Waymo in Dallas • Hacker News Board

Re: Waymo in Dallas

#641

Post by bluGill » Wed, Aug 05, 2026, 2:32 PM UTC

Yizahi wrote: post #634

bluGill wrote: post #568

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When logic and the observation disagree that means your logic is missing something. Don't double down on flawed logic, figure out where the flaw is. I don't know where your flaws in logic is coming from, but I have seen the numbers enough different places to know there is one someplace.

You are missing one thing. Logic can be faulty AND observation can be faulty just as well (it's just more rare usually). Especially in the financial reporting. I've seen enough to immediately doubt and try to find intentional tricks in any level of financial reporting or analysis. The tools are endless - simple faking, reclassifying specific inflows and outflows to the different time frames or divisions or even separ…

When you step back you can see that suburbs have existed since 1880 (street car suburbs), and most of them are still around. The roads have been replaced several times since then in most - they don't last for 140 years so they must have been. Likely the first ones didn't even have water/sewage pipes, but they all have that now so somehow they added them. We know how long pipes in the ground last (both average and maximum), so we know they must have replaced at least some of them at some point since they were added. We know that telephone and electric would have been built sometimes between 1920 and 1950 - and we know those wires don't last forever so they got replaced. We know that cable TV was added likely between 1970 and 2000, some of those much be wearing out and been replaced. We know that fiber is being added now.

I don't know how they managed to do the above. However we know that they have done it, and the costs must have not been excessive.

When you show me facts I'll change my mind. Until then the above facts are compelling.

Re: Waymo in Dallas

#642

Post by infecto » Wed, Aug 05, 2026, 2:34 PM UTC

bluGill wrote: post #637

infecto wrote: post #615

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that is a pretty broad generalization that lacks cultural differences and regional challenges. There are indeed many whys but one of the core issues in American is the rooted desire to be free by driving a car. It’s kind of similar to how folks argue small cars should be manufactured in the US when in reality most folks don’t want to buy them. You could not efficiently run a bus service in most US cities at a…

> You could not efficiently run a bus service in most US cities at a level of “good service”. Only because you can never get the political supported needed to get there. If you somehow got the needed support people would start using it and it would turn the US city into a transit city. Note that political support needs to last for at least 5 years, in the real world there is an election every 2 years and so before yo…

Sorry no you are ignoring the most important fact. Unless you can get door to door service, people in a place like Dallas are not going to use a bus. You tell me it’s not feasible to do a rideshare small bus? Well then it’s definitely not feasible to run bus networks. I think the narrative is conflicting within itself.

- if you give someone the option of a bus with a transfer or taking a car they will almost always take a car (thinking of Dallas)

- if you can get me a bus that very nearly gets me door to door with low to no wait people will consider taking it over a car. Very nearly to me is 5-10 mins of walking at most. That’s like a single section of a frontage road in Dallas at best.

- I don’t see how you build that kind of service. Maybe you do live in DFW but it’s massive. Just walking from one intersection of a frontage road to the next would take me at least 10-15mins and thinking of job density there it’s pretty low and then thinking of those folks and how many are commuting from similar places is even lower.

You are arguing that if you could create a great bus service that people would take it and I am trying to point out that a great bus service in a place like Dallas is not economically feasible. It has nothing to do with politics at least from the upfront problem of it not being feasible.

Re: Waymo in Dallas

#643

Post by tuesdaynight » Wed, Aug 05, 2026, 2:37 PM UTC

sashank_1509 wrote: post #406

ultimoo wrote: post #275

I was talking with someone visiting from Florida the other day and they were talking about how Waymo is slurping money that would have otherwise stayed in the local economy. E.g. you pay an uber driver, the uber driver pays the grocery store, etc. This is something that had never occurred to me since I love taking Waymos here in the bay area. I guess Waymos operating in Florida need local labor to maintain and clean…

There is some need for local labor, but it’s an order of magnitude lower than the number of Uber drivers that get paid. I never thought of this, but I think this is a valid concern. Uber drivers will end up spending in their locality while money that goes to Waymo will be used for further investment that’s probably concentrated in the Bay Area. I will say this though, Uber it self somehow takes > 50% of the cut a dri…

Someday some politician will propose a law to require companies to maintain most part of their revenue in the city where it was acquired. I know that it will not necessarily be a good thing, but it doesn't matter

