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

We have decided to pause driverless operations across all of our fleets

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 395 posts

Re: We have decided to pause driverless operations across all of our fleets

#51

Post by 7e »

bobthepanda wrote: post #47
polalavik wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Out of all the tech problems to solve, driverless cars or driverless taxis has always baffled me. It’s a very complex thing to solve with a zillion edge cases. And for what net gain? What incredible inconvenience are we trying to solve? Lack of good public transit? Let’s solve that instead. Millions of cars driverless or not are not a great solution to anything.

The main obstacle to better transit in a developed countries is the cost and scarcity of labor. An automated bus would basically eliminate most of the running cost; make it electric and it would be pennies on the dollar compared to running a bus today.

I think an automated bus would have enough electronics such that it would cost a lot more than the bus driver for a long, long time. At least that's the status quo. A Waymo car costs a lot more than a $7K Uber Prius.

Re: We have decided to pause driverless operations across all of our fleets

#52

Post by ryandrake »

gurchik wrote: post #11
cj wrote: post #5

Cruise, taking the high road to build public trust. For now. I respect that. Edit: yeah, I get they don’t have a perfect track record. But most tech companies don’t stop even when faced with issues like Cruise. Getting their cars off the road entirely is a major acknowledgment that their tech needs improvement, which is something I never expected from cruise.

They're not taking the high road, they got caught lying and were banned from a state where a third of their vehicles operate[1]. Call me a cynic but I think the time to demonstrate you're "relentlessly focused on safety" is before you're caught red handed. 1: It looks like they have 150 vehicles in San Francisco out of 400 vehicles total nationwide.

Yea, the "relentlessly focused on safety" quote reminds me of every time a company gets breached by hackers, they trot out the same "At $company, we take security very seriously" nonsense. I wonder if these P.R. people have to chug a fifth of bourbon in order to stomach hitting send on these statements.

Re: We have decided to pause driverless operations across all of our fleets

#53

Post by ra7 »

uejfiweun wrote: post #22

Are self-driving cars actually going to be lucrative? Yes, the progress is promising, but it seems to me (as an observer that knows nothing) that things aren't very scalable. - It seems like every city pretty much requires a custom-tailored solution, and they still haven't solved the "downtown" problem. - It's far more of a regulatory minefield than a pure software business model. - The cars themselves, in addition t…

> IIUC the leader, Waymo, does all the computation in the cloud, so you're hosed if the network goes down.

All the computation for driving happens on the onboard computer(s) and the maps are also onboard, so they can drive just fine without a network. But it is required for managing trips, remote assistance when necessary, etc.

The vehicle will most likely come to a safe stop on its own during an extended network outage because it can’t report the trip status anymore.

Re: We have decided to pause driverless operations across all of our fleets

#54

Post by mrastro »

huytersd wrote: post #42
polalavik wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Out of all the tech problems to solve, driverless cars or driverless taxis has always baffled me. It’s a very complex thing to solve with a zillion edge cases. And for what net gain? What incredible inconvenience are we trying to solve? Lack of good public transit? Let’s solve that instead. Millions of cars driverless or not are not a great solution to anything.

Public transit is no good. I don’t want to walk to a station and then share the space with other people. I don’t want to lug grocery bags around. I want to make pit stops. I want to go off road. I want to live in the suburbs or semi rural areas so I can have a lot of land.

If we (North America) had more walkable streets a lot of these problems would be solved: grocery stores are easier to place in population centers a short distance with less car and more foot traffic and you can rent a car for occasional "off-road" recreational driving.

In terms of transportation and city design, the US could learn a lot from Europe if it weren't so addicted to cars. It's better for the environment, mental well-being, and a sense of community.

Re: We have decided to pause driverless operations across all of our fleets

#55

Post by bumby »

stickfigure wrote: post #32
polalavik wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Out of all the tech problems to solve, driverless cars or driverless taxis has always baffled me. It’s a very complex thing to solve with a zillion edge cases. And for what net gain? What incredible inconvenience are we trying to solve? Lack of good public transit? Let’s solve that instead. Millions of cars driverless or not are not a great solution to anything.

