Waymo in Portland • Hacker News Board

Re: Waymo in Portland

#521

Post by SR2Z » Wed, Apr 29, 2026, 2:37 PM UTC

cucumber3732842 wrote: post #234

SR2Z wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When it comes to controlling the wheels to prevent sliding and slipping, the AV control system is unbeatable. The ABS and traction control on a regular car has to cope with whatever control inputs the driver has made; on an AV, the computer models the grip limits of the wheel and plans a trajectory to not exceed them. It's not just for snow but also for changing pavement surfaces and the rain. The main limitation is…

This is the "works in a textbook" take. Being able to plot a series of inputs that can more efficiently use available traction than a human doesn't prevent you from blundering your way into a dumb situation where the laws of physics dictate that the only possible outcomes are various flavors of bad ones. It's not clear how often the software will chose poorly and need to brute force its way out with traction/handling…

They put the hardware on performant cars because it would be stupid to choose gas for stop-and-go city driving. Electric cars are fast; a new Honda Civic does 0-60 in 6 seconds!

No, this is not a "works in a textbook" take. The path planner is aware of surface conditions on the road. This is already a big deal because otherwise the AV would not be safe to operate in the rain.

Waymo will not be touched in most of those accidents. I've been driving in snow long enough to know that there are always going to be idiots who drive too fast for conditions and lose control of their car; I'm sure some of them will blame Waymo because it's nearby. I once watched a guy with a TX license plate spin out on a perfectly empty, perfectly straight freeway. Waymo doesn't really need to do anything for human drivers to crash.

Re: Waymo in Portland

#522

Post by llbbdd » Wed, Apr 29, 2026, 2:47 PM UTC

sensanaty wrote: post #512

llbbdd wrote: post #489

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If the US bothered to build out the infrastructure, you could go anywhere you wanted to go via public transport as well. Public transit != mass transit. There's no reason that self-driving vehicle fleets can't be municipally subsidized and provide a dramatically better private experience than any mass transit anywhere in the world, and we already have the infrastructure for it.

Let's say you go to a concert or similar event where there's potentially thousands of people leaving at the same time. How many robotaxis do you need to carry the same amount of people as a single train carriage is capable of carrying? 200? 300? What about what an entire train, with multiple carriages, could carry? Also why on earth would I want the gov't paying fucking Google for their robotaxis, rather than having…

Sure, 200 or 300, why not? I've been to events of this size and left them in taxis or rideshare. Automatic demand allocation + wage surging systems at companies like Uber funnel drivers to the events and people leave. Presumably that allocation only gets smarter when the cars all drive themselves. Trains would still have the last mile problem here, the main difference would be spacing out the congestion potentially to different remote hubs.

This misses a couple things:

- As an individual going between destinations, my mind is on my travel and not focused on the externalities of how optimal or efficient the transport is for other people. The fact that a train can fit more people is a downside, because being packed in with the public while trying to travel is not actually desirable. This is why even trains charge for expensive private rooms.

- Whether a private company or Google provides it is immaterial to this as well: I'm not chasing after Google trying to pay them, it is just literally more desirable to travel alone and privately whoever is providing it. I have no problem if the government wants to build its own robotaxi fleet, maybe it'd be better, maybe worse, let God sort them out. I'd use the one that has better service and fits my budget.

Seemingly very rare that anyone argues for public transit expansion based on any of the following:

- They like being in a box with strangers for a long duration, where bad behavior of just one individual becomes stressful and inescapable. You can increase funding for social services to reduce the number of homeless people responsible for this disruption, but you can't stop strangers from farting.

- They prefer the lesser convenience of having to plan 3+ legs of a trip instead of 1, e.g. having to walk to/from a transit station at both ends of the track.

Trains do some things better that matter to me as a rider: they are faster. They have food service and bathrooms. But "look how packed in we could be" is not an argument that's going to convince anyone who has a choice.

Re: Waymo in Portland

#523

Post by llbbdd » Wed, Apr 29, 2026, 2:48 PM UTC

troupo wrote: post #495

llbbdd wrote: post #489

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If the US bothered to build out the infrastructure, you could go anywhere you wanted to go via public transport as well. Public transit != mass transit. There's no reason that self-driving vehicle fleets can't be municipally subsidized and provide a dramatically better private experience than any mass transit anywhere in the world, and we already have the infrastructure for it.

How many private vehicles do you need to provide mass transit away from a mass event such as a stadium, or a concert?

See above comment, why does the number of vehicles matter? I've left stadium events via taxi and ride-share, often there is a queueing area where cars pull up, you get in and leave. It's like a train that takes you home.

