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

California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

731–740 of 1001 posts

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#731

Post by bhelkey »

unshavedyak wrote: post #546
pbarnes_1 wrote: post #515

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I saw a Waymo come to a screeching halt in a split second as a... less than intelligent individual... skateboarded in front of a bus, into the extremely busy road . If it was a human that person would have been dead, no question. Sometimes I'm riding in a Waymo (which I do every single day, 4x) and it does something, and I double take. Then a second later I see whatever it was it reacted to, and I'm like "dang, why d…

I can't wait till those are generally available. I'd go out more if i could have a nice night and not have to deal with coming home later. Hell i live about 1.5h from Seattle and i never go because it's just awful (to me) dealing with cars there. If i could get a cab all the way there and back? Oh man, amazing. Or even park and ride would be nice. Cities seem so much more approachable to me if i don't need to drive t…

Does Uber not fill this need today?

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#732

Post by [deleted] »

hot_gril wrote: post #684
edge17 wrote: post #681

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Simple math? Assuming a fixed number of cars on the road, more lanes will increase the flow. The cable cars are novelty transportation for tourists that residents of the city don't actually use for commuting. In case it's not clear, I'm refering to California st starting downtown and going all the way up the hill.

Yeah but the cable cars only run in a limited area, basically the scenic hill you mentioned.

[deleted]

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#733

Post by pwnna »

tsunamifury wrote: post #644
andrewia wrote: post #490

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but the vast majority of human drivers will stop when they hit somebody, and when there's screaming under their car.

Errrrr in this exact scenario the other car that hit the woman didn't stop...

Yeah but we also would revoke their license..

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#734

Post by dclowd9901 »

fhub wrote: post #277
Lonestar1440 wrote: post #120

From my perspective as a person who lives in San Francisco and also drives a LOT (10-20k miles per year, and many small drives within the city): Cruise cars do not perform acceptably. They manage to avoid collisions by driving extremely conservatively, but the way they traverse, say, a left turn against traffic is absurd. They slow everyone down, including emergency vehicles and public transit, by performing far belo…

From my perspective, as a relatively early adopter of Waymo (60+ rides). I have zero gripes with the driving itself. In fact I've seen Waymos do things that no human would be able to do*. Drop-offs and pickups I'd like to see improvements made like getting a bit closer to the curb. Occasionally the route selections make no sense at all. * Waymo made a right turn up a steep hill. Two lanes each way. It then pulled a b…

> no human would be able to

_defensive driving has entered the chat_

Seriously, anyone here who rides motorcycles can pipe in, but some of us out there never assume anything on the road and thusly avoid a lot of trouble because of it. Assuming incorrectly is the root cause of probably 99.999% of accidents.

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#735

Post by km3r »

School-Cotton wrote: post #716
jakefromstatecs wrote: post #672

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Part of maturity/adulthood is coming to the realization that you don’t have the right to conscript other people into your sense of humor. And yet, you aren't willing to accept that they have a different sense of humor without hating them. Ironic.

I don’t hate them, and never said I did. I find their childish antics annoying.

It is however, interesting to me to confirm they are aware of other AVs and can sync with them, enable better safety, and potentially could optimize routing through traffic with the combined data. Imagine if the car in front could warn the car behind of an incident, enabling it to take action before a human driver would even be aware of the incident.

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#736

Post by Sephr »

lobsterthief wrote: post #689
joe_the_user wrote: post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aside from the other comments, pulling over when you detect a collision is definitely not best human practice on an ordinary city street for a human driver. If you detect a collision, you stop the vehicle, access the situation and maybe pull over based on your assessment of the situation. And this brings a question to me: How did they create, develop , this post-collision routine? Afaik, the overall program/system gu…

> And this brings a question to me: How did they create, develop, this post-collision routine? I’m just going to assume it’s a liability thing: * Cruise gets in an accident and stays in the road, passenger gets out and gets hit. * Cruise gets in an accident and pulls to the curb, passenger can get out on the curb (and if they don’t, and get hit, Cruise can claim it pulled over). I could see this decision being made (…

> * Cruise gets in an accident and stays in the road, passenger gets out and gets hit.

Waymo handles this by notifying riders when vehicles or cyclists are incoming near passenger exits.

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#737

Post by xnx »

School-Cotton wrote: post #663
fhub wrote: post #550

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Another fun anecdote. When a Waymo is in the vicinity of another Waymo they acknowledge each other in a whimsical/cute way - the windshield wipers swipe once (I'm not sure they still do this). But it wasn't implemented very well at some point since the Waymo I was in was behind another one for many blocks. The wipers went at least 17 times. As an earlier adopter I provided lots of feedback. Even little things like I…

> When a Waymo is in the vicinity of another Waymo they acknowledge each other in a whimsical/cute way I hate “whimsical” stuff like this. Part of maturity/adulthood is coming to the realization that you don’t have the right to conscript other people into your sense of humor.

It's hard to get right, and almost no one gets it right. Remember when Lyft cars had pink moustaches on them?

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#738

Post by xnx »

gcampos wrote: post #320
fhub wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From my perspective, as a relatively early adopter of Waymo (60+ rides). I have zero gripes with the driving itself. In fact I've seen Waymos do things that no human would be able to do*. Drop-offs and pickups I'd like to see improvements made like getting a bit closer to the curb. Occasionally the route selections make no sense at all. * Waymo made a right turn up a steep hill. Two lanes each way. It then pulled a b…

That is actually an interesting question. We track how many accidents the automated cars cause, but I'm not sure how many accidents they prevent are tracked.

Waymo thinks about this a lot and has posted a good video about it here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9-Qu6HNZu8g

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#739

Post by dml2135 »

PH95VuimJjqBqy wrote: post #625
dkarl wrote: post #504

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If a human being had done that they would have absolutely had the book thrown at them. Really? If they had been in a car accident caused by another driver, and took a few seconds to pull over because they were unaware they were dragging a person initially hit by the other driver, they would have been charged? It's very hard to hold people responsible, and it's telling that you had to cite such a grisly and outrageo…

> Really? If they had been in a car accident caused by another driver, and took a few seconds to pull over because they were unaware they were dragging a person initially hit by the other driver, they would have been charged? unless you believe this person stayed completely silent during this, the answer is yes. The measuring stick that the law tends to use for liability like this is the reasonable person test and no…

Sorry but this just comes off as completely out of touch to me. Yes, I agree that there would be a legal case to charge someone in such a scenario. But what actually happens, at least in NYC, is that the cops and prosecutors will bend over backwards to give a driver the benefit of the doubt.

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#740

Post by huytersd »

bluGill wrote: post #707
huytersd wrote: post #525

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s not the way I see it. There’s no reason for it to be a compromise unless it’s purely financial. I have everything set up just the way I like it with the existing status quo.

You don't have easy access to the symphony, whatever museums are downtown, many restaurants, or any of the other things you could have. You have set yourself up a different life, but to get that you had to compromise something else.

I live in a rural buffer area, a 15 minute drive from a large downtown with theatres, restaurants, shows, festivals/parades etc. There’s no compromise here. None of that would be possible without good road and personal vehicles.
Post reply on HN