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

Waymo: Google's self-driving car company

waymo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

551–560 of 769 posts

Re: Waymo: Google's self-driving car company

#551

Post by serge2k »

amelius wrote: post #459
jcranmer wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Also: Private car ownership is going to fall off a cliff shortly after autonomous ride services arrive. Which probably means general demand for vehicles will fall off a cliff. I've seen this sentiment so many times now that I have to ask a serious question to anyone who echoes this sentiment: Do you own a personal car right now? If so, why? All of this... excitement over the transformations that self-driving vehicl…

> Yet somehow self-driving vehicles are supposed to completely change the mix of transit use when it's not really adding any capability changes. Self-driving vehicles could be at your door within a 1 minute timeframe (say). That's a huge change, and will nullify the benefits of owning a car. Of course, this will be possible because driverless taxi companies will have the logistics in place to make this happen (they k…

> will nullify the benefits of owning a car

Except I like owning my car. I can take it where I want. When I need it, I have it. I can leave my stuff in it if I want to (e.g. if I decide to go to the park for the day I can leave my coat in the car if it is warm). If it's pouring rain I don't have to wait, I can just get in it and go.

Re: Waymo: Google's self-driving car company

#552

Post by dcre »

nec4b wrote: post #372
jcranmer wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Also: Private car ownership is going to fall off a cliff shortly after autonomous ride services arrive. Which probably means general demand for vehicles will fall off a cliff. I've seen this sentiment so many times now that I have to ask a serious question to anyone who echoes this sentiment: Do you own a personal car right now? If so, why? All of this... excitement over the transformations that self-driving vehicl…

I think that people who believe that private car ownership will fall are those who live in the urban centres and have little understanding of the needs and living styles of rural or suburban population. It could just as well be that the opposite will happen, because cars will suddenly become much more accessible for people who can't or don't know how to drive.

Yes, but they don't necessarily need to own them. They could call a ride from a lot 10 minutes away whenever they need one.

Re: Waymo: Google's self-driving car company

#553

Post by serge2k »

tza2016 wrote: post #492
jcranmer wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Also: Private car ownership is going to fall off a cliff shortly after autonomous ride services arrive. Which probably means general demand for vehicles will fall off a cliff. I've seen this sentiment so many times now that I have to ask a serious question to anyone who echoes this sentiment: Do you own a personal car right now? If so, why? All of this... excitement over the transformations that self-driving vehicl…

> So I'm genuinely curious as to what the magic sauce is that makes people so giddy for this future. I think the magic sauce is utilization. A fully autonomous car's utilization rate can be close to 100%. Higher utilization --> same demand for mobility hours/miles can be satisfied with fewer vehicles --> ceteris paribus, fewer vehicles sold every year. Viewed through this lens, it seems inevitable that, in equilibriu…

> A fully autonomous car's utilization rate can be close to 100

So if every car is almost always at 100% how am I going to be able to instantly get a car on demand from my suburban mcmansion?

Re: Waymo: Google's self-driving car company

#554

Post by ageofwant »

walrus1066 wrote: post #540
ageofwant wrote: post #526

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It only needs to be a better driver than you for you to be safer, and its that already. I can guarantee you that on a one to one driving skills shootout between you and the software you will loose 98% of the time.

Sure, but put a tumbleweed in front of the driverless car and it's stuck. Or wood with a nail sticking out/generic movable obstacle, a human can remove it, the auto-car cannot.

Yea so ? Harping on the 2% issues does not negate the benefit you have the rest of the time: It can swerve in microseconds, you cannot. How many times will your nail removal skills save you or your kids live compared to software that knows that rolling the car to the left have a 87.34 better chance of occupants survival that the head-on collision with the truck that just swerved in 0.4 seconds ago ?

Forget it, driver-less s cars will be the norm in the future. You won't be able to afford the insurance associated with a meat-driven car.

Re: Waymo: Google's self-driving car company

#555

Post by rtx »

agildehaus wrote: post #385
timdavila wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this claim is making the assumption that self driving cars will be much more accessible and available than taxis/Ubers today. Where I live (in the suburbs) I can't rely on an Uber being available at any time I would want to go somewhere, and taxis only exist at the airport. If I could count on a car showing up at any time, anywhere I might go after a short but predictable wait time, I would definitely ditch m…

Ridesharing currently requires human drivers which limits them to where the drivers want to be and limits them to how many drivers are in your area. When human drivers are not required you have neither of these problems. It will be significantly easier for ridesharing companies to provide availability in non-dense areas. Hell, they'll be able to control where these vehicles go by algorithm, so it will simply be a mat…

Why would ride sharing companies behave diffrently than human drivers. I don't think laws of economics will change.