Most people don't live in urban centers. Unless you plan on dismantling the suburbs, we're stuck with cars of one form or another. Taxis, driverless or otherwise, are "public transport".

It depends on how you define “urban.” The way the census defines it, less than 20% of the US population is non-urban.

Re: We have decided to pause driverless operations across all of our fleets

#56

Post by minwcnt5 »

polalavik wrote: post #17
xnx wrote: post #12

This is a good move on Cruise's part. Cruise is still nowhere near the maturity level that Waymo was at when Waymo first started driving on public roads. On the other hand, we definitely need a real competitor to Waymo. It doesn't seem likely, but hopefully some combination of Cruise, Apple(?), Tesla, or another player will be able to have a feasible alternative to Waymo's Driver.

Out of all the tech problems to solve, driverless cars or driverless taxis has always baffled me. It’s a very complex thing to solve with a zillion edge cases. And for what net gain? What incredible inconvenience are we trying to solve? Lack of good public transit? Let’s solve that instead. Millions of cars driverless or not are not a great solution to anything.

If public transit can't be solved in SF, the second densest city in the US, there's no hope for the rest of America outside NYC.

On average it takes close to twice as long to get from point A to B in SF using public transit than with Waymo. And for the walking portions you're likely dealing with either hills or sketchy areas.

Re: We have decided to pause driverless operations across all of our fleets

#57

Post by xnx »

polalavik wrote: post #46
xnx wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's definitely an immensely complex challenge, a legitmate "moonshot" scale effort. The benefits can also be huge. Think of the huge portion of a household's budget (purchase price, fuel, insurance, maintenance) and time is spent on cars. If someone can provide a better alternative to private car ownership (and goods transportation), they stand to capture a meaningful portion of those billions of dollars and billion…

It’s not like it’s free once it’s solved. you will subscribe to it and pay probably some fraction of a car payment for life.

Absolutely correct. Mobile phone service isn't free either, but it's so much better than land lines that most people have given up their land line. I expect a similar adoption pattern for self-driving car service.

Re: We have decided to pause driverless operations across all of our fleets

#58

Post by [deleted] »

acchow wrote: post #38
polalavik wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Out of all the tech problems to solve, driverless cars or driverless taxis has always baffled me. It’s a very complex thing to solve with a zillion edge cases. And for what net gain? What incredible inconvenience are we trying to solve? Lack of good public transit? Let’s solve that instead. Millions of cars driverless or not are not a great solution to anything.

How about reduction of traffic-related deaths?

[deleted]

Re: We have decided to pause driverless operations across all of our fleets

#59

Post by akdor1154 »

polalavik wrote: post #17
xnx wrote: post #12

This is a good move on Cruise's part. Cruise is still nowhere near the maturity level that Waymo was at when Waymo first started driving on public roads. On the other hand, we definitely need a real competitor to Waymo. It doesn't seem likely, but hopefully some combination of Cruise, Apple(?), Tesla, or another player will be able to have a feasible alternative to Waymo's Driver.

Out of all the tech problems to solve, driverless cars or driverless taxis has always baffled me. It’s a very complex thing to solve with a zillion edge cases. And for what net gain? What incredible inconvenience are we trying to solve? Lack of good public transit? Let’s solve that instead. Millions of cars driverless or not are not a great solution to anything.

> What incredible inconvenience are we trying to solve?

Having to pay those pesky gig workers I think.

Re: We have decided to pause driverless operations across all of our fleets

#60

Post by ZoomerCretin »

7e wrote: post #51
bobthepanda wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The main obstacle to better transit in a developed countries is the cost and scarcity of labor. An automated bus would basically eliminate most of the running cost; make it electric and it would be pennies on the dollar compared to running a bus today.

I think an automated bus would have enough electronics such that it would cost a lot more than the bus driver for a long, long time. At least that's the status quo. A Waymo car costs a lot more than a $7K Uber Prius.

Time to bring back trolley cars!
Post reply on HN