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

Waymo robotaxi hits a child near an elementary school in Santa Monica

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 813 posts

Re: Waymo robotaxi hits a child near an elementary school in Santa Monica

#271

Post by cucumber3732842 »

fwip wrote: post #255
cucumber3732842 wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Can you imagine being dumb enough to drive over the speed limit around a double parked SUV in a school zone? Can you imagine being dumb enough to think that exceeding a one size fits all number on a sign by As if 2mph would have fundamentally changed this. Pfft. A double parked car, in an area with chock full street parking (hence the double park) and "something" that's a magnet for pedestrians, and probably a bunc…

The default, with good visibility in ideal conditions, should be to not exceed the speed limit. In a school zone, when in a situation of low visibility, the car should likely be going significantly below the speed limit. So, it's not a case of 17mph vs 15mph, but more like 17mph vs 10mph or 5mph.

So let me get this straight, the car should have been going less than the speed limit, but the fact that it was going a hair over the speed limit is the problem?

The car clearly failed to identify that this was a situation it needed to be going slower. The fact that it was going 17 instead of 15 is basically irrelevant here except as fodder for moral posturing. If the car is incapable of identifying those situations no amount of "muh magic number on sign" is going to fix it. You'll just have the same exact accident again in a 20 school zone.

Re: Waymo robotaxi hits a child near an elementary school in Santa Monica

#272

Post by boh »

moomoo11 wrote: post #228
boh wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So the TechCrunch headline should be "Waymo hits child better than a human driver would"? Not sure if the details reflect how the general public actually interprets this story (see the actual TC headline for exhibit A).

The general public is stupid. That’s why they purchase goods and services (from others) and then cry about things they don’t and probably never will understand. And why they can be ignored and just fed some slop to feel better. I could lie but that’s the cold truth. Edit: I'm not sure if the repliers are being dense (highly likely), or you just skipped over context (you can click the "context" link if you're new here…

So if they were 100% self-sufficient and understood everything they'd be smart enough to interpret a child being hit at 6 mph as progress? Fun how "general public" is always a "they" vs "you".

Re: Waymo robotaxi hits a child near an elementary school in Santa Monica

#273

Post by dilyevsky »

coryrc wrote: post #133
JKCalhoun wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think my problem is that it reacted after seeing the child step out from behind the SUV. An excellent driver would have already seen that possible scenario and would have already slowed to 10 MPH or less to begin with. (It's how I taught my daughter's to drive "defensively"—look for "red flags" and be prepared for the worst-case scenario. SUV near a school and I cannot see behind it? Red flag—slow the fuck down.)

First, it's still the automobile's fault. At least it was already slowed down to 17 mph to start. Remember that viral video of some Australian in a pickup ragdolling a girl across the road? Most every comment is "well he was going the speed limit no fault for him!" No asshole, you hit someone. It's your fault. He got zero charges and the girl was seriously injured.

That’s not how fault works

Re: Waymo robotaxi hits a child near an elementary school in Santa Monica

#274

Post by Zopieux »

Cheers to cities pedestrianizing school streets even in busy capitals (e.g. Paris). Cars have no place near school entrances. Fix your urbanism and public transportation.

Yes, kids in developed countries have the autonomy to go to school by themselves from a very young age, provided the correct mindset and a safe environment. That's a combination of:

* high-trust society: commuting alone or in a small group is the norm, soccer moms a rare exception,

* safe, separated lanes for biking/walking when that's an option.

Re: Waymo robotaxi hits a child near an elementary school in Santa Monica

#275

Post by themafia »

jobs_throwaway wrote: post #42
chaboud wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Possibly, but Waymos have recently been much more aggressive about blowing through situations where human drivers can (and generally do) slow down. As a motorcyclist, I've had some close calls with Waymos driving on the wrong side of the road recently, and I had a Waymo cut in front of my car at a one-way stop (t intersection) recently when it had been tangled up with a Rivian trying to turn into the narrow street it…

Certainly, I'm not against constructive criticism of Waymo. I just think it's important to consider the counterfactual. You're right too that an especially prudent human driver may have avoided the scenario altogether, and Waymo should strive to be that defensive.

