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

Waymo blocking ambulance during deadly Austin shooting

mysanantonio.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 220 posts

Re: Waymo blocking ambulance during deadly Austin shooting

#201

Post by 1718627440 »

rogerrogerr wrote: post #74
macintux wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good luck making eye contact with the Waymo to gain confidence that it sees you.

Do you want them to put googley eyes on it? If you can see it, it can see you. Pretty simple. Eye contact matters for humans because they might be looking at their phones, or their McDonald's fries, or staring straight into the sun. None of these things happen with self-driving cars. It's a non-issue.

Eye contact matters for humans, because humans can indicate that way which direction and speed they plan on moving.

Re: Waymo blocking ambulance during deadly Austin shooting

#202

Post by 1718627440 »

kelvinjps10 wrote: post #81
gruez wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not too hard to implement them with cryptographic protocols to prevent duplication and apply time/location restrictions to them. Moreover if you really wanted to steal a car, there are much easier ways of doing that, like buying a replica gun on aliexpress then going to your nearest intersection.

The problem is not really that they can get stolen, but remote control, like a bad person gaining access to the car to hit people or something like that.

Not every social problem needs a technical solution. You can steal cars now, this is solved foremost by most people not being thieves and then second the existence of police for the few people that are.

Re: Waymo blocking ambulance during deadly Austin shooting

#203

Post by 1718627440 »

sashank_1509 wrote: post #90
KennyBlanken wrote: post #29

I've never understood why everyone acts like this is some bizarre legal quagmire. If I make a robot and it goes and kills someone, nobody sits around navel gazing wondering how they're going to prosecute a robot. If I make a device that pulls the trigger of a gun aimed at someone tied to a chair when I click a button on my cell phone, or something green appears in the camera attached to the device, or time reaches 11…

This is ridiculous. We don’t send surgeons to jail if they mistakenly kill their patient.

If they should/could have known better, then we do?

Re: Waymo blocking ambulance during deadly Austin shooting

#204

Post by dangero »

ibejoeb wrote: post #71
noduerme wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the comment you're responding to was referring to needing to cross a backed up lane of traffic in their car, not on foot.

Sure, there are valid scenarios. LA certainly has some terrible and legal vehicle crossings. (The fast, windy portion of beverly ranks.) I agree that it's hard to navigate without some cooperation. It's just that almost all of the crashes I've witnessed involved someone giving a bad go-ahead.

I wasn’t clear, but yes I meant in a car. During morning commute there are whole hours where certain roads are gridlocked leaving no space to cross. Beverly is one example of this.

There is no way to cross unless someone yields to let you through

Re: Waymo blocking ambulance during deadly Austin shooting

#205

Post by dangero »

ibejoeb wrote: post #59
rfrey wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In many places, traffic would not function if drivers did not e.g. make space for other drivers to change lanes. It's an extraordinary claim to say such behaviour is bad practice (or even illegal??)

In that context, yes, there are certainly cases where making space is reasonable and legal, like stopping shy of side intersection while (traffic is stopped) to allow a turn. Stopping or altering traffic isn't, though. You shouldn't stop at a green to allow another driver to maneuver for all the same reasons.

Imagine a street where cars are moving at 2mph because of traffic. Cars can never cross unless someone yields

Re: Waymo blocking ambulance during deadly Austin shooting

#206

Post by dangero »

rogerrogerr wrote: post #62
ibejoeb wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That courtesy is almost always bad practice and is generally unlawful. You must yield right of way to a pedestrian at a legal crossing, but california has codes that prohibit impeding normal traffic flow, including stopping in the street to wave across a pedestrian where there is no such crossing. It's especially dangerous on multi-lane roads because the stopped vehicle can blind the pedestrian to other traffic.

