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

Robotaxis 'do not belong in the city of Los Angeles,' lawmaker says

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 83 posts

Re: Robotaxis 'do not belong in the city of Los Angeles,' lawmaker says

#51

Post by 4k3aa4 »

srackey wrote: post #11
joncrane wrote: post #2

I know this sounds terrible, so please understand I don't agree with this approach, but. I've had the thought that third world countries will end up being the testing ground for autonomous vehicles. Peoples' safety isn't taken as seriously in developing countries, and the local authorities are easier to bribe. The cost for actually functioning autonomous vehicles will be some mistakes. It's up to society to decide wh…

I fear it will end up more like nuclear energy: a clearly better, objectively safer technology that nevertheless is very easy to fear-monger against. Development won’t be pushed to the Third World, but rather those political systems less susceptible to being swayed by nonsense public pressure like that.

I feel like nuclear energy is a bad example, because when it goes wrong it's "one big scary thing" as opposed to the papercuts that would add up with dangerous robotaxis. Also the benchmark for car danger is already so incredible low. You can see in this thread the argument that "cars are already killing people, so we as a society just have to decide how many it's ok to have die while we figure out to make them work."

As far as "objectively safer" - not sure how that works (or matters). Since when has safety actually mattered in terms of public opinion? If safety mattered we wouldn't have cars on city streets at all, all last mile would be slow & public and we'd have built our towns & cities to support that.

Re: Robotaxis 'do not belong in the city of Los Angeles,' lawmaker says

#52

Post by 4k3aa4 »

martythemaniak wrote: post #43

If you're not familiar with the concept of Vetocracy, now's a good time to read up on it. While most of us are aware of NIMBYs blocking housing, small businesses, bike lanes, etc, the concept is very far-reaching and we're watching it develop here in real-time with respect to autonomous vehicles. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vetocracy

Wait, so you are saying that any time the public pushes back on a new potentially dangerous technology it's a "vetocracy"?

Re: Robotaxis 'do not belong in the city of Los Angeles,' lawmaker says

#54

Post by lelanthran »

guil177 wrote: post #18
paulette449 wrote: post #8

The article infers, not unreasonably IMO, that the support for this push comes neither from citizens nor fellow lawmakers but from labor unions with whom the lawmaker (Councilmember Hug Soto-Martínez) is closely aligned. > "This has everything to do with making sure that the streets of Los Angeles are safe ... It’s also about making sure that we protect jobs" > "During the Q&A that followed, TechCrunch asked if any c…

I never understood the longterm logic of protecting jobs by not using tools. Any tools goal is to reduce work.

> I never understood the longterm logic of protecting jobs by not using tools.

Ever read thelastpsychiatrist? The website is dead now (and he may be too, for all I know), but he was on the money when talking about why a specific amount is paid by the state to the unemployed - it's the exact amount of money that would stop the idle masses from burning down the city.

You don't understand it now, but you will if we had a transition to completely automated driving in a short period - those millions of unemployed drivers, that are now never going to be employed, are a risk to the city.

Re: Robotaxis 'do not belong in the city of Los Angeles,' lawmaker says

#56

Post by joncrane »

slibhb wrote: post #7
joncrane wrote: post #2

I know this sounds terrible, so please understand I don't agree with this approach, but. I've had the thought that third world countries will end up being the testing ground for autonomous vehicles. Peoples' safety isn't taken as seriously in developing countries, and the local authorities are easier to bribe. The cost for actually functioning autonomous vehicles will be some mistakes. It's up to society to decide wh…

Companies are already testing self-driving cars in SF, Phoenix, and LA. So much for this theory.

Yes, and the article to which we're replying is a story about political pressure to STOP that testing.

Re: Robotaxis 'do not belong in the city of Los Angeles,' lawmaker says

#57

Post by joncrane »

djoldman wrote: post #6
theonlybutlet wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The road conditions are not ideal though, poor road markings, road conditions, other drivers not following the rules of the road. Hardly a place to test cars.

Counter take is that it's the perfect environment from a learning perspective: if you succeed there, you can succeed in easier conditions.

I agree. The hard part of autonomous driving is when people and things behave unpredictably and there aren't many context clues.

However, as someone who regularly visits and drives in a 3rd world country, there's a "vibe" to it if you will, and once you learn the vibe it becomes natural. (It seems to be that people respect the laws of physics over the laws of the land, if you will) If you train the cars on a 3rd world country's driving patterns, further refinement will be necessary to fit in better in a more developed country. But early on it will deal with stuff like driving on a road with no lines at the edges or between lanes, one lane bridges, sharing the road with pedestrians, cyclists, motorcyclists, and animals, etc.

Re: Robotaxis 'do not belong in the city of Los Angeles,' lawmaker says

#58

Post by 4k3aa4 »

zztop44 wrote: post #36
paulette449 wrote: post #8

The article infers, not unreasonably IMO, that the support for this push comes neither from citizens nor fellow lawmakers but from labor unions with whom the lawmaker (Councilmember Hug Soto-Martínez) is closely aligned. > "This has everything to do with making sure that the streets of Los Angeles are safe ... It’s also about making sure that we protect jobs" > "During the Q&A that followed, TechCrunch asked if any c…

I’m not saying that’s not true. But the push to have them also doesn’t feel wholly organic. Robotaxis feel like one of those new technologies that we’re gonna have whether we like it or not, because enough very rich people want us to have them. And I’m not saying we can or should try to delay the inevitable either. But the people who are pushing these timelines are basically the same people who just finished up spend…

I dunno I can think of a couple of ways to make them economically nonviable...

Re: Robotaxis 'do not belong in the city of Los Angeles,' lawmaker says

#59

Post by RHSeeger »

zztop44 wrote: post #36
paulette449 wrote: post #8

The article infers, not unreasonably IMO, that the support for this push comes neither from citizens nor fellow lawmakers but from labor unions with whom the lawmaker (Councilmember Hug Soto-Martínez) is closely aligned. > "This has everything to do with making sure that the streets of Los Angeles are safe ... It’s also about making sure that we protect jobs" > "During the Q&A that followed, TechCrunch asked if any c…

I’m not saying that’s not true. But the push to have them also doesn’t feel wholly organic. Robotaxis feel like one of those new technologies that we’re gonna have whether we like it or not, because enough very rich people want us to have them. And I’m not saying we can or should try to delay the inevitable either. But the people who are pushing these timelines are basically the same people who just finished up spend…

> But the people who are pushing these timelines are basically the same people who just finished up spending tens (hundreds?) of billions of dollars making the food delivery industry worse, more expensive, and probably less profitable overall.

I've stopped ordering delivered food all together. I just go pick it up now. Everything about it has gotten worse

- More expensive

- Delivery people don't work for the restaurant, so many of them just don't care at all. We had one deliver someone else's food to us, and tell us it's not their problem when we informed them of such.

- Tip must be up front, so not based on performance

Re: Robotaxis 'do not belong in the city of Los Angeles,' lawmaker says

#60

Post by progne »

uoaei wrote: post #45
gruez wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>“Driver” happens to be the most popular job in the United States ...which still only work out to 1-2%

...which works out to roughly 3-7 million people. Unless you want to pay them UBI, you're going to have to help them find and transition to other categories of jobs.

I used to drive a taxi. Now I write code. I paid for my own training. I'd expect to find that self-help is the most usual way to transition into other jobs.
Post reply on HN