Re: Waymo in Portland

#524

Post by xnx » Wed, Apr 29, 2026, 2:50 PM UTC

Jblx2 wrote: post #268

Schiendelman wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I spent ten years in the trenches of American urban design policy. The best we could do was lose very slightly less quickly . It's not changing. Trains are great, we should build more, and we probably should replace a lot of bus routes by subsidizing rides on Waymo and its ilk. It'll be cheaper and provide better service.

>Trains are great I wonder how much that sentiment is that based on steampunk and 1880's nostalgia?

A huge amount, most self-proclaimed supporters of "public transportation" are primarily train enthusiasts (which is a fine hobby!). Any concern for safe, clean, effective transportation is incidental and is immediately abandoned if it ever means less trains.

Re: Waymo in Portland

#525

Post by GuinansEyebrows » Wed, Apr 29, 2026, 2:57 PM UTC

hnav wrote: post #462

GuinansEyebrows wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I absolutely trust Google the most. why?

robust culture of data protection because of lots to lose

here's why i don't think that holds water:

i no longer believe a company of alphabet's size cannot weather a "controversy" around surreptitious data collection. too many people accept this possibility as a matter of course.

beyond PR, alphabet, like every other company at or near its size:

    * has obviously bribed the current administration
    * they can afford a relative slap on the wrist should any financial penalty be imposed
    * and of course, NSA letters continue to allow the federal government to receive whatever data they wish to ask for

Re: Waymo in Portland

#526

Post by qwerpy » Wed, Apr 29, 2026, 2:57 PM UTC

UltraSane wrote: post #450

qwerpy wrote: post #355

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I want this as well. Hopefully my Cybertruck will get unsupervised driving someday, but until then, it's the closest thing to the dream of electric off-roading, self-driving vehicle with huge cargo capacity. I've already stopped driving myself around 98% of the time, according to my FSD stats.

Why did you buy a Cybertruck?

They’re awesome, why wouldn’t I?

Re: Waymo in Portland

#527

Post by llbbdd » Wed, Apr 29, 2026, 2:58 PM UTC

troupo wrote: post #496

llbbdd wrote: post #491

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is that profitability calculated before or after billions in federal funding?

Have you calculated profitability of vehicles after government has funded all the infrastructure for them?

No, but I was pointing out that profitability isn't a very useful metric for selling the benefits of either mode. Otherwise the counterargument would be that transit in the rest of the US outside the Northeast Corridor makes it the exception to the rule.

In any case, what vehicle infrastructure does the government fund today that goes away if you expand rail service? I still need to get to my house, and I don't want to live anywhere near a public transit station. Is the pitch that we get rid of the highway system entirely and make all intercity travel rail or plane?

Re: Waymo in Portland

#528

Post by UltraSane » Wed, Apr 29, 2026, 3:00 PM UTC

qwerpy wrote: post #526

UltraSane wrote: post #450

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why did you buy a Cybertruck?

They’re awesome, why wouldn’t I?

They are basically the car Homer designed in that famous episode of The Simpsons. They are the ugliest and and most impractical car ever designed. The fact that the bed cover blocks the rear view window should be illegal. Dozens of people must have told Elon how stupid using stainless steel for the body is but he ignored them all. The cabin looks incredibly cheap for an $80,000 car. It is a very bad truck.

I do have to admit the steer by wire system with adaptive sensitivity is neat.

Re: Waymo in Portland

#529

Post by xnx » Wed, Apr 29, 2026, 3:06 PM UTC

GeneralMayhem wrote: post #428

xnx wrote: post #418

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does Waymo get subsidies? If I ride in Waymo, does that mean I get subsidies?

> by simple virtue of being a car State and local governments spend a truly obscene amount of money building and repairing roads, and set aside a nauseating amount of publicly owned land to serve as roads, street parking, and parking lots. Those of us who don't frequently drive get some benefit from the roads, sure, because of the efficiencies of shops needing deliveries and whatnot, but not anything close to proport…

> Those of us who don't frequently drive get some benefit from the roads, sure

Where "some benefit" includes transportation and delivery of every single product necessary for daily life as well as garbage removal of the same products.

Re: Waymo in Portland

#530

Post by qwerpy » Wed, Apr 29, 2026, 3:22 PM UTC

UltraSane wrote: post #528

qwerpy wrote: post #526

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They’re awesome, why wouldn’t I?

They are basically the car Homer designed in that famous episode of The Simpsons. They are the ugliest and and most impractical car ever designed. The fact that the bed cover blocks the rear view window should be illegal. Dozens of people must have told Elon how stupid using stainless steel for the body is but he ignored them all. The cabin looks incredibly cheap for an $80,000 car. It is a very bad truck. I do have…

None of the subjective things you said has any bearing on my lived experience of the past two years I’ve owned it. It off roads well. Holds lots of stuff. Backed up my whole house when we had a power outage. Safest truck ever tested. Drives itself. Looks awesome.