They’re super conservative. I rode just once in one. There was a parked ambulance down a side street about 30 feet with it’s lights one while paramedics helped someone. The car wouldn’t drive forward through the intersection. It just detected the lights and froze. I had to get out and walk. If we all drove that conservatively we’d also have less accidents and congest the city to undrivability.
Back in February, I took a Waymo for the first time and was at first amazed. But then in the middle of an empty four lane road, it abruptly slammed the brakes, twice. There was literally nothing in the road, no cars and because it was raining, no pedestrians within sight.
If I had been holding a drink, it would have spelled disaster.
After the second abrupt stop, I was bracing for more for the remainder of the ride, even though the car generally goes quite slow most of the time. It also made a strange habit of drifting between lanes through intersections and using the turning indicators like it had no idea what it was doing—it kept alternating went from left to right.
Honestly it felt like being in the car with a first time driver.
Maybe the reason they crash less is because everyone around them have to be extremely careful with these cars. Just like in my country we put a big L on the rear of the car for first year drivers.
How long ago was that? Last year I took a couple near Phoenix and they did great, lights or no. The hardest part was dropping me off at the front of a hotel, as people were in and out and cars were everywhere. Still didn’t have issues, just slowed down to 3mph when it had 15 years left or so
just slowed down to 3mph when it had 15 years left or so
Damn, spending 15 years in a car going 3mph sounds terrible.
Haha, yeah I didn’t check that, was eating. 15 yards. I’m actually still sitting there.
That’s what happens when you have a reasonable sensor suite with LIDAR, instead of trying to rely entirely on cameras like Tesla does.
Musk: but-but-but people don’t have lidars and can drive! Lidars are expensive! Tesla go brrrrr.
Tesla go durrrrr
Tesla go 🔥🔥🔥🔥
people … can drive
Citation needed
People have a brain. Well most people. AI is no replacement for brains.
At least the repair for a camera-only front is cheaper after the car crashes into a parked white bus
Tap for spoiler
/s
And are limited to highly trained routes. There’s a reason you only see them in specific neighborhoods of specific cities.
Because they are driving under near ideal conditions, in areas that are completely mapped out, and guided away from roadworks and avoiding “confusing” crosses, and other traffic situations like unmarked roads, that humans deal with routinely without problem.
And in a situation they can’t handle, they just stop and call and wait for a human driver to get them going again, disregarding if they are blocking traffic.I’m not blaming Waymo for doing it as safe as they can, that’s great IMO.
But don̈́t make it sound like they drive better than humans yet. There is still some ways to go.What’s really obnoxious is that Elon Musk claimed this would be 100% ready by 2017. Full self driving, across America, day and night, safer than a human. I have zero expectation that Tesla RoboTaxi will arrive this summer as promised.
You’re not wrong, but arguably that doesn’t invalidate the point, they do drive better than humans because they’re so much better at judging their own limitations.
If human drivers refused to enter dangerous intersections, stopped every time things started yup look dangerous, and handed off to a specialist to handle problems, driving might not produce the mountain of corpses it does today.
That said, you’re of course correct that they still have a long way to go in technical driving ability and handling of adverse conditions, but it’s interesting to consider that simple policy effectively enforced is enough to cancel out all the advantages that human drivers currently still have.
You are completely ignoring the under ideal circumstances part.
They can’t drive at night AFAIK, they can’t drive outside the area that is meticulously mapped out.
And even then, they often require human intervention.If you asked a professional driver to do the exact same thing, I’m pretty sure that driver would have way better accident record than average humans too.
Seems to me you are missing the point I tried to make. And is drawing a false conclusion based on comparing apples to oranges.
Waymo can absolutely drive at night, I’ve seen them do it. They rely heavily on LIDAR, so the time of day makes no difference to them.
And apparently they only disengage and need human assistance every 17,000 miles, on average. Contrast that to something like Tesla’s “Full Self Driving” (ignoring the controversy over whether it counts or not), where the most generous numbers I could find for it are a disengagement every 71 city miles, on average, or every 245 city miles for a “critical disengagement.”
