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

231–240 of 319 posts

Re: Next stop: Miami

#231

Post by bedobi »

vel0city wrote: post #217
bedobi wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you're just being obtuse in the realm of infrastructure investment, all of that is overnight vs eg the yet another additional bridge to nowhere they're currently building that is taking decades and costing billions but tell you and every other frothing at the mouth motorist what, enjoy sitting in traffic

> but tell you and every other frothing at the mouth motorist what, enjoy sitting in traffic You're being quite rude here about this for no reason and projecting an identity on me that's not warranted. I'm generally pro public transit, but I'm also a realist and not suggesting it takes practically zero time to procure additional rolling stock and hire a lot more people. A lot of people think having a higher level of…

the disconnect here is you have a status quo biased thinking

the current state of things is, roads get all the money and transit and bike infra get scraps and are poorly run (so are FDOT road projects too btw)

no one disputes that?

what is being advocated is increasing trirail frequency, implementing an actual network of segregated greenways and expanding metrorail

you're saying "oh we can't do that"

but like, yes, we can? I promise you, if you send out construction crews to apply green paint and put down curbs for greenways, there's no natural law of the universe that would make the paint not come out

and once it's in place, there's nothing preventing millions of Miami residents from using them the same way they're being used in NYC, Montreal, Barcelona etc etc instead of having to get in the car for literally every single trip and errand

likewise if you procure trains there's no magic wall that prevents them from crossing into the state of Florida etc etc

these things are trivially achievable, but misinformed policymakers and voters alike think adding more roads is somehow not costing any money (it costs way more) and will fix traffic (it won't)

Re: Next stop: Miami

#233

Post by duped »

ndileas wrote: post #228
allturtles wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some people need to live in "the sticks" to produce the resources (food, ores, oil, timber) that the rest of society relies on. Subsidizing the availability of services for those people doesn't seem unreasonable, and it is certainly something the federal government has historically taken responsibility for (for mail, electricity, telephone).

Sure, although I think there's room for reasonable people to disagree where to draw the line for various services. But taxi service? Seems way way out there in terms of costs and of minimal benefit.

State governments already operate special rural transportation services, like busses or even volunteers. Think people who are sick/injured and can't get to healthcare services because they can't drive.

It's not unreasonable to me that they would subsidize robo-taxis for those services since they are already funding services that are expensive or inadequate. Especially if there is some give and take to be had with regulatory overhead for the taxi service.

Re: Next stop: Miami

#235

Post by vel0city »

bedobi wrote: post #231
vel0city wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but tell you and every other frothing at the mouth motorist what, enjoy sitting in traffic You're being quite rude here about this for no reason and projecting an identity on me that's not warranted. I'm generally pro public transit, but I'm also a realist and not suggesting it takes practically zero time to procure additional rolling stock and hire a lot more people. A lot of people think having a higher level of…

the disconnect here is you have a status quo biased thinking the current state of things is, roads get all the money and transit and bike infra get scraps and are poorly run (so are FDOT road projects too btw) no one disputes that? what is being advocated is increasing trirail frequency, implementing an actual network of segregated greenways and expanding metrorail you're saying "oh we can't do that" but like, yes, w…

> the disconnect here is you have a status quo biased thinking

No, the disconnect here is you're being quite rude here about this and projecting an identity on me that's not warranted. And now you're even putting words in my mouth.

> you're saying "oh we can't do that"

I never once made the claim. I just argued it wouldn't be "overnight".

None of my statements were about greenways or even about expanding the Metrorail. Just that adding additional capacity can and often does take a while to be approved, acquired, and put into service. Stating it can be done overnight is ignoring reality just as much as someone arguing the paint somehow wouldn't come out to paint a greenway.

I'm for them adding more trains and expanding the existing lines. I'm for the bus service outside my house being a lot better than it currently is. I'm also looking at the fact the cities around me are talking about slashing the funding instead of increasing it and seeing the people around me cheering for such an idea. Me thinking it can be improved overnight is a delusional thought given the realities of today. Thinking Tri-Rail can just snap their fingers and magically get approvals and sign contracts and get trains delivered overnight is also delusional.

