970's, not by a large margin.

To understand things at this level you need contact with reality. I've you've never tried to get a non-trivial project done in the real world, moving atoms, not bit, I can see how waving a magical wand and thinking we can do what was done five to seven decades ago might be possible. It is not. I've been in manufacturing my entire life. I assure you this is not the 1950's.

> This ultimately doesn't really deal with some of the big immediate and local issues though in crowded urban environments

Sure, but that's a different problem, isn't it? What we can change --over time-- is the relationship between where people work and where they live. If you take the greater Los Angeles area, the massive concentration of job centers in centralized "hubs" as I call them is tragically destructive. You have people driving into these hubs from every possible angle and you end-up with shit like the 405 freeway being a parking lot all day, every day.

This isn't about public transportation. It's about politicians being politicians (which I use to mean: incompetent) wasting decades of valuable intelligent planning. In the town I live in they absolutely refuse to grant permits for the kinds of job magnets that would have people from this town work here. As a result, if you are unfortunate enough to not have found work in this area, you are eating a one to two hour commute every day.

So, if you want to solve the housing and congestion problem, you need a long term intelligent planning policy that will incentivize businesses to build in areas that will reverse some of the flows.

To use a company I am very familiar with, SpaceX, just look at where they are in Los Angeles. It's probably one of the worst locations one could choose. And like that, probably hundreds of large employers in that area and a few miles north, south, east and west. A good policy would have looked at the concentration and created intelligent plans to incentivize companies to find locations that would balance flows and spawn new housing developments surrounding these centers of employment.

Instead of doing that, what you end-up with over time are companies leaving for other states where they have more favorable financial climates as well as the ability to, in some cases, build what they need and where they need it.

Moving atoms isn't easy. Some things we can do. Others we cannot. Public mass transportation is not likely to be some thing that will take over the US. Exceptions here and there, sure. I've completed non-trivial construction projects that don't even begin to approximate the zoning and political complexity of the kinds of things you are talking about, and every single one of them has been an expensive nightmare purely because our system has devolved into something that prevents progress rather than encouraging it.

Note that I am not at all opposed to the image you paint. I have travelled and worked in European and Latin American cities where public transport is wonderful and love it. I am just being realistic about who we are and we can actually accomplish in the US. We can't build a single new nuclear (or whatever) power plant while China is building a hundred. That should tell you something.

Re: Waymo in Dallas

#655

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bad operations is not the fault of transit it is the fault of operations. Making transit serve the poor is a political choice and the result is it didn't serve you. However there is every reason to think good operations with a good budget could serve you well.

No there really is not. The problem is that static routes in low density areas do not work. The reason the transit system has a policy about poor areas is because they know people with cars will never take the bus unless the government makes driving onerous which will never happen.

The idea of transit as welfare is a cancer to good transit in the US, even in places where it’s onerous to drive like NYC. This is how we end up with bus stops every block, buses from nowhere to nowhere instead of subway-like frequencies on well used routes, a lack of fare enforcement, running transit as a jobs program, etc.

Re: Waymo in Dallas

#656
post #523

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Capex for car infrastructure seemingly is uncapped (and I don’t talk only about USA either). But when it’s non-car transit suddenly it’s too much money, not profitable, nimby, etc. When cars enjoy fuel subsidies , (mostly) free roads and endless expansion. Update: some car brains over the world decided that even bike lanes are an issue. When bike lanes have bigger throughput, costs don’t even make a dent compared to…

Because 99% of Americans use cars. There’s no point spending money on something that only 15% of the population will even consider using, you’ll still have to spend just as much on roads.

> Because 99% of Americans use cars.

I wouldn't want to be a kid, elderly, sick, blind, disabled in USA.

> There’s no point spending money on something that only 15% of the population will even consider using

Induced demand.

Though seriously you had everything: trains, trams/streetcars, great towns - now say it's impossible (after 80-100 years of lobbying and crazy subsidies).

I bet if "right" startup popped up that by accident would be public transport adjacent - atitude would shift on a dime. I saw a bunch of articles about pedestrian accessibility improvements, due to delivery bots[0]. Apparently it may be easier to improve things for businesses instead of people.