Re: Waymo: Google's self-driving car company

#556

Post by username223 »

nec4b wrote: post #372
jcranmer wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Also: Private car ownership is going to fall off a cliff shortly after autonomous ride services arrive. Which probably means general demand for vehicles will fall off a cliff. I've seen this sentiment so many times now that I have to ask a serious question to anyone who echoes this sentiment: Do you own a personal car right now? If so, why? All of this... excitement over the transformations that self-driving vehicl…

I think that people who believe that private car ownership will fall are those who live in the urban centres and have little understanding of the needs and living styles of rural or suburban population. It could just as well be that the opposite will happen, because cars will suddenly become much more accessible for people who can't or don't know how to drive.

Or even those who live in urban centers but like to get out of them on weekends and vacations. I've tried living for years in western US cities both with and without a car. Going without was much cheaper, and I managed to find entertainment and not starve, but getting a car vastly improved my quality of life. Trains and an occasional rental would probably have worked nearly as well in parts of Europe, but the US just has too much empty space between interesting places.

Re: Waymo: Google's self-driving car company

#557

Post by serge2k »

dragonwriter wrote: post #274
bambax wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Private car ownership is going to fall off a cliff shortly after autonomous ride services arrive But how is this going to work? In cities, everyone uses their car at exactly the same time: roughly, between 8-9 in the morning and 5-7 in the evening. If you don't own a car, chances are you won't get one when you need it to get to work on time. Or, if there are enough cars for peak hours, then demand for new cars will…

> Or, if there are enough cars for peak hours, then demand for new cars will not fall that much (although the structure of ownership may in fact change). Initially, no, but long-term you can move much parking to cheaper places around the periphery of the urban area rather than needing a parking spot where people live, one where they work, and fractions everywhere else they might go. So sustainable density of everythi…

Okay so now I'm waiting 10 minutes for the car to get to me from parking.

Re: Waymo: Google's self-driving car company

#558

Post by bhntr3 »

woofyman wrote: post #496
ticviking wrote: post #466

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a key point here. The cars don't have to be perfectly safe, just safer than the average driver.

It has be better than the best human driver or they'll get sued out of existance. You can't sell a product that you know will hurt or kill a certain number of people.

What happened to worst case analysis? Don't we all know the flaws of best case?

I think (and I could be wrong) that there are many more cases where conservative driving is safer than aggressive driving.

In a lot of the cases mentioned, doing nothing or stopping are the safest choices. What's safe to drive over? Just assume everything is unsafe and only drive over it if it puts others in danger to avoid it.

If the road is blocked and you need to communicate to navigate, don't. Wait.

If the road conditions are changed due to construction in ways the car can't understand, stop. Find a new route.

Most humans wouldn't do these things. The nice thing about the autonomous car is that it can drive extremely cautiously.

Re: Waymo: Google's self-driving car company

#559

Post by bambax »

semi-extrinsic wrote: post #542
bambax wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Private car ownership is going to fall off a cliff shortly after autonomous ride services arrive But how is this going to work? In cities, everyone uses their car at exactly the same time: roughly, between 8-9 in the morning and 5-7 in the evening. If you don't own a car, chances are you won't get one when you need it to get to work on time. Or, if there are enough cars for peak hours, then demand for new cars will…

> sleep comfortably Have you ever been in a car? I've gotten plenty of sleep in cars, but never has the word "comfortable" crossed my mind when I woke up afterwards. I reckon it's something about that whole annoying safety thing requiring you to sit still upright strapped to your seat that ruins the comfort factor for me. YMMV though.

Self-driving cars of the future don't need to look / be shaped like a conventional car. Not all of them at least.

The ones designed for slow night travel don't need to be air efficient, they could be shaped like a big square with almost real beds (like on a train).

Re: Waymo: Google's self-driving car company

#560

Post by brazzledazzle »

criley2 wrote: post #411
moxious wrote: post #399

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a difference between "trying to deal with" and "product on sale next month". These cars are overhyped. They've been just around the corner for the last 10 years. They are the Duke Nukem Forever of Silicon Valley.

>These cars are overhyped Not really, they're correctly hyped. The concept is revolutionary. > They've been just around the corner for the last 10 year B-S. Holy revisionism BS!! We were NOT talking about self-driving cars in 2006! There was no company seriously designing fully autonomous cars in 2006! It was fully in the realm of science fiction, no investment, no major players, nothing. And you make it sound like i…

Hey I just wanted to remind you about the Principle of Charity[0] as well as HN's guidelines for commenting[1]. It's easy to forget when you feel strongly about something but that's a real person you're replying to and they are probably acting in good faith. We should be civil on HN even when we have strong opinions.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_charity [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Post reply on HN