You are correct in that Waymo is heavily geofenced, and that’s pretty annoying sometimes. I tried to ride one in Phoenix last year, but couldn’t get it to pick me up from the park I was visiting because I was just on the edge of their area. I suspect they would likely do fine if they went outside of their zones, but they really want to make sure they’re going to be successful so they’re deliberately slow-rolling where the service is available.
Waymo can absolutely drive at night
True I just checked it up, my information was outdated.
I specifically didn’t ignore that. My entire point was that a driver that refuses to drive under anything except “ideal circumstances” is still a safer driver.
I am aware that if we banned driving at night to get the same benefit for everyone, it wouldn’t go very well, but that doesn’t really change the safety, only the practicality.
driving might not produce the mountain of corpses it does today.
And people wouldn’t be able to drive anywhere. Which could very well be a good thing, but still
True enough, it would not be a wise economic or political move
I think “near ideal conditions” is a huge exaggeration. The situations Waymo avoids are a small fraction of the total mileage driven by Waymo vehicles or the humans they’re being compared with. It’s like you’re saying a football team’s stats are grossly wrong if they don’t include punt returns.
I have zero expectation that Tesla RoboTaxi will arrive this summer as promised.
RoboTaxis will also have to “navigate” the Fashla hate. Not many will be eager to risk their lives with them
Why are we still doing this? Just fucking invest in mass transit like metro, buses and metrobuses. Jesus
Also, Note that this is based on waymo’s own assumptions, that’s like believing a 5070 gives you 4090 performance…
That doesn’t solve the last mile problem, or transport for all the people who live outside of a few dense cities.
Almost all people can walk a mile. The remainder have special mobility needs.
Yes it does, if done properly. I have stops for four bus lines within walking distance. During peak hours, buses come once every 15 minutes. Trolleys in the city centre, every 10 minutes. Trams, every two minutes, and always packed. Most of the surrounding villages have bus stops. A lack of perspective is not an excuse.
Well if YOU have a bus stop near you then everyone must! That’s just science!
If you build it they will come
Because having a bus to pick up 7 people in a day is really efficient economically and environmentally…
Much more so than having a car-centric infrastructure. If you start cherry-picking you’ll of course find cases where a car would have been more efficient but public transportation needs to be understood as a whole.
I’m not cherry picking Im just telling you my personal experience and the town I live in
For sure. Just cruising around the countryside on the off chance that someone actually needs the bus that day. They haven’t for the past few but they have to go shopping eventually.
Yeah, all three of them.
Uh, yes, actually. I know someone like you can’t even fathom the possibility of a public transit system being well-built because you’ve been gaslit into believing that whatever happens in The West is the best humanity can offer, but we’ve got 80 bus and trolley lines criss-crossing the city. As a guesstimate, three quarters of the city is within a 10-minute walk from a stop, and the elderly and disabled who can’t walk benefit from the resulting reduction in traffic.
And all the world is cities! There’s noooooooooo other type of living. Your egocentric view of the world is going to carry you really far.
Did you hallucinate that I said anything like it or something? Obviously not every situation is solved by the same concept. Dense city centres – sidewalks, bike paths, trams, human-scale infrastructure. Suburban areas – abolish Euclidean zoning, European-style grid streets, buses, local light rail services. Inter-city transit – high-speed rail. Smaller villages and towns – regional rail. It’s an issue that most of the developed world has solved.
Public transit is not supposed to replace cars altogether, but give people another choice. A transit system that is built well, operated well, and cheap, will reduce the reliance on cars, and make the streets safer for people or services that have to use cars.
Public transport can, and does work in rural areas too.
“most of the surrounding villages”
I live on a 40mph road with no sidewalk or shoulder. That is connected to a 45mph road with no sidewalk or shoulder. My nearest bus stop is 3.2 miles away.
I’m not even that far out, I can drive to a major city downtown in 30 minutes.
That’s great that you have all this infrastructure around you, but not everyone does. Like you said, a lack of perspective is not an excuse.
