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

Self-driving Waymos secure final clearance for expansion beyond S.F

sfchronicle.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

411–420 of 449 posts

Re: Self-driving Waymos secure final clearance for expansion beyond S.F

#411

Post by abecedarius »

dventimi wrote: post #398
abecedarius wrote: post #395

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sigh. OK, I tried.

Did you? You asked a question about Social Security policy, in a thread that's arguably about individual tipping practices. Perhaps you regard the former as an illustrative thought experiment which helps reason about the latter via shared principles, but it's a shame you didn't elaborate on it because as it stands, I regard it as a non sequitur.

It's irritating to be accused of not engaging, when you've twice ignored my main point that expectation of tips lowers the posted price and makes life harder for all of the drivers/servers. Making life harder is not a benefit. I tried to probe for what is not coming through to you this third time, with another case where the legibility of a cost is shifted to no benefit.

Not going to continue here.

Re: Self-driving Waymos secure final clearance for expansion beyond S.F

#413

Post by Me1000 »

dntrkv wrote: post #191
Me1000 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately Waymo still wont operate on freeways or at SFO. But I long for the day when I can take a Waymo between SF and Berkley or to SFO, those are my most frequent reasons to call a Lyft.

Anytime I go to east bay I go for BART. I’m not trying to sit in bay bridge traffic. BART gets a bad rap, like every other public transit in the US, but I’ve been using it pretty frequently recently (stopped around beginning of lockdowns) and it’s a great experience.

I also use BART most of the time, but I often end up heading back to SF pretty late in the night so that’s not always an option.

Re: Self-driving Waymos secure final clearance for expansion beyond S.F

#414

Post by nytesky »

level1ten wrote: post #405
dazc wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

'...when people try to merge later than them,' You mean the people who must get past every single car and merge at the last possible second?

Just use the lane normally and zipper merge when the lane ends. Don't waste space. Don't block people. You don't get brownie points for being in the "correct" lane as soon as possible, and it doesn't help to police others who are using the existing lane. It really isn't that hard.

A zipper merge is fine, both lanes tend to fill up.

What I often see if a lane that intended to go through and a turning lane that is backed up; people pretend to be on through lane, then stop to merge at last minute into long turning lane and void the line.

Re: Self-driving Waymos secure final clearance for expansion beyond S.F

#415

Post by yazzku »

yazzku wrote: post #4
steelframe wrote: post #2

Cool. Can I take one without my identity and travel patterns being tracked? Like, suppose I want to get picked up from work and dropped off at my girlfriend's house in San Mateo. Something I might not want my soon-to-be-ex's lawyer to be able to subpoena. There's one of those machines onboard that are all over the place in supermarkets where I can feed bills right? Or maybe not. Okay then, Luxor Cab it is. Cheaper, b…

Obviously you do surrender all of your travel privacy to the data broker. That's why they are making self-driving cars in the first place. But you're already doing all of that by carrying an Android phone.

Google fanboys entered the chat room. Care to explain what is it that you dislike about my comment? Was any of it non-factual?

Re: Self-driving Waymos secure final clearance for expansion beyond S.F

#416

Post by dventimi »

abecedarius wrote: post #411
dventimi wrote: post #398

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you? You asked a question about Social Security policy, in a thread that's arguably about individual tipping practices. Perhaps you regard the former as an illustrative thought experiment which helps reason about the latter via shared principles, but it's a shame you didn't elaborate on it because as it stands, I regard it as a non sequitur.

It's irritating to be accused of not engaging, when you've twice ignored my main point that expectation of tips lowers the posted price and makes life harder for all of the drivers/servers. Making life harder is not a benefit. I tried to probe for what is not coming through to you this third time, with another case where the legibility of a cost is shifted to no benefit. Not going to continue here.

> It's irritating to be accused of not engaging

I can see how that might be irritating. Good thing I haven't done that.

> you've twice ignored my main point that expectation of tips lowers the posted price and makes life harder for all of the drivers/servers

That's not a point. That's a claim, which you have not persuaded me to accept.

> I tried to probe for what is not coming through to you this third time, with another case where the legibility of a cost is shifted to no benefit.

If only you had been clear that that's what you were doing, I would've told you that what's not coming through is the casual relation between tips and wages. You seem to believe tips necessarily suppress wages. I see no particular reason to believe that's true.

> Not going to continue here.

Suit yourself.

Re: Self-driving Waymos secure final clearance for expansion beyond S.F

#417

Post by extragood »

seeknotfind wrote: post #3

Wooooooo! Goodbye Lyft and Uber. Honestly, I get a bag driver, use the AI for a while. Feels too sterile, switch back, get some interesting drivers. Waymo has everything going for it but good company. Love it.

Keep using Waymo and stream with a stranger on one of the Omegle clones when you ride. Problem solved.

Re: Self-driving Waymos secure final clearance for expansion beyond S.F

#418

Post by extragood »

AzzyHN wrote: post #17
ortusdux wrote: post #5

I'm still surprised that they, and most of their competitors, chose to start off in such difficult to navigate regions. I would have started off in a retirement community or the like.

They did some driving in some Arizona suburbs too, iirc. The reasoning for having so much driving in SF is twofold 1. Silicon Valley, both for the workers and the general public's willingness to embrace fancy new tech 2. SF is DIFFICULT to drive in. If you follow all driving laws & drive super defensively, you'll never get anywhere on time. If an AI can learn to effectively navigate around traffic, construction, stop…

Your 2nd point was what really sold me. I was apprehensive before my first ride but it deftly navigated around double parked cars in narrow side streets like I would have done myself. Surpassed my expectations for sure.

Re: Self-driving Waymos secure final clearance for expansion beyond S.F

#419

Post by refulgentis »

YeGoblynQueenne wrote: post #401
refulgentis wrote: post #357

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In my reading this is trying very hard to put a self-driving spin on an interface that allows a human operator to set waypoints for a robot to follow. I can 100% confirm you're reaching way too far to find excuses to indicate Waymo isn't self-driving.

OK what the bloody fuck. What is it with the tone of these discussions? You can 100% confirm I'm reaching... the hell is the matter with you? Can't you disagree like an intelligent adult? Fucking internets.

(lectures about tone while getting personal and swearing and not asking any legible question)

Come with curiosity! Ex. "How would one be able to 100% confirm Waymo isn't just being live monitored and incremental way points set?"

(I'll leave it to you ask if you want, you seem upset and I worry you'll think the answer is obvious and that's not what you meant and I'm creating strawman. I want to deescalate and make you un-angry!)

Re: Self-driving Waymos secure final clearance for expansion beyond S.F

#420

Post by worik »

Workaccount2 wrote: post #286
scrollaway wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're the one calling them faceless bureaucrats. Most speed limits are set in place by a mix of safety boards and urban planners, who do take these limits into account. Explain to me what makes them faceless and detached from the situation?

Because everyone drives 40mph on that main road that is marked 25mph, and there is no string of accidents or fatalities after decades of this.

> there is no string of accidents or fatalities after decades of this.

Ignoring reality

A lot of people killed on the road

Post reply on HN