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

Robotaxis 'do not belong in the city of Los Angeles,' lawmaker says

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 83 posts

Re: Robotaxis 'do not belong in the city of Los Angeles,' lawmaker says

#11

Post by srackey »

joncrane wrote: post #2

I know this sounds terrible, so please understand I don't agree with this approach, but. I've had the thought that third world countries will end up being the testing ground for autonomous vehicles. Peoples' safety isn't taken as seriously in developing countries, and the local authorities are easier to bribe. The cost for actually functioning autonomous vehicles will be some mistakes. It's up to society to decide wh…

I fear it will end up more like nuclear energy: a clearly better, objectively safer technology that nevertheless is very easy to fear-monger against. Development won’t be pushed to the Third World, but rather those political systems less susceptible to being swayed by nonsense public pressure like that.

Re: Robotaxis 'do not belong in the city of Los Angeles,' lawmaker says

#12

Post by Etheryte »

djoldman wrote: post #6
theonlybutlet wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The road conditions are not ideal though, poor road markings, road conditions, other drivers not following the rules of the road. Hardly a place to test cars.

Counter take is that it's the perfect environment from a learning perspective: if you succeed there, you can succeed in easier conditions.

Not really, hectic traffic and nonexistent roads aren't a superset of organized traffic and good roads. If you take a human driver from a country with hectic traffic and put them in one with organized traffic they'll struggle and vice versa, the same would hold here. Being skilled in one doesn't really help you out in the other.

Re: Robotaxis 'do not belong in the city of Los Angeles,' lawmaker says

#13

Post by Etheryte »

joncrane wrote: post #2

I know this sounds terrible, so please understand I don't agree with this approach, but. I've had the thought that third world countries will end up being the testing ground for autonomous vehicles. Peoples' safety isn't taken as seriously in developing countries, and the local authorities are easier to bribe. The cost for actually functioning autonomous vehicles will be some mistakes. It's up to society to decide wh…

I'm not sure this holds up to scrutiny. So far we have numerous companies testing autonomous vehicles in the states and personally I don't know any that test in developing countries.

Re: Robotaxis 'do not belong in the city of Los Angeles,' lawmaker says

#14

Post by micromacrofoot »

Axsuul wrote: post #4

I am constituent in this guy's district and I would much, much rather bike next to robotaxis in LA vs. human drivers.

no way, most people have some incentive to avoid murdering another, because it will likely ruin or severely interrupt their lives - a robotaxi killing someone will result in an insurance payout, the company won’t even be shut down

Re: Robotaxis 'do not belong in the city of Los Angeles,' lawmaker says

#16

Post by micromacrofoot »

joncrane wrote: post #2

I know this sounds terrible, so please understand I don't agree with this approach, but. I've had the thought that third world countries will end up being the testing ground for autonomous vehicles. Peoples' safety isn't taken as seriously in developing countries, and the local authorities are easier to bribe. The cost for actually functioning autonomous vehicles will be some mistakes. It's up to society to decide wh…

thanks for sharing that messed up thought with us I guess

Re: Robotaxis 'do not belong in the city of Los Angeles,' lawmaker says

#17

Post by rob74 »

micromacrofoot wrote: post #14
Axsuul wrote: post #4

I am constituent in this guy's district and I would much, much rather bike next to robotaxis in LA vs. human drivers.

no way, most people have some incentive to avoid murdering another, because it will likely ruin or severely interrupt their lives - a robotaxi killing someone will result in an insurance payout, the company won’t even be shut down

Drivers who kill pedestrians or cyclists don't consciously decide to murder them (at least not in 99.99% of cases), they do it out of negligence - opening a door without looking into the mirror, turning right at an intersection without looking for pedestrians or cyclists, not stopping at pedestrian crossings etc. etc.

Re: Robotaxis 'do not belong in the city of Los Angeles,' lawmaker says

#18

Post by guil177 »

paulette449 wrote: post #8

The article infers, not unreasonably IMO, that the support for this push comes neither from citizens nor fellow lawmakers but from labor unions with whom the lawmaker (Councilmember Hug Soto-Martínez) is closely aligned. > "This has everything to do with making sure that the streets of Los Angeles are safe ... It’s also about making sure that we protect jobs" > "During the Q&A that followed, TechCrunch asked if any c…

I never understood the longterm logic of protecting jobs by not using tools.

Any tools goal is to reduce work.

Re: Robotaxis 'do not belong in the city of Los Angeles,' lawmaker says

#19

Post by djoldman »

Etheryte wrote: post #12
djoldman wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Counter take is that it's the perfect environment from a learning perspective: if you succeed there, you can succeed in easier conditions.

Not really, hectic traffic and nonexistent roads aren't a superset of organized traffic and good roads. If you take a human driver from a country with hectic traffic and put them in one with organized traffic they'll struggle and vice versa, the same would hold here. Being skilled in one doesn't really help you out in the other.

They're both a superset of the problem space: safely navigate from A to B.

And broadly speaking, with more varied training data you can achieve better out of sample results.

Re: Robotaxis 'do not belong in the city of Los Angeles,' lawmaker says

#20

Post by [deleted] »

guil177 wrote: post #18
paulette449 wrote: post #8

The article infers, not unreasonably IMO, that the support for this push comes neither from citizens nor fellow lawmakers but from labor unions with whom the lawmaker (Councilmember Hug Soto-Martínez) is closely aligned. > "This has everything to do with making sure that the streets of Los Angeles are safe ... It’s also about making sure that we protect jobs" > "During the Q&A that followed, TechCrunch asked if any c…

I never understood the longterm logic of protecting jobs by not using tools. Any tools goal is to reduce work.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN