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

Waymo says insurance data shows its driverless cars are safer than humans

nbcbayarea.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 288 posts

Re: Waymo says insurance data shows its driverless cars are safer than humans

#21

Post by notyourwork »

ra7 wrote: post #20
belltaco wrote: post #4

Aren't they operating under a lot of constraints? The comparison should be with human drivers operating under similar conditions and on similar roads, similar cars(eg. new ones), weather conditions etc. Plus they have a fleet of support folks and standby remote and dispatchable operators which cannot be cheap, we get no insight into the financials except that they're losing several billion dollars a year. If at the e…

> Aren't they operating under a lot of constraints? The comparison should be with human drivers operating under similar conditions and on similar roads, similar cars(eg. new ones), weather conditions etc. The insurance data for the comparison is from the zip codes Waymo currently operates in, so all of that is accounted for. Here is the full study: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2309.01206.pdf

And for cars that are geofenced. Not accurate comparison.

Re: Waymo says insurance data shows its driverless cars are safer than humans

#22

Post by [deleted] »

scott00 wrote: post #5

Been a flurry of self driving car safety news lately. Both Cruise and Waymo are reaching for more sophisticated comparison samples than nationwide stats to demonstrate the safety of their systems. But the obvious way to prove this, to me anyway, is to run a randomized controlled trial. Put them in a dispatch system with human driven cars, randomize whether any given assignment goes to a human or a robot, and you've g…

[deleted]

Re: Waymo says insurance data shows its driverless cars are safer than humans

#23

Post by RockRobotRock »

gpm wrote: post #14
ChatGTP wrote: post #12

Ban human drivers and lobby to have Waymo be the only legal way to drive. \s

Ban human drivers eventually. First ban the development of new self driving systems because it's too dangerous, and merge with any competitors. Make sure you're the only game in town. With how they're developing self driving as AI heavy black boxes there isn't a more natural monopoly in the world.

comma.ai is a sustainable and realistic business and it kicks ass

Re: Waymo says insurance data shows its driverless cars are safer than humans

#24

Post by smileysteve »

skepticATX wrote: post #18
belltaco wrote: post #4

Aren't they operating under a lot of constraints? The comparison should be with human drivers operating under similar conditions and on similar roads, similar cars(eg. new ones), weather conditions etc. Plus they have a fleet of support folks and standby remote and dispatchable operators which cannot be cheap, we get no insight into the financials except that they're losing several billion dollars a year. If at the e…

I’d like to see AVs compared to the average good driver. I’d bet it’s a lot closer in that case.

The average "good" driver is likely the p90 though.

60% of US drivers survey to using a hand held cell phone while driving.

an intersection, but not exclusively 30% of US drivers survey to driving under the influence of alcohol in the last year; and that's generally excluding "buzzed"/under the legal limit - which may be lawful - but likely take one out of the "good" category.

Then you have medical conditions that go unchecked for driving in the US, peripheral vision, far-sightedness checked once a decade, reaction time, physical disabilities.

Then you have following too closely, speeding, accelerating too quickly, braking too quickly, taking turns too quickly, vehicles lacking maintenance (tires with little tread, inappropriate tread for roads, brakes not bled every ~2 years, lights out, suspension unchecked, carolina raised trucks)

Finally, you can add in US infrastructure, which traditionally maximizes speed and minimizes safety -- and generally gets a C-.

Re: Waymo says insurance data shows its driverless cars are safer than humans

#25

Post by lolinder »

ra7 wrote: post #20
belltaco wrote: post #4

Aren't they operating under a lot of constraints? The comparison should be with human drivers operating under similar conditions and on similar roads, similar cars(eg. new ones), weather conditions etc. Plus they have a fleet of support folks and standby remote and dispatchable operators which cannot be cheap, we get no insight into the financials except that they're losing several billion dollars a year. If at the e…

> Aren't they operating under a lot of constraints? The comparison should be with human drivers operating under similar conditions and on similar roads, similar cars(eg. new ones), weather conditions etc. The insurance data for the comparison is from the zip codes Waymo currently operates in, so all of that is accounted for. Here is the full study: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2309.01206.pdf

"All of that" is not encompassed in the human driver's home zip code. OP is talking about more than just the zip code, they're also talking about restrictions on the times of day Waymo operates, the types of vehicles they use, whether Waymo shuts down in adverse weather, etc. I'm not sure what all the current and past restrictions are, but those have to be controlled for.

The study you linked only discusses one uncontrolled variable (which is a bad sign given how many others there are that they don't talk about) but it's one I hadn't thought of:

> A limitation of the selected human baseline is that the location of crashes that generate claims is not known, which limits the ability to filter claims based on Waymo's Operational Design Domain (ODD). As a result, whereas the Waymo ODD largely does not include freeway driving, the human database includes miles driven and claims which occur on freeways. Due to variations in collision frequency per million miles between freeways and non-freeways, this may have led to a baseline which may be more conservative than a roadway- matched baseline.

Re: Waymo says insurance data shows its driverless cars are safer than humans

#26

Post by ehsankia »

notyourwork wrote: post #21
ra7 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Aren't they operating under a lot of constraints? The comparison should be with human drivers operating under similar conditions and on similar roads, similar cars(eg. new ones), weather conditions etc. The insurance data for the comparison is from the zip codes Waymo currently operates in, so all of that is accounted for. Here is the full study: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2309.01206.pdf

And for cars that are geofenced. Not accurate comparison.

If you're comparing to other accidents in the same (geofenced) zipcode, then why is it not an accurate comparison?

Re: Waymo says insurance data shows its driverless cars are safer than humans

#27

Post by lolinder »

ehsankia wrote: post #26
notyourwork wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And for cars that are geofenced. Not accurate comparison.

If you're comparing to other accidents in the same (geofenced) zipcode, then why is it not an accurate comparison?

The linked study even calls this out: the zip codes they controlled for are the residence zip code, which means accidents that happen on the freeway (where Waymo typically doesn't drive) or even in other zip codes are included in the human baseline.

Re: Waymo says insurance data shows its driverless cars are safer than humans

#28

Post by hetman »

tjmc wrote: post #19

The comparison against all human drivers is too broad. Typically insurance companies will apply higher premiums to new drivers due to inexperience and a higher likelihood of accidents. It would be better to see comparisons against the safest, most experienced cohort of human drivers.

What's the utility of that? Self driving cars are meant to replace all humans, not just the safest ones.

Re: Waymo says insurance data shows its driverless cars are safer than humans

#29

Post by notyourwork »

lolinder wrote: post #27
ehsankia wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're comparing to other accidents in the same (geofenced) zipcode, then why is it not an accurate comparison?

The linked study even calls this out: the zip codes they controlled for are the residence zip code, which means accidents that happen on the freeway (where Waymo typically doesn't drive) or even in other zip codes are included in the human baseline.

Precisely.

Re: Waymo says insurance data shows its driverless cars are safer than humans

#30

Post by tjmc »

hetman wrote: post #28
tjmc wrote: post #19

The comparison against all human drivers is too broad. Typically insurance companies will apply higher premiums to new drivers due to inexperience and a higher likelihood of accidents. It would be better to see comparisons against the safest, most experienced cohort of human drivers.

What's the utility of that? Self driving cars are meant to replace all humans, not just the safest ones.

A couple of reasons. First, you could compare a self driving car's safety against your own record. I've had a licence since 1988 and never had an accident. I want to compare against that standard. Second, you could get a better idea of the insurance premium against your own. I suspect there will come a day when the premiums are much lower for self driving cars but right now I suspect they'd be higher due to all the added self driving equipment you're insuring as well.
Post reply on HN