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

Cruise vehicle gets stuck in wet concrete while driving in San Francisco

sfgate.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 175 posts

Re: Cruise vehicle gets stuck in wet concrete while driving in San Francisco

#101

Post by dotnet00 »

SketchySeaBeast wrote: post #94
nzoschke wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Plus there is an opportunity for all the cars to learn the same lesson at once and forever. Also humans can learn from this too. It’s not hard to imagine a new type of safety cone that has an explicit sign for autonomous vehicles to stop far far away.

> It’s not hard to imagine a new type of safety cone that has an explicit sign for autonomous vehicles to stop far far away. Isn't that kind of defeating the point of autonomous vehicles if we need to build a world that will accommodate them?

The point of autonomous vehicles is to not have to totally reshape the world before being able to accommodate them. But small shifts like adjusting signs to also be easily read by autonomous vehicles aren't that crazy.

It'd just be done such that new signage is made to be easily readable, so that over time, as old stuff is replaced, the signage becomes more readable for machines.

This sort of thing can also benefit regular vehicles.

Re: Cruise vehicle gets stuck in wet concrete while driving in San Francisco

#102

Post by bryanlarsen »

Driverless car from Cruise. Headlines every day about autonomous driving mishaps from Tesla & Cruise, seemingly never from Waymo.

Does this hurt or help Waymo? They're being painted with the same brush, but perhaps they can leverage that into regulatory capture. When the inevitable regulations come along they'll likely be set to "difficult, but achievable". Which at this point feels like "Waymo pass, Tesla & Cruise fail".

Re: Cruise vehicle gets stuck in wet concrete while driving in San Francisco

#103

Post by frob »

danielvaughn wrote: post #76

This might be a naive question, but are driverless lanes being considered? For instance we have bike lanes all over the US. It might make sense to make a similar investment for AI-friendly lanes to help transition to driverless transportation.

Doing something like that takes massive public investments in changing our roads and infrastructure. Given that this money will come from the public, I would argue that it should be spent on publicly accessible tools and services, like enhanced public transit. I do not want to spend public money to build public infrastructure for the gain of massive private companies' experiments.

Re: Cruise vehicle gets stuck in wet concrete while driving in San Francisco

#104

Post by burkaman »

> On Friday night, as many as 10 Cruise driverless cars stopped working near a music festival in San Francisco’s North Beach, causing traffic to back up, according to The San Francisco Chronicle, which reported that the company had blamed “wireless connectivity issues.”

They just stop if they lose service?

Re: Cruise vehicle gets stuck in wet concrete while driving in San Francisco

#105

Post by kdmccormick »

rchaud wrote: post #93
danielvaughn wrote: post #76

This might be a naive question, but are driverless lanes being considered? For instance we have bike lanes all over the US. It might make sense to make a similar investment for AI-friendly lanes to help transition to driverless transportation.

There are bike lanes all over the US? Since when? Also, isn't Musk setting up Hyperloop, or was that another publicity stunt?

Since the past decade or so, but especially the past couple of years: https://nextcity.org/urbanist-news/how-five-u.s.-cities-buil...

Re. Hyperloop: some have said it was a stunt to attack public support for CA high speed rail (which would reduce CA's dependency on cars): https://twitter.com/parismarx/status/1571628269555826688?lan...

EDIT: Re-reading your comment, I realize that you're challenging GP's assertion that we already have bike lanes everywhere, which I agree is obviously false.

Re: Cruise vehicle gets stuck in wet concrete while driving in San Francisco

#107

Post by dmazin »

bryanlarsen wrote: post #102

Driverless car from Cruise . Headlines every day about autonomous driving mishaps from Tesla & Cruise, seemingly never from Waymo. Does this hurt or help Waymo? They're being painted with the same brush, but perhaps they can leverage that into regulatory capture. When the inevitable regulations come along they'll likely be set to "difficult, but achievable". Which at this point feels like "Waymo pass, Tesla & Cruise…

The article does mention that a Waymo car was also involved in an incident.

> In May, a driverless Waymo car blocked a fire vehicle while it was backing into a station.

Re: Cruise vehicle gets stuck in wet concrete while driving in San Francisco

#108

Post by sundaeofshock »

LatteLazy wrote: post #95
kayodelycaon wrote: post #85

The scary part of this is it went through construction cones and flaggers with stop signs to end up in the concrete. Basically, this thing went right through a construction zone without stopping. Granted, people are this dumb every single day. But who is liable for the fines here?

The owner of the car initially. The passenger(s) and maker may also be liable depending on circumstances.

Under what circumstances would the passenger be liable? They have no control over the vehicle so I fail see how an event like this would be their fault.

Re: Cruise vehicle gets stuck in wet concrete while driving in San Francisco

#109

Post by soco »

burkaman wrote: post #104

> On Friday night, as many as 10 Cruise driverless cars stopped working near a music festival in San Francisco’s North Beach, causing traffic to back up, according to The San Francisco Chronicle, which reported that the company had blamed “wireless connectivity issues.” They just stop if they lose service?

It's definitely safer than going on blind. Wet concrete might be the least bad situation.

Re: Cruise vehicle gets stuck in wet concrete while driving in San Francisco

#110

Post by kdmccormick »

LatteLazy wrote: post #98
shakow wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would we want to spend so much money to transition to driverless transportation? Just take PT if you don't want to drive.

I'm all for public transport, and I don't think this will happen but... Because driverless cars are safer, faster and more efficient.

...than what, regular cars, or public transit?

Good public transit is WAY safer and more efficient than cars of any sort. It could be faster, too, if we prioritized it over cars like much of Europe has.

Post reply on HN