Re: Waymo in Dallas

#644

Post by bluGill » Wed, Aug 05, 2026, 2:41 PM UTC

HDThoreaun wrote: post #640

bluGill wrote: post #638

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Define low density.... In the typical suburb there is enough density for a good static network to work. Note that I said "good", and "network". A suburb cannot support a bus every hour, the service is too bad - but it can support a bus every 10 minutes or better because the service is acceptable. Also: network, not route - the important part is you need to be able to get to all the places you would normally go and th…

I really think the issue here is just that you are blinded by your own preferences. Buses will never be faster than cars in Dallas. Literally impossible. So if they’re not faster, and they’re not more convenient, what are the upsides? Well they’re cheaper, but everyone in Dallas already owns a car so that doesn’t matter. They have lower externalities, but that’s not convincing anyone to switch, Dallas residents are r…

Buses don't have to be faster. They need to be as good or better for the trips you take. If it is 15 minutes to drive to work and 25 minutes by bus that is good enough. If you can get all your other errands done on the bus then you can save a ton of money by selling a car. Note that I said sell a single car - nearly everybody in Dallas lives in a "family" situation with more than one car, so you still have a car for the exceptions while saving a ton of money (this only works if everybody is using the bus for almost everything and so there isn't a conflict when one person needs the car for something weird)!

Also we should not assume only the bus. A train is a useful part of any large transport network. There should be a train between Dallas and Fort Worth that makes the trip in 10 minutes - you can't do that in a car (a race car with a professional driver could beat that if we block all traffic, but no normal car or driver can even if traffic is blocked). Sure the current train takes an hour, but we can make is faster with existing technology.

Re: Waymo in Dallas

#645

Post by infecto » Wed, Aug 05, 2026, 2:41 PM UTC

vel0city wrote: post #632

Grombobulous wrote: post #626

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hot weather transit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_SJ1NBMrH0 Cold weather transit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dKvtnToQyi0 Transit is small towns and suburbs: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ztpcWUqVpIg I would remind all of us that our built environment is not an inevitability, it is a continuous choice, especially in a rapidly expanding state like Texas. In 1960, 8 million fewer people lived in the Netherla…

If I lived in Singapore I'd absolutely ride and walk most places, as owning a car is extremely expensive. To own a Toyota Corolla, before even thinking about paying for the garage to park it just the taxes and fees, its like $130k. Then you're looking at a few hundred dollars in rent just to store the car. This might be news to you, but it doesn't cost $130k to drive an old Toyota Camry around in DFW. Every home is p…

I know you are not saying this but in defense of what you are saying…I think if you could rebuild all of DFW that yes I bet you could get some portion of the population to live in denser apartment buildings with everything they need in a walkable area and have trains connecting these dense areas together. But people choose to buy a home in the suburb and choose to drive that suburban with AC. Folks who want density move to those places.

Waymo is a step in a direction of an interesting future. If you can take the current blueprint and make it more efficient that sounds like a win to me?

Re: Waymo in Dallas

#646

Post by bluGill » Wed, Aug 05, 2026, 2:43 PM UTC

Grombobulous wrote: post #620

bluGill wrote: post #570

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is false. A fixed route is predictable. You know when it will be there and can plan for it. Non fixed routes mean you cannot be sure when your ride will arrive and thus cannot be sure you will arrive on time. That makes the fixed route better than a flexible route. Sure the flexible route is faster in the best case. However it is unpredictable and people have deadlines of when they can arrive: a flexible route c…

Bus routes can be fixed in the sense that they can stay in place for decades. Even simple things like paint, signs, and shelters provide psychological permanence. Things like WalkScore show up on real estate listings as a value add.

You don't even need that. Just seeing the bus go by "all the time" provides permanence. Really it is better, I've seen plenty of paint/signs/shelters, but when I bothered to look the bus only came rarely. When I moved someplace where I saw buses all the time I realized I could use them even though there was no paint/sign/shelter close to where I got on.

Re: Waymo in Dallas

#647

Post by vel0city » Wed, Aug 05, 2026, 2:55 PM UTC

infecto wrote: post #645

vel0city wrote: post #632

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I lived in Singapore I'd absolutely ride and walk most places, as owning a car is extremely expensive. To own a Toyota Corolla, before even thinking about paying for the garage to park it just the taxes and fees, its like $130k. Then you're looking at a few hundred dollars in rent just to store the car. This might be news to you, but it doesn't cost $130k to drive an old Toyota Camry around in DFW. Every home is p…

I know you are not saying this but in defense of what you are saying…I think if you could rebuild all of DFW that yes I bet you could get some portion of the population to live in denser apartment buildings with everything they need in a walkable area and have trains connecting these dense areas together. But people choose to buy a home in the suburb and choose to drive that suburban with AC. Folks who want density m…

I think we're seeing that kind of happen with self-selection driving it.

