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

Waymo says can't avoid bike lanes because riders want to be dropped off in them

road.cc

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 456 posts

Re: Waymo says can't avoid bike lanes because riders want to be dropped off in them

#251

Post by isthatafact »

SilverElfin wrote: post #121
spankalee wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe drivers should stop thinking they're the center of the universe and consider pedestrians and bicyclists around them. It's more dangerous to block a bike lane, with the more vulnerable user, than a car lane. Other drivers can wait.

It’s not dangerous to block a bike lane. The bikers can wait. They are fewer in number and inconveniencing them is less problematic. If they’re worried about being vulnerable, they are free to ride at low speeds on the sidewalk, or just not use a bicycle.

In many places, bicyclists are not fewer in number, not that the distiction makes the rest of your comment rational.

Re: Waymo says can't avoid bike lanes because riders want to be dropped off in them

#252

Post by pavlus »

jiveturkey wrote: post #134

bit of an absolutist argument in california. can't speak to the UK. it's obviously safer (for cyclists) for taxis or even carpools to drop off and pick up at the far right, ie into the bike lane. i think we can generally consider it to be "parking" not "driving" and thus within the letter of the law as well. (parking is explicitly allowed.) we know this very well, and that's why there are curb-separated lanes and the…

I don't believe there is a country in the world, where parking on bike lanes is explicitly allowed. Merging before turns and stops for drop/pickup/load/unload sure. But not parking.

Re: Waymo says can't avoid bike lanes because riders want to be dropped off in them

#253

Post by slibhb »

TulliusCicero wrote: post #220
slibhb wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with your analysis but I just want to point out that, as a general rule, cyclists do not follow traffic laws. They don't stop at stop signs/red lights. They weave in and out of traffic. They often bike the wrong way down one-way bike paths.

Drivers generally don't follow traffic laws. They text on their phone while they drive. They routinely go over the speed limit. They go through red lights. They go into or park in bike lanes. They tailgate other drivers. They don't signal before turning or changing lanes.

Drivers generally follow the rules. It's considered bad form when they don't, and they're occasionally ticketed. This doesn't apply to bikers. No one even expects them to follow the rules.

I'm not anti-bike. I bike a bit and I got hit by a car last year. Some crackhead turned left across the opposite lane right into me.

I'm just reporting what I see -- bikers do not generally follow the rules, and I find this interesting. Maybe they're being rational. Or maybe they're not. Either way it's interesting.

Re: Waymo says can't avoid bike lanes because riders want to be dropped off in them

#254

Post by fc417fc802 »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #172
SOLAR_FIELDS wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All the fines in the world won’t save you from getting mowed down by a distracted driver on their phone. Drinking and driving has heavy fine deterrents, yet people still do it anyway. You know what stops a drunk or distracted driver from killing someone? A cement barrier

> a distracted driver on their phone Waymos don’t get distracted. Grade separation, ticketing and increasingly favoring AVs in cities is a simpler solution than erecting physical barriers, which have the downside of making cities less walkable.

That would be relevant if we had mass adoption of autonomous vehicles. Unfortunately last I checked actual autonomy was still stuck in the perpetual R&D phase.

Re: Waymo says can't avoid bike lanes because riders want to be dropped off in them

#255

Post by dublinstats »

mrgoldenbrown wrote: post #242
doug_durham wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the US, bikes == cars. They are required to follow the same rules. I don’t find them nonsensical.

It's weird to have the same rules when there are several orders of magnitude difference in manueverability, maximum damage possible, and visibility between the two modes. Imagine if pedestrians had to follow all the same rules as cars. Or everyone in an electric wheelchair. It wouldn't make sense.

I think the point is they have to follow the rules of the road because they are allowed in the road. Pedestrians, wheelchairs, etc can go on the sidewalk and be safe from traffic (one hopes).

Though it depends on the state and in my experience there are typically some differences, such as bikes are required to share the lane.

