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

Waymo updates 3,800 robotaxis after they 'drive into standing water'

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 223 posts

Re: Waymo updates 3,800 robotaxis after they 'drive into standing water'

#131

Post by nomel »

harry8 wrote: post #83
nomel wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For common routes, yes. For getting to John's house, where the path there sometimes floods, no.

So the first waymo to get to this less used road to john’s will not have the data rather than every waymo that travels down a new highway, that then becomes a problem if it rains. One car with an issue of first coincides with rain on a less used road?

Well, it's closer to: any car with stale data and sufficient water depth is a financial and PR disaster. These cars are not cheap, and a tiktok of someone being driven into the water is even more expensive!

Re: Waymo updates 3,800 robotaxis after they 'drive into standing water'

#132

Post by cesarb »

That's the promise of self-driving cars.

Every time an issue is found, no matter how minor, it's fixed and updated everywhere. From now on, every car of that model (and future models, and related models) will no longer have that problem. Several passes of that improvement cycle, and self-driving cars become safer (and more efficient/comfortable/etc) than human drivers. At least, that's how it's supposed to work.

Re: Waymo updates 3,800 robotaxis after they 'drive into standing water'

#133

Post by adrianmonk »

fudged71 wrote: post #48
xnx wrote: post #8

"recall" = applies software update

Also I think it's wrong to call something a recall if it's not owned by customers. Waymo is a service.

Waymos are fleet vehicles. Recalls go to the owners, just like with other fleet vehicles such as rental cars, taxis, limos, delivery services, utilities, and city/state/federal government. It doesn't really matter who is whose customer.

Re: Waymo updates 3,800 robotaxis after they 'drive into standing water'

#134

Post by Chaseraph »

drob518 wrote: post #22
Animats wrote: post #2

That's a tough problem - distinguishing wet pavement from deep water. Humans make that mistake frequently. Autonomous vehicles should probably be equipped with a water sensor. (We did that in our DARPA Grand Challenge vehicle back in 2005). Then they can enter water very cautiously and see if it's too deep. This may make them too cautious about shallow puddles on roads, though.

It’s a particularly hard problem in Texas. We get torrential rains and the landscape is relatively flat. Couple that with shallow soil over lots of limestone and it means flooding is really common. We also have roads that have a “low water crossing,” where a road crosses a creekbed that is normally dry but which will flood. There are often water depth signs there (basically a vertical ruler with feet marks so you can…

This case makes me think of my brother's place in rural Tennessee. To get to his house, you drive through a small creek, year round. For a hundred years in their community, they've managed without a bridge. I'm not sure driverless cars are ready for edge cases like this. Also, no one tell Enterprise I drove their rental through a creek.

Re: Waymo updates 3,800 robotaxis after they 'drive into standing water'

#135

Post by _puk »

bombcar wrote: post #107
reaperducer wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Texas has it easy. I've seen several places in England (and at least one in the western United States) where they have fords. For those not familiar, water runs over the road full-time, and people are expected to just drive through it like it's no big deal. Except for right after a storm, when it is a big deal. It's essentially the intersection of a road and a stream where a bridge should be, but nobody ever built on…

It seems to me you could do something interesting with floating warning devices that only appear when the water's too deep.

Sounds like overkill.

Stick in the ground will do it.

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2F...

Re: Waymo updates 3,800 robotaxis after they 'drive into standing water'

#136

Post by JKCalhoun »

Animats wrote: post #2

That's a tough problem - distinguishing wet pavement from deep water. Humans make that mistake frequently. Autonomous vehicles should probably be equipped with a water sensor. (We did that in our DARPA Grand Challenge vehicle back in 2005). Then they can enter water very cautiously and see if it's too deep. This may make them too cautious about shallow puddles on roads, though.

Human drivers look for Waymos up ahead, water up to their windows.

Re: Waymo updates 3,800 robotaxis after they 'drive into standing water'

#137

Post by 0x457 »

amluto wrote: post #35
tintor wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

LIDAR isn't helpful for water. Standing water behaves like a mirror on LIDAR.

If the LIDAR can sense the road close enough to the front of the car, then it could estimate how far underwater the car is.

There are better ways to measure how far underwater the car is: https://www.landrover.com/ownership/off-road/wading-depths.h..., this assumes you driving over something more or less flat underwater and that car is built for this.

Here the goal is avoiding driving into the water in the first place.

Re: Waymo updates 3,800 robotaxis after they 'drive into standing water'

#138

Post by sunrunner »

_puk wrote: post #135
bombcar wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems to me you could do something interesting with floating warning devices that only appear when the water's too deep.

Sounds like overkill. Stick in the ground will do it. https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2F...

As long as the ground doesn't dip halfway across...

Re: Waymo updates 3,800 robotaxis after they 'drive into standing water'

#139

Post by sidewndr46 »

drob518 wrote: post #22
Animats wrote: post #2

That's a tough problem - distinguishing wet pavement from deep water. Humans make that mistake frequently. Autonomous vehicles should probably be equipped with a water sensor. (We did that in our DARPA Grand Challenge vehicle back in 2005). Then they can enter water very cautiously and see if it's too deep. This may make them too cautious about shallow puddles on roads, though.

It’s a particularly hard problem in Texas. We get torrential rains and the landscape is relatively flat. Couple that with shallow soil over lots of limestone and it means flooding is really common. We also have roads that have a “low water crossing,” where a road crosses a creekbed that is normally dry but which will flood. There are often water depth signs there (basically a vertical ruler with feet marks so you can…

I've lived here over a decade. Lived through multiple floods. Never once have I driven into water without being unaware of it.

Re: Waymo updates 3,800 robotaxis after they 'drive into standing water'

#140

Post by sgerenser »

bombcar wrote: post #109
jjmarr wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I traveled to Austin 3 weeks ago and there were entire highways not on Google Maps. Apparently they were built in just a few months.

There's some places where Apple still thinks I'm driving through a cornfield even though the development is a few years old, now. I suppose I could inform them somehow, but it's not worth the bother.

I’m still amazed at the people who claim that Apple Maps is as good as Google Maps nowadays. If you live anywhere where there’s lots of development, it’s definitely not. It’s also terrible when businesses or places of interest move. My wife’s business moved a half mile down the road and a single message to google maps got it moved in a couple days. Apple Maps took about a year with multiple requests and even multiple messages to their special “escalation” email address.
Post reply on HN