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

261–270 of 456 posts

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

#261

Post by rafabulsing »

throw_a_grenade wrote: post #239
danny_codes wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That seems irrelevant, we’re talking about cars. Also, of course bikers don’t follow car rules. Those rules are nonsensical for cyclists.

How is that when car drivers decide the rules are nonsensical it's bad, but when bicycle drivers decide the rules (that, please note, apply to everyone on the street, car or not), it's somehow A-ok?

How come that when people handling uranium decide the rules are nonsensical it's bad, but when people handling bananas decide the rules (that, please note, apply to everyone with radioactive materials), it's somehow A-ok?

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

#262

Post by zeeZ »

dublinstats wrote: post #255
mrgoldenbrown wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Everyone using the road following the same set of rules makes their actions more predictable and thus safer (in theory)

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

#263

Post by socalgal2 »

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.

Waymo consistently stops in No Stopping zones.

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

#264

Post by [deleted] »

SOLAR_FIELDS wrote: post #96
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…

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…

[deleted]

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

#265

Post by 010101010101 »

valicord wrote: post #190
amiga386 wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not the case. As you just read in the article: https://highwaycode.org.uk/rule-140/ > Cycle lanes. These are shown by road markings and signs. You MUST NOT drive or park in a cycle lane marked by a solid white line during its times of operation. Do not drive or park in a cycle lane marked by a broken white line unless it is unavoidable. You MUST NOT park in any cycle lane whilst waiting restrictions apply. La…

You've quoted the rules which forbid parking and driving in the bike lane and then went on to confidently make up the part about stopping and dropping people off.

The driving is the part before and after the stopping, which is the parking.

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

#266

Post by gsnedders »

valicord wrote: post #190
amiga386 wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not the case. As you just read in the article: https://highwaycode.org.uk/rule-140/ > Cycle lanes. These are shown by road markings and signs. You MUST NOT drive or park in a cycle lane marked by a solid white line during its times of operation. Do not drive or park in a cycle lane marked by a broken white line unless it is unavoidable. You MUST NOT park in any cycle lane whilst waiting restrictions apply. La…

You've quoted the rules which forbid parking and driving in the bike lane and then went on to confidently make up the part about stopping and dropping people off.

You cannot stop in a cycle lane to drop people off without first driving into the cycle lane.

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

#267

Post by socalgal2 »

Stratoscope wrote: post #103

I won't comment on the pick up / drop off situation, but another important scenario is right turns. In California, drivers are legally required to merge into the bike lane when making a right turn. This is for the safety of the bicyclists, to avoid the dreaded "right hook" collision. Dylan Taylor, a beloved Menlo-Atherton High School football coach, was killed last year in one of these collisions: https://www.almanac…

Bike lane or not, the majority of drivers make illegal right turns.

If you're in SF, watch on Gough or Franklin that people don't pull in the far right or left lane to make a turn, they illegally turn from one lane over. Literally 9 of 10 cars do this.

It happens all over. My guess is they don't perceive it as a right lane because 100-200 feet back there were cars parked in it but it's clearly marked as a lane and the law makes it clearly illegal to make right turn if you're not in the right lane.

There's lots of other less illegal? but dangerous things 95% of drivers do. 2 left turn lanes, curved line drawn through intersection to guide the lanes. 95% of cars in the 2nd left turn lane cut the guide line effectively cutting off the people in the #1 left turn lane.

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

#268

Post by fc417fc802 »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #259
fc417fc802 wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Sure, there's a very gradual, strictly limited, tightly controlled rollout. It's certainly not to the point where anyone would realistically design a city center around it. There's perhaps a small handful of companies globally that are currently prototyping the technology in a process that's shaping up to take a decade or longer to play out.

Even once things reach that point reworking an existing place would be a massive undertaking.

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

#269

Post by teachrdan »

Saline9515 wrote: post #225
teachrdan wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are either very paranoid or very bad at math. The odds of a pedestrian getting killed by a cyclist are minuscule. The best data I could find making an apples-to-apples comparison showed that pedestrians are *160 times* more likely to be killed by a car than a bicyclist. https://transport.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2021-11/collisio...

Odds are conditional though. As a father, I think that the odds are quite high that a 3 years old child will get hit by a cyclist, especially if they ride on the sidewalk. I have had several stressful close calls with my son, and my pregnant wife was hit by a cyclist who didn't respect the red light (as it is the custom among the high lords of the road).

> I think that the odds are quite high that a 3 years old child will get hit by a cyclist

You should see the odds of a child being hit by a car! Here in the US, about 6 children a day are hit and killed by a motor vehicle. And yet the number of children hit and killed by bicycles is unavailable -- perhaps because it is close to 0?

I understand that "as a father" you may become paranoid about things that are objectively unlikely. But if you are more worried about getting killed by a bicycle than by a car -- something 160 times more likely to kill you! -- then perhaps you need to recalibrate.

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

#270

Post by panick21_ »

Fucking ridiclous. Police, Waymo and everybody else need to keep out of the bike lanes. Bike lanes are vital transportarion infrastructure that if used correctly can have more threwput then car lanes by far whipe being cheaper and better in literally every way for a city.
Post reply on HN