[0] first article I've found: https://nextcity.org/urbanist-news/could-delivery-robots-hel...

Re: Waymo in Dallas

#657
post #373

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's talk about trains. We tore out the light passenger rail lines that once quite commonly connected cities and towns together, and to points within those places. These cities once grew around (and because of) these features, but now it is like like they never even existed. We can't just put them back where they used to be. The landscape has changed. In order to do something different, we'd need to have new routes…

> We can't just put them back where they used to be. The landscape has changed. A lot of old train right of ways still pretty much exist. For many areas it often isn't too outlandish for those lines to be brought back, if there was a will to do so.

See how politically difficult it is to build queenslink in NYC, a transit project using ab existing right of way in the most transit-oriented city in the US. Even there, the unholy alliance of NIMBYs and the degrowth/rent-control left have managed to shut it down for now.

Re: Waymo in Dallas

#658

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Moving the same number of people with fewer passengers per car increases traffic. The overwhelming majority --overwhelming-- of cars, SUV's and trucks on the road have exactly one passenger, including the guy commuting to his office job in an F-250.

You're right, but that still puts the minimum at 1. Even with the many, many vehicles with single passengers as 1, the average is still always higher than 1. An autonomous vehicle doing a deadhead drive has a passenger count of 0. 0 A lot of these AVs at the moment at least are still roughly minivan/midsize SUV. On top of that, with safe distances adding another foot of the car to a highway scenario really doesn't in…

I don't necessarily disagree with you. I think single person AV pods would be amazing and is likely one version of the future. However, this kind of change takes time, a lot of time. AV or not, if you have to share the road with monster trucks being driven by humans who are too busy looking at pictures on their phones, well, you are going to eventually want to be in something at a similar scale. That's why interesting options like Smart cars never made it here.

Whatever this will become, it will be a matter of decades and a real modernization of our traffic laws and other infrastructure. I will not pretend to know what form that will take, my crystal ball stopped working a few decades back.

There are so many questions. Just looking at a place like Los Angeles, I regularly drive right next to massive trucks moving containers and all kinds of cargo. Can we be more intelligent about this? An automated cargo monorail operating down the middle of every highway? Sure, as an idea and a fantasy. In the real world you'll have to contend with myriad issues spanning a range between our inability to build anything anymore in this country with how you are going to deal with millions of people losing their jobs if you automate cargo transport and clear large trucks from the highways. Etc.

It's nice to have these visions about the future. What will actually happen is a different matter. I am placing my bet on self driving cars as the first practical phase of a transition into something more sensible that will likely require three to five decades. The equation is very simple: Atomos are expensive and hard to move. Conventional cars and trucks manufactured and purchased today are going to stay on the roads for at least a decade. A mass transition to a different paradigm is measured in units of decades after the last conventional vehicle is manufactured and sold. Hence my five decade estimate for transportation utopia.

Re: Waymo in Dallas

#659
post #526

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From a municipal finance perspective, most Dallas-Fort Worth suburban municipalities are far and away outperforming urban Dallas (the City of Dallas proper). That's not opinion, you can see the finances as they are all public. Ask the LLM of your choice to make research easy. I'm not really sure where people get this idea that suburbs are drowning in liabilities where dense american urban centers are overflowing with…

The finances of these metros rarely incorporate road costs; their accounting does not require them to incorporate the future liability for infrastructure maintenance and so everything looks good until they need to redo the roads.

[deleted]

Re: Waymo in Dallas

#660

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Waymo is not doing any carpooling optimizations. They're right now a luxury service that is priced above the normal Uber ride prices. This will obviously change in future, once they start a truly mass rollout.

Yeah, all the people who refuse to ride busses to the point they're willing to spend many many thousands of dollars on their own cars are just yearning to carpool in a much more compact vehicle than a bus.

> Yeah, all the people who refuse to ride busses

It's not that people refuse to ride busses. In most places in the US this is either a non-existent or extremely impractical option. It's just reality.

Post reply on HN