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

Waymo pulls over, calls cops on juvenile riders who had 'ghost gun"

latimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 223 posts

Re: Waymo pulls over, calls cops on juvenile riders who had 'ghost gun"

#61

Post by leopoldj »

analog31 wrote: post #35
kelnos wrote: post #3

I'm really torn on this. This particular situation, at face value at least, sounds like a good outcome. Kids had a gun, someone noticed, called police, situation handled without escalation or violence or something tragic happening. But this doesn't generalize. Another incident described in the article was when some kids were drinking in the car and shooting toy guns. What if they hadn't been drinking? What if they we…

>>> What if Waymo thought the guns were real, called the cops, and the cops screwed up and shot one of the kids? These sorts of escalations aren't imaginary; they happen, and they end in tragedy. I take this seriously, but I think this a problem with the cops. Even regular people hesitate to report problems if they think the police might overreact.

Please do not encourage your children to carry and brandish replica guns. This is never a good idea. Unfortunately I see this more frequently than I like. Kids don't just carry, they aim and pretend to shoot. Even in an open carry state like Florida brandishing a gun is illegal.

Re: Waymo pulls over, calls cops on juvenile riders who had 'ghost gun"

#62

Post by iamnothere »

qwerpy wrote: post #38

[flagged]

Why stop at autonomous cars? New cars monitor drivers for “drowsiness” and have internal/external cameras. Why not monitor for guns too? Maybe they should even refuse to drive if you’re holding a gun!

And why stop at cars? Maybe home cameras should call the cops if they see a weapon. Maybe your Apple Watch should detect if you’ve fired a gun. Brave new world!

Re: Waymo pulls over, calls cops on juvenile riders who had 'ghost gun"

#63

Post by anon84873628 »

handwarmers wrote: post #29
anon84873628 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well for one, so far they've only called the police on people who chose to use the service. When we have evidence that Waymo is contracting its external cameras out to local governments and allowing abuse, then we can criticize them for it.

What do you mean? Google is legally required to share information, and does share information, when such information is requested through a whole variety of different means available to local governments. https://policies.google.com/terms/information-requests

That's the same as the police getting security footage from any random building.

The problem with Flock is that they let police hop on and look at whatever they want whenever they want. Completely different operating modes and intentions.

Also, Google and Waymo are different companies under the same parent. Google's policies are irrelevant.

Re: Waymo pulls over, calls cops on juvenile riders who had 'ghost gun"

#64

Post by kstrauser »

bot403 wrote: post #8
kelnos wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a big difference between a human present who can make a decision based on a situation literally in front of their eyes, and a computer flagging a video feed for someone in what amounts to a call center to look at and decide on. Not to mention the mass surveillance this sort of stuff continues to help enable.

I'm not a fan of expanding surveillance but the alternative of unmonitored transit seems worse. Going to shoot up a place? Take your guns on a waymo. It won't complain. Guy wants to take an obviously distressed and co-erced girl to an abandoned lot? No complaints. Person with obvious head injury and slurring speech wants to go home instead of the hospital? Sure. Person has heart attack and passes out in back? We'll j…

Those are bad examples of things where a computer should make a judgement call.

> Going to shoot up a place? Take your guns on a waymo. It won't complain.

I take my kid to go skeet shooting. You’d call the police on us for having legal guns? What about my pocket knife?

> Guy wants to take an obviously distressed and co-erced girl to an abandoned lot? No complaints.

My wife is scared by someone on the sidewalk. We’re riding to where we parked our car for the evening. There’s a scared woman with me as we commute to our vehicle. BART wouldn’t call the cops on me.

> Person with obvious head injury and slurring speech wants to go home instead of the hospital? Sure.

What’s “obvious” here? I have drinks with friends and bump my head on a cabinet, and now I’m bleeding like a stuck pig. I’m not remotely about to die. Dammit, Waymo, I just want to go home and shower and let me wife laugh at me while she tapes me up.

> Person has heart attack and passes out in back? We'll just drive your limp body 45 minutes in traffic to your destination.

Person’s exhausted after work and wants to nap on the way home. They look identical to the dead guy. BART lets you nap.

If we had ubiquitous taxi and subway police, maybe they’d spent 5 seconds assessing each situation and move on. In no other real-life situation do we expect empty subways or taxi drivers to call the cops and investigate every possible bad scenario, nor should we.

