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

Waymo in Dallas

waymo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 754 posts

Re: Waymo in Dallas

#291

Post by ssl-3 »

inigyou wrote: post #255
SR2Z wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Presumably Waymo complies with their legal obligations... The point is that there's a process, it applies both to Waymo and to you as a rando. The police don't have special access to Waymo cameras.

So if I sent an email to Waymo I could get camera footage of a crime?

More like: When an entity (including a corp like Waymo and you as a random person alike) has information (such as camera footage), then that information can be subpoenaed.

Even when you've got your own camera on your own front porch making recordings on your own hard drive using your own isolated network: There is are long-established legal processes by which you can be ordered to hand over [a subset of] those recordings.

Neither Waymo nor you, yourself, are exceptional to these processes.

Re: Waymo in Dallas

#293

Post by [deleted] »

reaperducer wrote: post #152
epolanski wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aren't you going 20 times per month, twice, that's 40 rides. At an average 25$ you're spending 1'000$/month on Uber.

Aren't you going 20 times per week, twice, that's 40 rides. Work 5 days a week = 10 rides. Plus four rides on the weekend, or not. That's why I used 14. Where do you get 40 rides per week? At an average 25$ you're spending 1'000$/month on Uber. Even if someone did 40 rides per week at your posited average of $25/ride, that's $4,000, not $1,000. Are you letting an LLM do math for you?

[deleted]

Re: Waymo in Dallas

#294

Post by eagleinparadise »

dinobones wrote: post #286
eagleinparadise wrote: post #232

As someone who works in commercial real estate, involved in about $300M of housing development, some of it affordable, i will say without any doubt that driverless cars are a very effective affordable housing policy that is not being considered or discussed by anyone. Any public dollar that gets contributed to housing, basically adds a 50% cost factor and assume whatever it is used for will take 2-3x as long to deliv…

Here's another idea: The places where people want to live have no land or archaic zoning laws. I wouldn't want to live two hours away, but if I could sleep/work during my commute, and pay $400/month for it, I might do it. My housing costs would be like less than a third of living in the metro where I work. Supercommuting becomes slightly more palatable.

Why should a tax payer in Dallas pay for your [affordable] transportation from the outskirts of Houston or OK to commute to Dallas?

tax payer sources needs to be allocated to a project that can be administered, tracked, and iterated on.

Plus the public should pay for services servicing more people than less, which your idea services a small population.

Re: Waymo in Dallas

#296

Post by s1artibartfast »

Lammy wrote: post #238
eagleinparadise wrote: post #232

As someone who works in commercial real estate, involved in about $300M of housing development, some of it affordable, i will say without any doubt that driverless cars are a very effective affordable housing policy that is not being considered or discussed by anyone. Any public dollar that gets contributed to housing, basically adds a 50% cost factor and assume whatever it is used for will take 2-3x as long to deliv…

> provide these vehicles for use by affordable tenants in properties with limited parking Translation: Poors are allowed to exercise their freedom of movement iff they stay in a huge corpo's good graces.

Solves one of the big problems with public transportation.

If waymo is willing to ban people for shitting or smoking meth in their shared cars, that's purely an advantage over government run transportation

Re: Waymo in Dallas

#297

Post by eagleinparadise »

PsylentKnight wrote: post #253
eagleinparadise wrote: post #232

As someone who works in commercial real estate, involved in about $300M of housing development, some of it affordable, i will say without any doubt that driverless cars are a very effective affordable housing policy that is not being considered or discussed by anyone. Any public dollar that gets contributed to housing, basically adds a 50% cost factor and assume whatever it is used for will take 2-3x as long to deliv…

As someone who knows anything about Texas cities, I assure you that parking space is not an issue in Dallas

yes it is. it's still a cost.

but anyways, texas does not have the same cost of living issue as other metros like most of CA. that's up to local jurisdictions to do this. just like any city can build rail or bus.

Re: Waymo in Dallas

#298

Post by filoleg »

Lammy wrote: post #260
filoleg wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Translation: Poors are allowed to exercise their freedom of movement iff they stay in a huge corpo's good graces. Would it placate you, if we did it for non-poors instead then? I am a non-poor, and I would like a free/subsidized waymo with priority mode set for sharing with my neighbors. My belief is that it would help the poors more than me, but if doing so is oppressive or freedom-restricting or smth like that, I…

The point is that some people have other options. Personally I will always choose to go where I want, when I want, in the privacy of my own vehicle. Even if Waymo were completely free I'd still choose those things, and I am thankful I have the option to choose.

Good for you, and I fully respect other people making choices like that. I don't believe that you should be forced into a situation that makes you use waymo despite your wishes, and I believe that you should be able to opt out (in case you want to).

Back to the topic, why should I not be allowed a choice of having a subsidized/free waymo that prioritizes me and my neighbors (given I would be participating in this fully out of my own volition)?

If I am allowed to make that choice, do you believe that poors should have access to the same service and be allowed to make the same choices as non-poors in that regard? If no, then why not?

Re: Waymo in Dallas

#299

Post by digisign »

SR2Z wrote: post #270
Lammy wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The point is that there's a process That is the opposite of reassuring, because here are the stats for those processes as a whole (just ‘requests for user information’, not broken down by data type or Google product). Currently at 84% accepance rate i.e. the ‘process’ is a formality lol: https://transparencyreport.google.com/user-data/overview?hl=...

I don't know what to tell you. The subpoena system has been around for a VERY long time before Google even existed. You seem to be unfamiliar with it so I'd encourage you to read up before you call it a "formality." This is not some newfangled shiny thing. If you hold records that are important to a court case you can be forced to give them up by court order. This is true regardless of who "you" happens to be. If pol…

So they do have access after all—just have to ask nicely.

That process is fine, the best we have.

The problem is having roving surveillance vehicles driving around everywhere. I see a couple of them every day on my walk in a mostly residential area.

The addition of facial recognition is trivial if not already implemented. Can be done after the fact. The tradeoff is catching an occasional criminal while enabling all sorts of abuse from the powers that be.

Re: Waymo in Dallas

#300

Post by bitpush »

eagleinparadise wrote: post #294
dinobones wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's another idea: The places where people want to live have no land or archaic zoning laws. I wouldn't want to live two hours away, but if I could sleep/work during my commute, and pay $400/month for it, I might do it. My housing costs would be like less than a third of living in the metro where I work. Supercommuting becomes slightly more palatable.

Why should a tax payer in Dallas pay for your [affordable] transportation from the outskirts of Houston or OK to commute to Dallas? tax payer sources needs to be allocated to a project that can be administered, tracked, and iterated on. Plus the public should pay for services servicing more people than less, which your idea services a small population.

Perhaps I'm understanding things wrong, but isnt the idea of taxes for public good and some / all of it might never reach you?

I pay for taxes that help run schools, and it is an good setup even if I dont have any kids.

Post reply on HN