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

Next stop: Miami

waymo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 319 posts

Re: Next stop: Miami

#121

Post by ecocentrik »

fngjdflmdflg wrote: post #17

This is important if nothing else because Miami sees much more rain than SF and Phoenix: Miami: 57 in. ( https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/access/us-climate-normals/#dataset... SF: 25 in. ( https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/access/us-climate-normals/#dataset... ) Phoenix: 7 in. ( https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/access/us-climate-normals/#dataset... )

The rainfall can pose serious visibility risks that will be as much of a challenge as picking up and dropping off customers on a rainy day. Extreme high tides do still flood some roads on Miami Beach with brackish water, which isn't something you want to drive through in an electric car.

On the less challenging side, the city has zero snow, no road ice to worry about.

Re: Next stop: Miami

#122

Post by bluGill »

sumeno wrote: post #106
bedobi wrote: post #61

Imagine if instead Miami built MetroRail extensions to the beach and everywhere else it should go, increased TriRail frequency and express services, built a real network of fully segregated greenways etc etc. It would turn transport nightmare into transport heaven. We don't need more cars on the streets of Miami or the I95...

But then a rich person might have to share a ride with a poor person and we can't have that

That doesn't follow. Nobody has said we will force the rich out of their limos.

Some of the rich will chose to use transit though. There is a group of rich people who got that way by being cheap and that group will use transit if possible just because it is cheaper. They don't care about sharing rides with poor people at all.

There is a group of people who appear rich - they live in mansions, drive limos. They are also in dept up to their eyes and one wrong move will put them out on the streets.

Re: Next stop: Miami

#123

Post by IshKebab »

timmg wrote: post #3

I wonder when they will be able to provide service in northern cities (that get snow). Once they can do that -- and (I guess) can prove profitable -- they could expand non-stop across the country.

Based on what I saw in SF they're still pretty limited to noob-level driving. I expect driving difficulty will be way more of a barrier than snow.

Re: Next stop: Miami

#124

Post by maverickmax90 »

tomp wrote: post #97
fixprix wrote: post #85

Waymo is cool, but I have no idea how it is going to compete with the tsunami coming that is CyberCab. Tesla will be mass producing this smaller, cheaper vehicle like nothing else. Covering the entire country with self driving vehicles. I don’t know how Waymo can possibly compete with that. Their deployment by city is slow, their hardware is expensive, slown to produce, and not purpose built for self driving.

The bigger question is, how can Tesla with it's non-working "full self driving" compete with Waymo's working actual self-driving.

[flagged]

Re: Next stop: Miami

#125

Post by comte7092 »

xnx wrote: post #92
skybrian wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They won’t have to pay for the driver when idle, but owning cars ties up capital and the fewer rides they do, the longer it takes to pay off. This isn’t specific to cars - all capital equipment works that way. Lower utilization is sometimes unavoidable, but it still means less revenue which can be the difference between a profit and a loss. How much this matters depends on the price of the car. We don’t know how much…

> To be profitable with lower utilization, they’ll need to work on reducing how much each car costs somehow. Definitely. Their custom vehicle had optimizations for cost, but seems to be on hold due to tariffs. Waymo also has the option to drop prices lower than Uber/Lyft when vehicles are unutilized, though they still need to stay above their per-mile depreciation and operating costs.

> Waymo also has the option to drop prices lower than Uber/Lyft when vehicles are unutilized

I think that’s an unproven assumption.

There’s certainly reason to believe it to be true of course, but uber and Lyft are already capturing upwards of 50% of the fares for each ride, and that’s without the capital costs on their books. Removing the driver from the equation can’t lead to much more than that 50% (realistically much less) margin.

Going from charging $10 to $5 isn’t going to make rides suddenly materialize. Especially in rural areas there are just times that people aren’t going to be looking to go anywhere, and wait time becomes far more of a factor that raw costs.

Re: Next stop: Miami

#126

Post by vel0city »

bedobi wrote: post #101
onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well that would cost Miami taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars, and this costs Miami taxpayers nothing. It would also take decades. This will be happening next year. Build all the transit you want. You need something for the next 30 years while you're doing that.

no it would save miami and the state and the federal government billions trirail frequency increases can be done overnight a greenway network can also be built quickly and cheaply metrorail extension would cost more but still less than it costs to build and maintain roads but they are too busy spending billions building even more car infra which will only make traffic and congestion even worse

> trirail frequency increases can be done overnight

Increasing the frequency can't necessarily be done overnight, unless they actually have the spare rolling stock just sitting around along with all the workers needed to operate and maintain the increased usage and the spare budget to cover the increased operations costs. Otherwise, they need to find the money to procure the rolling stock, actually place the order, wait for the rolling stock to be built/delivered, hire the people to operate and maintain it, etc.

Re: Next stop: Miami

#127

Post by ethbr1 »

taneq wrote: post #29
simpleintheory wrote: post #4

I think the most interesting part is that the article says that Waymo's handing its operations to Moove. It seems like Waymo's trying to become a software provider while having other companies handle the capital-intensive parts.

Capital-intensive, or labour-intensive? If I were a provider of 'special smart sauce' that goes on a common piece of equipment, I'd be trying to focus on making it so I could provide the sauce rather than dealing with all the real-world issues that come with all the real-world people using the saucy equipment.

Depends.

Chick-fil-A grew into a pretty big business by vertically integrating outside of just selling sandwiches to Waffle House.

So sometimes it's worth owning sauce distribution too. ;)

Re: Next stop: Miami

#128

Post by palmtree3000 »

entropi wrote: post #93
onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If the problem is efficiently moving people around in a city; well to be honest I find this premise a bit ridiculous. Call me a European, but I find the idea that moving 1-2 people in private vehicles on roads being superior than public transit -preferably on rail- simply absurd. Much of the US like Huston and Miami is extremely lacking in public transit, and will likely never build the infrastructure. > Ride-haili…

> Much of the US like Huston and Miami is extremely lacking in public transit, and will likely never build the infrastructure. I am not trying to be a contrarian here, but I fail to see how that is an answer. I feel like what you say boils down to "since we are not solving the problem at hand in a good way, we decided to solve it in a worse way". > ~50% of your fare goes to the driver. Yet these ride-hailing companie…

> since we are not solving the problem at hand in a good way, we decided to solve it in a worse way

It's a different "we". Rephrased:

since Houston's government is not solving the problem at hand in a good way, Waymo decided to solve it in a worse way

Re: Next stop: Miami

#129

Post by ra7 »

SubiculumCode wrote: post #119

Question: Do Waymo rides ever get on a freeway within their operating territory?

Not yet. Freeway rides are open to employees only for now, so I'd imagine it's pretty close to being available to the public.

Re: Next stop: Miami

#130

Post by PittleyDunkin »

asdff wrote: post #110
tomp wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The bigger question is, how can Tesla with it's non-working "full self driving" compete with Waymo's working actual self-driving.

I’ve seen teslas full self driving drive me on surface roads, on the highway, and even navigate the lot, find parking, and park the car. In what way is it non working at this point? Waymo doesn’t even do highway.

It's not "full" self driving despite their advertisements (which shouldn't even be legal to use). It can't handle basic weather or bad drivers or confusing road markings.

Granted, neither can many humans. But the bar should be many times higher if the operators are relieved of liability.

Post reply on HN