That’s not out of necessity. It’s a design decision. You could have one nearby with the right elected officials and public effort. You also chose where to live, with the ability to know where existing stops are. If you chose the live away from a bus stop or other public transport then that’s on you.
So fuck everyone who can’t afford to, or doesn’t want to, live in the city?
I can, do, and will vote for officials that want to expand public transit. I also appreciate other efforts being taken, because I don’t let perfect be the enemy of the good, and I recognize that no one solution works for everyone.
So fuck everyone who can’t afford to, or doesn’t want to, live in the city?
What the hell? Were did you pull that from my comment?
We need to work to improve public transport everywhere. Switzerland can have timely consistent trains to tiny villages in the fucking alps. We can have it here. We need to push for it though.
People saying “it doesn’t work for me right now so shut up” are actively harmful to the discussion. They’re choosing to be in a position where it doesn’t work at all (though it doesn’t work well for almost anyone in America outside of DC and NYC). I’m not saying “fuck them” I’m saying “your opinion is not relevant if it’s only complaining about doing better because it’s bad for you right now.”
Its like saying we shouldn’t go to the moon because it’s hard right now, or we shouldn’t try to develop nuclear fusion technology because it’s hard right now. I don’t care if it’s hard right now. We’re discussing what could/should be.
Here’s a summary of this thread:
Guy 1 - why is anyone doing waymo when there’s public transit
Guy 2 - last mile problem
Guy 3 - it works great for me in the city surrounded by bus stops, no last mile problem
Me - it doesn’t work great for me barely outside the city. (My point being that it’ll take a lot to get public transit to within 1 mile of where I am, let alone to someone even further from the city)
You - that’s your own fault so stop complaining
Me - so fuck me and everyone farther out than me apparently.
That’s how we got here. I simply stated my situation as it relates to public transit, and you tell me it’s just my own fault and I should shut up.
We have a long way to go to get ubiquitous public transit in America. I doubt we will ever get there. It makes sense to consider other options as well.
I’m saying we should go to the moon AND develop nuclear fusion.
You want to know what’s harmful to discussion? Pricks like you telling people that their opinion is irrelevant.
Public transport (with acceptable intervals) is only (practically) feasible in densely populated areas, like cities and maybe the immediate surroundings. There’s no chance every tiny village in the middle of bumfuck nowhere is gonna have even a resemblance of acceptable public transport. You’d need a driver to drive around all day where most trips are completely or mostly empty.
It’s better to have a few self driving cars that are safer than everyone owning their own car. It’s like getting gas guzzling vehicles off the road: better to replace a humvee with a sedan than a sedan with an electric.
Good thing we basically got rid of sedans in favor of “light truck” SUVs…
ROFL ya because taking 5 separate buses to get to work is TOTALLY going to encourage people to get rid of their cars.
Fucking brilliant.
Oh ya and I TOTALLY want to give up my car just so I can be forced to sit next to rude assholes coughing in my face.
These brilliant suggestions are amazing.
Jesus. Ten of the hottest years ever recorded were the last ten. Its time for some major changes. If more people rode public transport it would be better.
All your objections seem to be about how inconvenient it would be for you. Sound kinda self-centered. Act like the only way to get by is to continue to conspicuously consume everything. Get a fuckin grip.
Edited with less profanity and name calling
Fella it isn’t me you need to convince. It’s the billions of other people on the planet you need to convince.
If you think you can force the entire world then by all means and try.
And also clearly you. As you seem to have decided you won’t participate until every single one of the other billions do.
Pretty much. I’m not trashing my life and living in the slums while the rest of the world doesn’t care.
If the world wants more from me then they can step up too.
You do realize that if we invest in more mass transit, then the people who want to take the bus will. That means fewer cars on the road and less traffic that you have to deal with. If you like driving your car and the freedom it gives you, advocating for more mass transit is in your favor. Imagine your commute with 90% less traffic. Doesn’t that sound appealing to you? Dedicated bus lanes that keep the slow busses out of your lane, doesn’t that sound appealing to you? I don’t know about you, but I love driving, and to me, that sounds like an absolute win
5 separate buses
Holy hyperbole, Batman!