"Courtesy causes confusion; confusion causes crashes"

That assumes you live in a place where the traffic system handles all edge cases

Re: Waymo blocking ambulance during deadly Austin shooting

#207

Post by wnevets »

gruez wrote: post #145
wnevets wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And have actual meaningful consequences happen? I'am. Twitter is creating CSAM, Meta & OpenAI pirate millions of books and Nvidia is playing some sort of shell game to pump their stock price. If a regular person committed any of those offenses once they would be lucky to just to be sued but because of "AI" nothing happens to these companies.

Going through each of the cases: >Twitter is creating CSAM It's unclear whether generated CSAM is illegal, see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_status_of_fictional_porn... . Moreover x/x.ai wasn't intentionally generating the images. Yes, someone intentionally set up grok to generate images, but nobody at x/x.ai was like "yes, let's generate some CSAM". That adds an additional layer of obfuscation that makes it h…

> Give me a break. People on /r/datahoarders pirate millions of books all the time. Use a VPN and basically nobody bothers going after you. If anything Meta/OpenAI are getting harsher treatment than the average person because they're juicier defendants.

Arguing that a regular person needs to conceal their real identity with a VPN to pirate books is proof these companies aren't receiving special treatment for committing the same crimes is very confusing to me.

We know the identity of the companies committing the crimes.

Re: Waymo blocking ambulance during deadly Austin shooting

#208

Post by daheza »

simulator5g wrote: post #169
geor9e wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't sound difficult to solve. The sensors can classify firetruck, ambulance, red&blues, uniformed police, badge, siren, etc. At a certain criteria, they can unlock the driver door for normal human driving, perhaps for a very limited speed and distance. The officer can move it to the side, and if they crash it's not waymo crashing it. This override should send the an alert to the remote command center, so a hum…

Cops can't move vehicles that they don't own because of liability. The only way for them to move a vehicle without liability is to use a tow truck.

I mean liability can be defined, we are writing new laws for these things. Cops that need to move autonomous are not liable for any damages.

I do think that theres needs to be better handling of emergency vehicles and autonomous vehicles. Someone needs to spend some serious time thinking through how to handle this better because this situation was not okay.

Re: Waymo blocking ambulance during deadly Austin shooting

#209

Post by dragonwriter »

simulator5g wrote: post #169
geor9e wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't sound difficult to solve. The sensors can classify firetruck, ambulance, red&blues, uniformed police, badge, siren, etc. At a certain criteria, they can unlock the driver door for normal human driving, perhaps for a very limited speed and distance. The officer can move it to the side, and if they crash it's not waymo crashing it. This override should send the an alert to the remote command center, so a hum…

Cops can't move vehicles that they don't own because of liability. The only way for them to move a vehicle without liability is to use a tow truck.

> Cops can't move vehicles that they don't own because of liability. The only way for them to move a vehicle without liability is to use a tow truck.

While the precise boundaries of liability depend on the laws of the particular jurisdiction (they aren't consistent across the whole US) police generally can take reasonable action to move vehicles obstructing the road in an emergency without liability for any damages incurred, whether or not they use a tow truck to do it.

Re: Waymo blocking ambulance during deadly Austin shooting

#210

Post by _DeadFred_ »

ibejoeb wrote: post #30
dangero wrote: post #14

The problem we will encounter with self driving cars is that while they will make less mistakes than humans, they will make different mistakes. Humans will continue to have a hard time accepting this tradeoff. I live in LA where Waymos are now on every street. My experience is that they don’t respect human courtesy, so for example if I need to cross a lane of busy traffic, a human may brake as a courtesy to let me th…

That courtesy is almost always bad practice and is generally unlawful. You must yield right of way to a pedestrian at a legal crossing, but california has codes that prohibit impeding normal traffic flow, including stopping in the street to wave across a pedestrian where there is no such crossing. It's especially dangerous on multi-lane roads because the stopped vehicle can blind the pedestrian to other traffic.

A lot of our society works/has less friction because of human courtesy. Systemically stamping it out of every interaction for optimization will not result in a better society.

Our systems don't cover every case, and it's better when we use human courtesy to solve the edge cases.

Post reply on HN