Re: Waymo pulls over, calls cops on juvenile riders who had 'ghost gun"

#65

Post by ButlerianJihad »

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #37
epsteingpt wrote: post #7

Shocking this isn't bigger news. It will be strange what they get you for. Maybe car ownership isn't doomed after all. At least a human usually has some judgment and discretion situationally. I guess the alternative "Juvenile Driveby Shooting takes place from Waymo" isn't a better headline though.

Google would probably be held 100% liable if it happened from their car. . What I don’t get is why Waymo allows unaccompanied juvenile riders at all? That seems like a huge risk for them.

As of this writing, Waymo only permits unaccompanied minors in the Metro Phoenix area. The incident occurred in San Francisco, so it seems that they should not have riding without an adult.

https://support.google.com/waymo/answer/16389431?sjid=166657...

Re: Waymo pulls over, calls cops on juvenile riders who had 'ghost gun"

#66

Post by the8472 »

anon84873628 wrote: post #54
the8472 wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But it's a reduction of privacy compared to private vehicles. If the goal is to convert all transportation infrastructure into surveilled transportation then that is a loss in privacy for the general public.

You can raise that argument when they actually prevent you from owning your own vehicle.

No, the argument should be raised before that happens. You want to prevent undesirable things from happening, not try to claw them back after they happened.

It looks quite foolish to me to never plan ahead and predict undesirable future events and then trying to prevent them ahead of time.

"Sorry, we can't fulfill your request for transportation to the protest for private ownership, but we can offer a free ride to the Colosseum" ;)

Re: Waymo pulls over, calls cops on juvenile riders who had 'ghost gun"

#68

Post by kstrauser »

anon84873628 wrote: post #51
kstrauser wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. Well, not exactly wave guns around, but say and do stupid stuff? Not in a taxi around a human driver, no. And not in a subway car with people other than me and my friends, no. But your question had an “or” in it. If we had nerf guns and no one else was there to witness? It’s not unimaginable that someone might get a nerf dart to the ear when they didn’t expect it. My wife and I like watching real-life police det…

Good thing Waymo yells you you're being monitored then.

And the sign along the highway says my speed might be monitored by airplane, but I don’t want to live where that means a surveillance drone is flying along side me at all times. Consenting to let a taxi record me in case it comes up later that I did something bad and they want to have footage of it is one thing. But now we know Waymo is a little Flock tattletale, and people generally aren’t ok with their robocab proactively narcing on them.

Re: Waymo pulls over, calls cops on juvenile riders who had 'ghost gun"

#69

Post by analog31 »

leopoldj wrote: post #61
analog31 wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>> What if Waymo thought the guns were real, called the cops, and the cops screwed up and shot one of the kids? These sorts of escalations aren't imaginary; they happen, and they end in tragedy. I take this seriously, but I think this a problem with the cops. Even regular people hesitate to report problems if they think the police might overreact.

Please do not encourage your children to carry and brandish replica guns. This is never a good idea. Unfortunately I see this more frequently than I like. Kids don't just carry, they aim and pretend to shoot. Even in an open carry state like Florida brandishing a gun is illegal.

I know, it's a different world. I'm 62. As a kid, my friends and I chased one another around the neighborhood with toy guns for hours, raising a racket. My kids are 24 and 26 now, but it would have been unthinkable to let them have toy guns.

Re: Waymo pulls over, calls cops on juvenile riders who had 'ghost gun"

#70

Post by handwarmers »

anon84873628 wrote: post #63
handwarmers wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you mean? Google is legally required to share information, and does share information, when such information is requested through a whole variety of different means available to local governments. https://policies.google.com/terms/information-requests

That's the same as the police getting security footage from any random building. The problem with Flock is that they let police hop on and look at whatever they want whenever they want. Completely different operating modes and intentions. Also, Google and Waymo are different companies under the same parent. Google's policies are irrelevant.

Yeah good point on the policies. It makes Waymo's case worse though, because they have nothing defined publicly. They are also for-profit, and trying to deploy to more cities. The concerns are real - https://www.criminallegalnews.org/news/2025/jul/1/driverless...

"While companies like Waymo insist they require search warrants for footage, based on probable cause and judicial approval, the legal framework for accessing autonomous vehicle data remains unsettled. A 2022 analysis by the Electronic Frontier Foundation (“EFF”) noted that few states have specific laws governing law enforcement access to such data, leaving gaps in oversight. In Arizona, where Waymo operates extensively, police must typically obtain a search warrant to access footage, as required by state law for electronic records and consistent with Fourth Amendment protections. "

Post reply on HN