Re: Waymo says can't avoid bike lanes because riders want to be dropped off in them

#256

Post by altairprime »

moomin wrote: post #250
SOLAR_FIELDS wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cities who want to keep cars out of bike lanes should stop offering “mom says we have bike lanes at home” repainting of streets. Create a curb and raise the bike lanes. It’s the only safe solution. I understand this is not realistic in a lot of scenarios but it is basically the only way you can achieve actual safety short of cement separators at the road level, which is basically a curb anyway. There’s just no realit…

People undoubtedly said this was not realistic in many car-clogged European cities before some actually did it. “Realism” here is just a measure of the current number of votes you have for making things better.

It helps to replace ‘realistic’ with ‘palatable’, which at least conveys the issue more precisely as one of desirability rather than capability. Most U.S. voters for someone who interferes with drivers on behalf of non-drivers.

Re: Waymo says can't avoid bike lanes because riders want to be dropped off in them

#257

Post by fc417fc802 »

spankalee wrote: post #108
seanmcdirmid wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m pretty sure it went something like “so where are we allowed to pickup and drop off riders” and the city couldn’t answer. The problem isn’t really enforcement, the problem is that there are simply no alternatives, and the city shies away from enforcement because they know that. If they started enforcing the rules strictly, people would again ask questions that they aren’t prepared to answer. If you compare that to…

Blocking the right car lane for a drop off is perfectly legal outside of No Stopping zones. This is how taxis have always worked. It's just that other drivers get pissed off if you block a car lane when there's a bike lane next to it. That needs to be trained away by enforcing the rules.

That works for taxis but not for deliveries.

Re: Waymo says can't avoid bike lanes because riders want to be dropped off in them

#258

Post by canpan »

spankalee wrote: post #59

Cities that want to keep cars out of bike lanes should keep all cars out of them, autonomous or not, by ticketing them. But they don't, so taxis and delivery drivers stop in them. That's traffic enforcement's fault. Given that human drivers stop in bike lanes, Waymo then has a tradeoff: 1) Be the only ones to follow the letter of the law, break a lot of people's expectations, and catch backlash for disrupting traffic…

In Tokyo many bicycle lanes are pretty useless for this reason. Cars are parking every 20m making them absolutely inaccessible. Then there is the bicycle lane between Asakusa and Ueno, which is separated from the street, but made like some sort of obstacle course. There are some good ones too though. Pretty random.

Re: Waymo says can't avoid bike lanes because riders want to be dropped off in them

#259

Post by JumpCrisscross »

fc417fc802 wrote: post #254
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> a distracted driver on their phone Waymos don’t get distracted. Grade separation, ticketing and increasingly favoring AVs in cities is a simpler solution than erecting physical barriers, which have the downside of making cities less walkable.

That would be relevant if we had mass adoption of autonomous vehicles. Unfortunately last I checked actual autonomy was still stuck in the perpetual R&D phase.

> last I checked actual autonomy was still stuck in the perpetual R&D phase

I know plenty of people in Phoenix for whom it’s their main mode of transport. When I’m there or in San Francisco, it’s certainly mine. (And now, increasingly, in Miami, too.)

Waymo is here and it’s real and it’s so much better than Uber or taxis.

Re: Waymo says can't avoid bike lanes because riders want to be dropped off in them

#260

Post by socalgal2 »

spankalee wrote: post #59

Cities that want to keep cars out of bike lanes should keep all cars out of them, autonomous or not, by ticketing them. But they don't, so taxis and delivery drivers stop in them. That's traffic enforcement's fault. Given that human drivers stop in bike lanes, Waymo then has a tradeoff: 1) Be the only ones to follow the letter of the law, break a lot of people's expectations, and catch backlash for disrupting traffic…

I agree with you in priniciple but cities no longer have the money to enforce this and everyone knows it. What they do have is the ability to demand that Waymo give them video of every stop and use AI to detect if it obeyed the laws.

I've had waymo drop me off in dangerous no-stopping zones with red painted curbs. I've had waymo pick wait for me to get in blocking apartment complex garage entrances. I've seen waymo pass 10 cars in the right lane waiting to turn right and then at the last moment make an illegal right turn left of the right turning cars.

I like the idea of Waymo but they need to fix their shit, no excuses.

Post reply on HN