Even if we somehow changed people's minds "overnight" to want to increase train service, it'll still take a few years to actually do all the process for acquiring and implementing the additional capacity. Governments almost always move slowly. Even when talking car infrastructure, something which generally is popular, it takes forever to put together the budget proposals, get the funding approved, get the bids together, purchase the materials, and actually get to work. They're still working on doing projects related to a road bond package in my city passed several years ago, and that's once again ignoring all the planning that went into it just to get the proposal together and get it passed.

None of this happens "overnight". Even just getting everything together to officially change the traffic patterns and put the paint down will take many months at the fastest. And that's assuming it's a popular decision.

Re: Next stop: Miami

#236

Post by somethoughts »

ethbr1 wrote: post #43
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... )

Also relevant, when it rains in Miami during the summer, it pours . As in, zero visibility for 15-30 minutes, then it's past. So if it can handle Miami tropical rain, it should be okay with all sorts of normal rain. Out of curiosity, what's Waymo's current production sensor suite mix? I'd assume lidar and radar would also be very unhappy with the surrounding space suddenly being ~10%(?) liquid water droplets.

Interestingly is there a potential moral issue in the making here? What happens if/when self driving dependency is so prevalent that the majority of inhabitants in a city don't know how to drive. In addition add the fact that self driving cars don't have a steering wheel so even people who know how to take over driving can't actually take over.

What happens if there's an event that requires a mass evacuation such as a Category 5 hurricane and the major self driving car companies deem it too risky to drive in the conditions that precede the storm?

Re: Next stop: Miami

#237

Post by creaghpatr »

newfocogi wrote: post #37
bbor wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good point! Though also worth mentioning that they're already in Atlanta, which gets ~50in (and 59in so far this year, despite the mind-bending "first October without rain in recorded history")

I think they've announced they're headed to Atlanta in early 2025. So they may be testing there, but I don't believe they are at GA in GA :)

They are frequently spotted but not yet available in ATL.

Re: Next stop: Miami

#238

Post by NickC25 »

onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #89
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...

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.

>Well that would cost Miami taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars, and this costs Miami taxpayers nothing. It would also take decades.

Ironically enough, the county approved and passed a tax back in 2000 to expand the MetroMover. Not a single inch of rail has been built since. Wonder where all the tax revenue went?

Re: Next stop: Miami

#239

Post by NickC25 »

0xbadcafebee wrote: post #167
jmyeet wrote: post #42

That's an interesting choice for several reasons: 1. Literally nobody in Florida can drive. Nobody indicates. People run red lights. They speed on the hard shoulder to overtake someone else who is speeding slightly less; 2. There's a lot of things that come down to timing, like when the bridges are up on the Venetian and over the Miami River. You can also get trains blocking the entire of downtown; 3. It seems like t…

Yeah, I dunno if the team understands just how crazy Miami driving is. Maybe they'll restrict it to Downtown, Miami Beach, the Grove, etc to limit the chaos?

That won't limit the chaos. FWIW I went to whole foods downtown today and nearly got hit twice. I live in Midtown, so it's quite literally a 27-block trip. Some of the worst driving (save for on 95) I've seen here has been either 1. idiots on the Beach 2. idiots in Brickell or 3. idiots in downtown.

People here suck at driving.

Re: Next stop: Miami

#240

Post by NickC25 »

0xbadcafebee wrote: post #170
BWStearns wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having lived in most of those cities and in Miami I can say Miami is definitely the most dangerous driving I've seen. And my car insurance company certainly seems to agree.

Most Americans don't understand that Miami is full of expats from the caribbean and latin america, some of whom may be here illegally, and so can't get a driver's license. They also may have grown up in places where they didn't get a drivers license or learn the rules. So they literally aren't supposed to be driving and never learned how. Because they can't legally drive a car, they buy a beater second-hand for cash,…

This right here.

I currently live in Miami. I've lived all over the country. I'm from NYC burbs. I thought NYC drivers sucked before I moved here almost a decade ago.

Miami's drivers are horrible, mostly because most of the people here have never been trained to actually drive.

Post reply on HN