While we're experiencing tons of growth in the far-flung suburbs with practically zero walkability, we're also seeing a good bit of redevelopment of places like Richardson, Garland, Carrolton, some parts of actual Dallas, and even some parts of Plano like the old downtown. A lot of these towns are trying to rebuild their downtown areas and more to be far more pedestrian, bike, and transit friendly.

Its entirely possible to live a car-free life in some places in DFW. There are definitely pockets where one can comfortably live without a car. I spent a bit of time without a car and got by with just a bicycle and motorcycle after my car was destroyed in a hailstorm. Because I had purposefully chosen bikeable places with decent transit to live near where I worked it really wasn't that big of a deal. But in the end you pretty much have to give up going to large parts on any kind of regular basis.

And yes, I do hope things like AVs can solve a bit of the current cost of operating bus lines. Nearly half of the cost to operate a line is the cost of the driver. We could run so much more capacity and really rethink a lot of the economics.

Re: Waymo in Dallas

#648

Post by infecto » Wed, Aug 05, 2026, 3:16 PM UTC

vel0city wrote: post #647

infecto wrote: post #645

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know you are not saying this but in defense of what you are saying…I think if you could rebuild all of DFW that yes I bet you could get some portion of the population to live in denser apartment buildings with everything they need in a walkable area and have trains connecting these dense areas together. But people choose to buy a home in the suburb and choose to drive that suburban with AC. Folks who want density m…

I think we're seeing that kind of happen with self-selection driving it. While we're experiencing tons of growth in the far-flung suburbs with practically zero walkability, we're also seeing a good bit of redevelopment of places like Richardson, Garland, Carrolton, some parts of actual Dallas, and even some parts of Plano like the old downtown. A lot of these towns are trying to rebuild their downtown areas and more…

Agree and it reminds me of my time in the Bay Area too. You could absolutely live car free but you give up a good part of going places (thinking of hikes and other activities).

I still think it’s really hard because even with that self selection, what happens when your work changes. Probably some of my Silicon Valley bias of swapping companies every few years but it can throw a wrench in your commute easily.

Re: Waymo in Dallas

#649

Post by lokar » Wed, Aug 05, 2026, 3:23 PM UTC

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #439

runako wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In context, your comment reads as a defense of companies ignoring laws: >> that big companies are (sometimes) bound by the same laws that bind the rest of us > Not if they’re stupid laws! States won't adapt to new technologies at the same time, this is embedded in the design of federalism.

> States won't adapt to new technologies at the same time, this is embedded in the design of federalism …how are you missing this. I’m saying the states failing to adapt need to do so or have their governments replaced. That all of these states are also facing multi-party insurgencies doesn’t strike me as a coïncidence. Pretending the corruption in e.g. New York around this is fine is just such a weird take.

The desire to slow down and consider the fate of cab drivers (very hard working, low income people) is not automatically corruption.

Re: Waymo in Dallas

#650

Post by dtdynasty » Wed, Aug 05, 2026, 3:38 PM UTC

panick21_ wrote: post #604

121789 wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the easiest way to understand their value is to be a pedestrian. it is insane how quickly you realize how safe and careful they are vs. humans. the "bugs" with getting stuck in intersections and stuff like that means very little to me if I can bike or cross a crosswalk with confidence

Easiest to understand their value as a pedestrian in a place that doesn't care about pedestrian and looks at their deaths as irrelevant. We know a lot about how to improve road safety for pedestrians, but its just not valued in some places. Replacing 100s of millions of cars with smart robot is not safety solution. Actually improving road safety with cheap well proven methods is the solution.

I agree if the money was given to organizations which would actually effectively use the money to make road safety changes. But with this form of claim I always come back to the idea this was originally funded by corporations. I don't think the opportunity cost of corporate funding is public infrastructure unless it's profit motivated. So if it makes safety improvements at low safety per $ I still support it because its opportunity cost is more likely ads or other corporate investments.