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

Delivery robots take over Chicago sidewalks

blockclubchicago.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 176 posts

Re: Delivery robots take over Chicago sidewalks

#91

Post by Izkata »

crooked-v wrote: post #6

I feel like part of this is people not being comfortable with the idea that they don't have to be deferent to the robots (i.e. do what you want, it will avoid you). That's perfectly understandable (nobody wants to walk in front a moving industrial robots), but is something these companies will have to work on if they want people comfortable around their bots.

> (i.e. do what you want, it will avoid you)

The one I encountered a week ago, when I and another person got near it, it stopped moving. You have to go around them, and there's no way to get them out of the way if they're blocking something aside from leaving and hoping they start moving again.

Re: Delivery robots take over Chicago sidewalks

#92

Post by bombcar »

janalsncm wrote: post #27

In another timeline, there are pneumatic tubes or underground trains routing to each building, negating the need for last mile delivery for most packages in dense urban areas. Adding these tunnels is probably too expensive now that the buildings are in place though.

https://idlewords.com/2007/04/the_alameda_weehawken_burrito_...

Re: Delivery robots take over Chicago sidewalks

#93

Post by bombcar »

esafak wrote: post #28
jeffbee wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These companies tried to start years ago in Berkeley but people wouldn't tolerate them and they always ended up flipped over in the road. Let it be known that I will not "dodge" something like this under any circumstances. Robots need to get out of the way and stay out of the way.

It is going to be an interesting sight when humanoid robots are let loose. They might not be inclined to stay out of your way. Rather the opposite.

It the “robot delivery vs the homeless” war I’m coming in on the side of the homeless.

Re: Delivery robots take over Chicago sidewalks

#95

Post by bombcar »

Izkata wrote: post #91
crooked-v wrote: post #6

I feel like part of this is people not being comfortable with the idea that they don't have to be deferent to the robots (i.e. do what you want, it will avoid you). That's perfectly understandable (nobody wants to walk in front a moving industrial robots), but is something these companies will have to work on if they want people comfortable around their bots.

> (i.e. do what you want, it will avoid you) The one I encountered a week ago, when I and another person got near it, it stopped moving. You have to go around them, and there's no way to get them out of the way if they're blocking something aside from leaving and hoping they start moving again.

Can’t go under it.

Can’t go around it.

Have to go over it!

Re: Delivery robots take over Chicago sidewalks

#96

Post by exasperaited »

Fricken wrote: post #77
miltonlost wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How are these solved problems when robot deliveries on sidewalks are a new phenomenon? Also, what other cities?

They aren't that new. Starship Technologies, founded in 2014, has performed over 9 million deliveries across 270 locations.

That’s… not many at all, really. You could do it in a year with ninety deliveries per day per location (well, 92).

Assuming a dozen robots per location, that's less than eight deliveries per day per robot (and even that might be beyond their upper bound, actually, given their speed and range).

But then they didn't do it all in one year. So… it doesn't feel like a stretch.

Given how many will be recurring customers with recurring journey routes, it feels barely enough to encounter all the possible unique problems.

Re: Delivery robots take over Chicago sidewalks

#97

Post by shadowgovt »

johnfn wrote: post #33

> “Chicago sidewalks are for people, not delivery robots.” This seems to be a false dichotomy. Isn't it obvious that if there weren't robots, there would be people delivering your food instead? And as a biker, I actually find delivery drivers to be quite dangerous. They are constantly blocking the bike lane, forcing me to drive into traffic -- or they are riding their extremely heavy and fast bikes dangerously throug…

Where the technology currently stands, people are far faster, more agile, and more compliant with the rules of sidewalk and street use than this category of robots is. They're currently objectively worse; a human being on two legs can make much better use of sidewalk real-estate than a robot (and that's before noting that most delivery couriers are in the street, using a bicycle, scooter, or car).

Re: Delivery robots take over Chicago sidewalks

#98

Post by exogenousdata »

monerozcash wrote: post #61
floundy wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just turn it upside down then. At best some “Good Samaritan” turns it right side up at some point but the food arrives late, cold, and spilled all over the inside of the robot.

Or just push for better regulation instead of resorting to childish vandalism?

More childish than the process of getting new regulations against big-tech approved in local government? I’d say it’s a tie, at best.

Was the Boston Tea Party childish vandalism or heroic patriotism? Only history gets to decide how the actions of disobedience are ultimately judged.

Re: Delivery robots take over Chicago sidewalks

#99

Post by hackingonempty »

trhway wrote: post #53
johnfn wrote: post #33

> “Chicago sidewalks are for people, not delivery robots.” This seems to be a false dichotomy. Isn't it obvious that if there weren't robots, there would be people delivering your food instead? And as a biker, I actually find delivery drivers to be quite dangerous. They are constantly blocking the bike lane, forcing me to drive into traffic -- or they are riding their extremely heavy and fast bikes dangerously throug…

>if you're going to argue that robots are objectively worse, I'm not so sure. Robots are becoming worse. I've been living in Mountain View for more than 2 decades, and Waymo cars have been around for years. They never been an issue until recently. I already wrote how several weeks ago our car was almost front-rammed by a Waymo, we had to swerve to avoid it. And recently i saw, and today was myself cut by a Waymo when…

>i just want parity, i.e. the law should allow me to outfit my car with similar (or may be for the old time sake of being a human - with better) sensor and mechanical capabilities and to allow me to for example cut the same way in front of humans and robots like those robots do.

Human drivers kill ~40,000 people a year in the USA. The last thing we need to do is enable humans to drive even more aggressively. Soon it wont make any sense to allow humans to drive at all, just like we currently don't allow them to drive while impaired.

Re: Delivery robots take over Chicago sidewalks

#100

Post by whimsicalism »

exasperaited wrote: post #82
whimsicalism wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree they definitely create a ton of new problems that we will need to figure out, but I think I am simply much much more sympathetic to the fewer drivers argument to the point that I feel like it is still worth doing and figuring out how to fix the details.

Well, if there are fewer drivers then there is room for them on the road isn’t there? Fewer drivers on the road because the pavements are becoming non-navigable because of robots nearly as wide as pavements does not sound like a benefit for anyone but drivers, and yet again demonstrates how messed up car culture is.

Yes, I would like it as part of a reclaiming of the streets for pedestrians and multi-use lanes. But fewer cars on the road is a good in itself.
Post reply on HN