> I'm not against constructive criticism of Waymo.

I feel like you have to say this out loud because many people in these discussions don't share this view. Billion dollar corporate experiments conducted in public are sacrosanct for some reason.

> I just think it's important to consider the counterfactual

More than 50% of roadway fatalities involve drugs or alcohol. If you want to spend your efforts improving safety _anywhere_ it's right here. Self driving cars do not stand a chance of improving outcomes as much as sensible policy does. Europe leads the US here by a wide margin.

Re: Waymo robotaxi hits a child near an elementary school in Santa Monica

#276

Post by margalabargala »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #191
samrus wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But would a human be driving at 17 in a school zone during drop off hours? Id argue a human may be slower exactly because of this scenario

> would a human be driving at 17 in a school zone during drop off hours? In my experience in California, always and yes.

Maybe we should not only replace the unsafe humans with robots, but also have the robots drive in a safe manner near schools rather than replicating the unsafe human behavior?

Re: Waymo robotaxi hits a child near an elementary school in Santa Monica

#277

Post by jobs_throwaway »

JKCalhoun wrote: post #127
kakacik wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes and no. Tons of situations where this is simply not possible, whole traffic goes full allowed speed next to row of parked cars. If somebody unexpectedly pops up distracted, its a tragedy guaranteed regardless of driver's skills and experience. In low traffic of course it can be different. But its unrealistic to expect anybody to drive in expectation that behind every single car passed there may be a child jumping…

I kind of drive that way. I slow down, move as far away in my lane from the parked cars as possible. It's certainly what I would expect from a machine that would claim to be as good as the best human driver.

> a machine that would claim to be as good as the best human driver.

Does Waymo claim that? If so I haven't seen it. That should of course be the goal, but "better than the average human driver" should be the bar.

Re: Waymo robotaxi hits a child near an elementary school in Santa Monica

#278

Post by dlg »

doctorpangloss wrote: post #261
dlg wrote: post #153

I was just dropping my kids off at their elementary school in Santa Monica, but not at Grant Elementary where this happened. While it's third-hand, word on the local parent chat is that the parent dropped their kid off on the opposite side of the street from Grant. Even though there was a crossing guard, the kid ran behind a car an ran right out in to the street. If those rumors are correct, I'll say the kid's/family…

Do you think Waymos should be banned from driving through Santa Monica?

No. They are by far the safest drivers in Santa Monica. Ideally we get to a point where human drivers are banned.

Re: Waymo robotaxi hits a child near an elementary school in Santa Monica

#279

Post by apitman »

jjav wrote: post #154
jobs_throwaway wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yup. And to add > Waymo said in its blog post that its “peer-reviewed model” shows a “fully attentive human driver in this same situation would have made contact with the pedestrian at approximately 14 mph.” It's likely that a fully-attentive human driver would have done worse. With a distracted driver (a huge portion of human drivers) it could've been catastrophic.

> It's likely that a fully-attentive human driver would have done worse. We'd have to see video of the full scene to have a better judgement, but I wouldn't call it likely. The car reacted quickly once it saw the child. Is that enough? But most humans would have been aware of the big picture scenario much earlier. Are there muliple kids milling around on the sidewalk? Near a school? Is there a big truck/SUV parked th…

Are they not using a ton of ML to take exactly this sort of context into account?

Re: Waymo robotaxi hits a child near an elementary school in Santa Monica

#280

Post by moomoo11 »

boh wrote: post #272
moomoo11 wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The general public is stupid. That’s why they purchase goods and services (from others) and then cry about things they don’t and probably never will understand. And why they can be ignored and just fed some slop to feel better. I could lie but that’s the cold truth. Edit: I'm not sure if the repliers are being dense (highly likely), or you just skipped over context (you can click the "context" link if you're new here…

So if they were 100% self-sufficient and understood everything they'd be smart enough to interpret a child being hit at 6 mph as progress? Fun how "general public" is always a "they" vs "you".

That's impossible though. And you and I are part of the general public as well, for things we don't understand.

It isn't me vs them. It is just me being self-aware. Clearly, you had a problem with what I said so I must have struck a nerve.

Welcome to the real world bro.

Post reply on HN