Live data from Hacker News

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

nbcbayarea.com

221–230 of 288 posts

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

#221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

I'm not bullish on self driving cars, but that's a bit unfair. If their car performs better than 50% of the population, then that sounds like a success.

Stand in a room with an actual representation of the population and you will feel very differently about what it takes to get to 51%.

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

#222
post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There’s progress because there’s investment. If dozens of billions were poured into public transport, it would improve dramatically. How can I be so so sure? Because that’s what a lot of countries have done, China first among many, and their public transport network has dramatically improved. The main issue is how much the private car industry avoids having to pay for the astounding externalities they generate: pollu…

Dozens of billions are being poured in. That’s we got the California high speed rail connecting nowhere to nothing and BART just barely making it to San Jose. None of that still fixes the last mile problem of suburbia, and buses aren’t a solution. They are slow, too infrequent, and generally uncomfortable.

Still significantly fewer billions than are being invested in road infrastructure.

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

#223
post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There’s progress because there’s investment. If dozens of billions were poured into public transport, it would improve dramatically. How can I be so so sure? Because that’s what a lot of countries have done, China first among many, and their public transport network has dramatically improved. The main issue is how much the private car industry avoids having to pay for the astounding externalities they generate: pollu…

Dozens of billions are being poured in. That’s we got the California high speed rail connecting nowhere to nothing and BART just barely making it to San Jose. None of that still fixes the last mile problem of suburbia, and buses aren’t a solution. They are slow, too infrequent, and generally uncomfortable.

> They are slow, too infrequent, and generally uncomfortable.

Uh, make them more frequent, more comfortable and faster?

I spend the last 15 minutes of my commute on a bus. Driving vs. bus + train = 3 minutes. I can drive, probably get stuck in traffic, get pissed at angry drivers ... or just chill on a bus and train for 45 minutes.

The only time it is worth driving is when I need to-the-minute exactness of when to arrive, which is rarely ever. IOW, I show up 10 minutes early to work (and also leave 10 minutes early) to be on the public transportation schedule.

Trains come every 10 minutes, busses every 15. I've never had any issues. Sure, I walk a whole 300 meters (1000ft) from the bus to my house, and again from the bus to work. But that is probably good for me since I don't get enough exercise as it is.

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

#224

To the folks particularly in US obsessed about driverless cars, why don't you instead focus on public transport, which is by default "driverless" for millions of people if you ignore a couple of metro/train drivers per 1000s of people. The point of a driverless car, from what I understand, is having end-to-end connectivity without the need to drive which is pain. I live in a place where public transport already has l…

The fact that someone always makes this sort of comment when driverless cars come up is really weird to me. I've never owned a car, use public transit very regularly, and think the state of it in the US is pretty bad and underinvested in. However, that's due to a huge set of systemic factors (political, organizational, spatial, ...) which nobody seems to have made much progress on, and not for lack of trying. Yeah, i…

I suspect driverless cars get more perceived attention because switching cars over will actually make a lot more money then building up a public transport system. Its a bit like with washing machines or TV sets. Selling to each and every individual household or even citizen is going to be more lucrative then maintaining shared infrastructure.

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

#226
post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There’s progress because there’s investment. If dozens of billions were poured into public transport, it would improve dramatically. How can I be so so sure? Because that’s what a lot of countries have done, China first among many, and their public transport network has dramatically improved. The main issue is how much the private car industry avoids having to pay for the astounding externalities they generate: pollu…

Public transport infrastructure at a national scale is not a dozens of billions project, it's a hundreds to thousands of billions project. The current investment in Waymo is less than the investment in the (still underfunded) NYC metro alone

Didn't they do that to themselves? IIRC, it's like that because (A), they were the first to do underground rail so lots of things were done "wrong" (with what we know today), thus requiring lots of money to fix it. And, (B), any changes they make (even small ones) require redoing significant infrastructure because of (A).

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

#227
post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact that someone always makes this sort of comment when driverless cars come up is really weird to me. I've never owned a car, use public transit very regularly, and think the state of it in the US is pretty bad and underinvested in. However, that's due to a huge set of systemic factors (political, organizational, spatial, ...) which nobody seems to have made much progress on, and not for lack of trying. Yeah, i…

There’s progress because there’s investment. If dozens of billions were poured into public transport, it would improve dramatically. How can I be so so sure? Because that’s what a lot of countries have done, China first among many, and their public transport network has dramatically improved. The main issue is how much the private car industry avoids having to pay for the astounding externalities they generate: pollu…

Pour out gazillions of money into American public transit and it won’t get you far.

The reason why China and other Asian nations have amazing public transit isn’t financial or technical. It’s cultural and social. And by that, I don’t mean anything to do with cars - I’m referring to just a public willingness (or enforcement) to enshre nice public things stay nice, which is often lacking in the US.

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

#228
post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

U.S cities were rebuilt to accommodate cars, and there's no reason they can't be rebuilt to undo this damage.

USA has trouble building enough houses as it is, or a single bridge or piece of infrastructure, and you say they can simply rebuild entire cities?

I mean... have you seen how much space is taken up by parking lots in the US? Often, the parking lot is bigger than the building it serves. That's a lot of space for homes ... shops ... instead of places for cars that do nothing.

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

#229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How many years to implement self driving cars? But really I think they’re the future of the city.

That's because it's a hard problem, not because of local government.

I think the point of the comment was: is this even a problem that needs to be solved because we already have a perfectly good solution, it's just that nobody (for REASONS) wants to implement the solution. So, some company has to solve a "hard problem."

A perfect "this is why we can't have nice things."

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

#230
post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

According to the article, Amsterdam was still built with bicycles in mind: > At the start of the 20th century, bikes far outnumbered cars in Dutch cities and the bicycle was considered a respectable mode of transport for men and women. But when the Dutch economy began to boom in the post-war era, more and more people were able to afford cars Amsterdam also has 50% higher population density than Los Angeles, despite h…

Well fair enough, but I really don't think Americans should throw their hands up in the air and say "we just can't do it." This is the country that landed a man on the moon after all, it should be a solvable problem. Maybe the Europeans can't help with their own experience, but the American solution of "just add another lane" is self-evidently unsustainable. Something new is needed.

"just add another lane" actually makes traffic worse, not better. It's an interesting paradox that has been known for over a century.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Braess%27s_paradox

Post reply on HN