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

651–660 of 769 posts

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

#651

Post by mypalmike »

ghaff wrote: post #606
IanCal wrote: post #581

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a definition in the census. I find it somewhat disappointing to see such a dismissive response when the answer is so easy to find. Here's a link to the definitions of urban and rural: https://www.census.gov/geo/reference/gtc/gtc_urbanrural.html Here's the 2010 figures for the split between the urban and rural: https://www.census.gov/geo/reference/ua/urban-rural-2010.htm...

I think the point was that the "urban area" definition in the census was quite broad. I live in an "urban area" on a decent plot of land with a Christmas tree farm on one side and a working farm/apple orchard on the other. Probably not what most people think of as urban.

It is relatively broad, but the point is that it's based on population size and density. The fact that you live next to a farm and an orchard doesn't change the fact that you live near lots of other people.

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

#652

Post by erikpukinskis »

randomdata wrote: post #150
goseeastarwar wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Presumably the cars won't continue driving if their systems are inoperable or unsure how to proceed. One could also argue that riding around in several inches of snow is a bad idea regardless of who's driving, human or computer.

That's a little concerning. Especially to the lee of the lake, snow storms can pop up out of nowhere and can last for days at a time. Usually, with care, a human driver can traverse to the nearest shelter to weather the storm. But if the car just stops out of the middle of nowhere, with limited energy to keep the cabin warm in the harsh cold, that seems like a recipe for disaster.

We're talking about mobility-as-a-service, so presumably the service would use other means to get you to your destination, like having the car towed, or sending out an SUV with a professional driver.

These kinds of extreme situations are scary, but that's what insurance is for.

Everyone is worried about how we get autonomous driving that's perfect in every situation, but that's not how automation works. You just have to automate the common case so a small number of humans can focus on the corner cases.

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

#653

Post by riprowan »

brwr wrote: post #574
riprowan wrote: post #525

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think you read my comment clearly. I think autonomous cars are going to be quite popular, but I don't understand how that necessarily leads to shared instead of privately owned autonomous cars.

Ah. We might be talking past each other. Looking back, a number of the advantages I mentioned are inherent in having self-driving cars. But the benefits compound when we have shared self-driving cars. Example: Traffic is improved with self-driving cars because most traffic jams are caused by humans. However, traffic is improved even more when carpooling is automated with a shared self-driving fleet. Shared autonomous…

I understand the points you're making. But I think you failed to address my question. Let me rephrase.

We have fleets of shared vehicles today, but most people prefer personal transportation.

What is it about autonomous shared cars vs shared cars with a human driver that makes you believe that driverlessness will lead to increased use of shared vehicles vs personal vehicles?

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

#654

Post by mypalmike »

mypalmike wrote: post #488
koheripbal wrote: post #357

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point is that we are far far further away than commonly accepted. The day a computer can distinguish between a plastic bag in the road and a child is the day I'd support them on the road.

The day a human can distinguish between a plastic bag in the road and a child is the day I'd support them on the road.

My mother once almost killed a child who ran into the road. The kid was on the side of the road and suddenly ran into the street. She did not see him, and he ran into some sharp piece of metal on the car (this was in the early 60s). He bled profusely, and the neighborhood people came out and almost became violent with her, blaming her for the incident.

If she had been in an automated car, it would have almost certainly have stopped before the collision.

And what's wrong with slowing/stopping for a plastic bag? How often do plastic bags really sit in the street shaped like babies?

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

#655

Post by ams6110 »

joeguilmette wrote: post #49

I'm interested to see where all the major players end up in 5yrs: • Tesla bootstrapping a ride service on the backs of buyers • Waymo directly rolling their own fleet • Uber trying to get a self-driving fleet up, burning mountains of money to maintain their "monopoly" on Uber for rides • Lyft working with GM to get a fleet up • All of the other car manufacturers trying to get autonomous vehicles going, presumably hop…

You've mentioned $1 a ride a couple of times. Where is this number coming from? It doesn't pass the smell test to me. Even bus fare is several times this amount.

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

#657

Post by imh »

dispose13432 wrote: post #588

What I don't understand is if trains aren't completely automated, planes aren't completely automated, subways aren't completely automated, ships aren't completely automated, How are CARS supposed to be automated??

When your train is carrying hundreds of passengers, the cost of somebody driving it is pretty small per passenger. In a car alone, that cost isn't split, so is more expensive. That makes it more worth pursuing.

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

#658

Post by perseusprime11 »

joeguilmette wrote: post #49

I'm interested to see where all the major players end up in 5yrs: • Tesla bootstrapping a ride service on the backs of buyers • Waymo directly rolling their own fleet • Uber trying to get a self-driving fleet up, burning mountains of money to maintain their "monopoly" on Uber for rides • Lyft working with GM to get a fleet up • All of the other car manufacturers trying to get autonomous vehicles going, presumably hop…

Can we also make it mandatory for these autonomous cars to be electric and not use gas?

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

#659

Post by ams6110 »

Florin_Andrei wrote: post #230
virmundi wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm with you entirely. I have no idea how to solve this problem. My cousin's husband is a truck driver. He makes a six figure income running between Indy and Chicago (bang, bang). He's going to retire before they can get rid of him, but this is a huge issue. I tried to explain this problem to my father, who's a CPA. I've pointed out that his firm can get by with a dramatically smaller office than it use to due to tec…

> I'm not a huge fan of UBI since I think that makes people slaves of their State. When America will be able to shake off its own mythology about this notion of the "State" as an inherently bad actor - then, perhaps, America will be able to get out of the current rut it's stuck in. Yes, the "State" can be bad (I should know, I grew up in an actual bad "State" in the Eastern Bloc before the revolutions). But at the ot…

America was founded on the notion that the state is a bad actor.

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

#660

Post by ams6110 »

jedberg wrote: post #276
dboreham wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This assumes autonomous vehicles exist, which they don't.

Wait five years. It'll almost certainly happen. The technology is solvable and lots of very big companies are spending billions to make it happen.

"Nuclear energy will be too cheap to meter"
Post reply on HN