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

California DMV approves map increase in Waymo driverless operations

dmv.ca.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 167 posts

Re: California DMV approves map increase in Waymo driverless operations

#71

Post by int0x29 »

My general experience with Waymos and safety is that while they are generally quite safe and communicative drivers (They have a pedestrian yeild indicator that should be required by law) they tend to create safety issues because people drive stupidly around them. A lot of SF drivers seem to see them, think I know better, and then proceed to do something dumb.

I'm not really sure how to fix this problem.

Also if any Waymo engineers are reading this please make the pedestrian yeild indicator icon visible on the front of the LIDAR. In narrow streets the front is much more visible to pedestrians than the sides as the LIDAR is pretty far back on the car.

Re: California DMV approves map increase in Waymo driverless operations

#72

Post by astrange »

piva00 wrote: post #41
BurningFrog wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe. It would still not be governed by Japanese politicians...

Also, if state government was Tokyo-level of public service then CA would have had decent public transportation a very long time ago, eradicating a huge part of the value proposal of Waymo.

Japan Rail is public-private and many of the other train lines are fully private. "Public" is kind of an empty distinction here, Americans associate the two concepts because they think mass transit is a kind of gift you give to poor people instead of something everyone actually uses.

But there is plenty of need for car-shaped transit in Japan and people take taxis and use cars all the time. You might have luggage/equipment to take somewhere, it might be raining and you don't want to walk the last mile, etc.

(It's surprisingly hard to take luggage through transit in Tokyo. For instance, maps apps won't give you a transit route that uses elevators, even though everyone with a baby carrier would use it.)

Re: California DMV approves map increase in Waymo driverless operations

#74

Post by skinnymuch »

freddie_mercury wrote: post #54
epicureanideal wrote: post #21

I’m looking forward to the day when the cost of taking one of these falls to somewhere 20% above the cost of fuel and wear and tear on the vehicle, making it incredibly cheap to take a ride anywhere you’d reasonably want to be driven to.

How do you know it isn't already at that price? Uber estimated that it costs Waymo $2/mile to operate. Google says they charge $1.60 to $2.60 a mile, depending on location and demand, so Waymo is already almost certainly at the price you claim you'd be taking it. I think you dramatically underestimate how much it actually costs to operate a car. Most people think they pay $0 to garage their car, for instance, since t…

I’ve never seen a Waymo ride be even close to $2/mile

Re: California DMV approves map increase in Waymo driverless operations

#75

Post by wtfwhateven »

tudelo wrote: post #45
krat0sprakhar wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> then I’d wait 10 minutes, then they’d cancel. Rinse and repeat for 30 minutes, This is such a common problem in SF (esp in odd times / from the airport). Waymo has been a lifesaver in these situations.

I don't know what it is but in basically every major airport I have struggled to get an uber/lyft. I expect at minimum one cancellation...

Same. I assume it depends on the destination

Person wants to go somewhat far from airport? That's more time on this single ride and less time pocketing peak demand money

Re: California DMV approves map increase in Waymo driverless operations

#76

Post by tricolon »

benatkin wrote: post #16
NullHypothesist wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cupertino is in there, no?

It appears not to be. Here are the ones in Santa Clara County: - Milpitas - Mountain View - Palo Alto Santa - San Jose - Sunnyvale - Unincorporated Area (Lexington Hills area, overlapping Santa Clara and Santa Cruz Counties) I don't know why it says "Palo Alto Santa" Edit: I guess it's "Palo Alto Santa" to disambiguate between Palo Alto, which is in Santa Clara County, and East Palo Alto, which is in San Mateo County…

Looking at the city limits, I don't understand why East Palo Alto isn't called North Palo Alto instead.

Re: California DMV approves map increase in Waymo driverless operations

#77

Post by conradev »

poszlem wrote: post #36
willio58 wrote: post #26

I didn’t think I’d be so pro Waymo but anecdotally I had a fantastic experience with one recently. I was at a music show very late ~1-2am in SF and walked out to grab an uber to the airbnb I was staying at. I kept getting assigned an uber, then I’d wait 10 minutes, then they’d cancel. Rinse and repeat for 30 minutes, mind you I even resorted to calling Lyfts at the same time and nothing bit. Then I say screw it and d…

Not saying this HAS to happen. But I remember when Ubers were clean, quiet, cheap too. I think you are just looking at a product before the enshittification, when they still have to pretend they care about your comfort.

You're not allowed to smoke cigarettes in a Waymo, whereas UberX drivers are allowed to, I believe, off the clock.

I do worry in general about what the enshittification of Waymo will look like, though.

Re: California DMV approves map increase in Waymo driverless operations

#78

Post by jmspring »

First used Waymo in Phoenix. It was a decent experience. The funny thing was watching it handle parallel parking. I mentioned it to the wife - self driving with parkinsons.

This last weekend, we were in the city (San Francisco) and literally drove by a Waymo trying to park and the wife started laughing - "you are right".

Re: California DMV approves map increase in Waymo driverless operations

#79

Post by arjie »

astrange wrote: post #72
piva00 wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also, if state government was Tokyo-level of public service then CA would have had decent public transportation a very long time ago, eradicating a huge part of the value proposal of Waymo.

Japan Rail is public-private and many of the other train lines are fully private. "Public" is kind of an empty distinction here, Americans associate the two concepts because they think mass transit is a kind of gift you give to poor people instead of something everyone actually uses. But there is plenty of need for car-shaped transit in Japan and people take taxis and use cars all the time. You might have luggage/equ…

> Americans associate the two concepts because they think mass transit is a kind of gift you give to poor people instead of something everyone actually uses.

Huh, funny. This model actually explains American behavior to me greatly. Now I understand why the emphasis on transit in the US is primarily on cost and shelter rather than on quality of service. I always thought it seemed odd that they'd emphasize making things that are not useful free rather than making them as costly as is required to make them useful.

But I was modeling 'useful' as optimal transportation across fare-classes. They are modeling 'useful' as 'compassion to the less well-off'. This also explains opposition to HOT lanes and so on.

Re: California DMV approves map increase in Waymo driverless operations

#80

Post by maxerickson »

freddie_mercury wrote: post #54
epicureanideal wrote: post #21

I’m looking forward to the day when the cost of taking one of these falls to somewhere 20% above the cost of fuel and wear and tear on the vehicle, making it incredibly cheap to take a ride anywhere you’d reasonably want to be driven to.

How do you know it isn't already at that price? Uber estimated that it costs Waymo $2/mile to operate. Google says they charge $1.60 to $2.60 a mile, depending on location and demand, so Waymo is already almost certainly at the price you claim you'd be taking it. I think you dramatically underestimate how much it actually costs to operate a car. Most people think they pay $0 to garage their car, for instance, since t…

Is it clear that they are decommissioning them when they are done depreciating them?
Post reply on HN