To get to work 25 miles away, it takes 2 trains (commuter and light rail) and a bus. I personally don’t take transit though, not because of the other passengers, but because of how infrequent those lines run, which turns what should be an hour commute into two, each way.
I have zero problem with transit and I actually alternated between cycling and the bus to my last job based on weather, which took a out 40 min regardless of method of transport (about 10 miles away, two buses).
I can get to most popular destinations in my area with about 3 transfers, and the most popular ones would be one transfer (commuter train to light rail). The main limiting factor is ridership and feeder lines. I even have a rail line that goes right through my suburban city (and a bunch of others) that connects to light rail lines, but that extension keeps getting delayed. If they built the line, it would shave an hour off my transit commute and connect me to multiple destinations (two pro stadiums and downtown), but no, we get wider highways instead, and still have terrible traffic (sometimes it’s slower than the 2 trains + bus that takes 2 hours).
Frankly the best solution i have seen is always a combination of things. At least in the city I live in, people can take bikes on buses and trains, many people walk, and for trips that require trunk space (e.g furniture, DIY supplies etc) there is a Car sharing service that is cheaper than owning a car, or using ride share / taxi.
I don’t think waymo is a better option than a combination of what’s above, I think it can perhaps compliment it but it should not be the sole last-kilometre solution.
I would like to see waymo-like tech provide better public transit for the disabled. As of now, people in my city with disabilities can book special routes which are serviced by specialized buses/ taxis, and existing lines are all wheelchair accessible as well.
Self driving cars give the opportunity for those people to have even more freedom in booking, since as of now they can’t do last minute booking for the custom routes. It wouldn’t really create a traffic problem and massively would increase quality of life for those who are sadly disadvantages in society
people in america don’t want to ride with public transport because they’re incredibly isolationistic and have a fear of other human beings; so they prefer to drive within “their own 4 walls”, in their own chassis. It’s really about psychology much more than practical feasibility.
Why are we still doing this?
Because there’s a lot of money in it. 10.3% of the US workforce works in transportation and warehousing. Trucking alone is the #4 spot in that sector (1.2 million jobs in heavy trucks and trailers). Couriers and delivery also ranks highly.
The self-driving vehicles are targeting whole markets and the value of the industry is hard to underestimate. And yes, even transit is being targeted (and being implemented; see South Korea’s A21 line). There’s a lot of crossover with trucking and buses, not to mention that 42% of transit drivers are 55+ in age. Hiring for metro drivers is insanely hard right now.
Taking waymo’s numbers at face value they are almost 20x more dangerous than a professional truck driver in the EU. This is a personal convenience thing for wealthy people, that’s it. Fucking over jarvis and Mahmood so we can have fleets of automated ubers…
It’s nonsensical to compare protected highway miles with surface city street miles.
Uber had a net income of 9.86 billion dollars and spent 7.14 billion in operations in 2024. That’s a single transportation company. Do you really think Uber or anyone else is going to ignore researching the technology that could significantly reduce their billions in operations costs?
I’m also not so sure that Europe is 20x safer than the US. A quick search pulled up the International Transport Form’s Road Safety Annual Report 2023 and their data disagrees. The US, even with its really poor showing in the general numbers, is safer than Poland and Czechia (Road fatalities per billion vehicle‑kilometres, 2021). I could see an argument for a 2x gap of Europe outdoing the US, but a 20x? Citation needed.
They’re not saying general road safety is 20x better. They’re comparing an automated car ONLY on surface streets with lights, intersections, pedestrians, dogs, left turns, etc… to a professional truck driver mostly on highway miles.
That’s fair. Comparing regular drivers doing typical city trips to commercial big rigs is a bit apples-and-oranges. I wonder how CDL data would compare when the self-driving semi-trucks start putting on miles. Aurora is about to launch in that exact space.
I’m honestly more scared of that. Professional CDL drivers are WAY better at driving than other people. But their trucks are way more dangerous and harder to handle. So putting driverless tech in that is going to be harder and more dangerous.
So we can have autonomous metros, buses and taxis that allow people anywhere when they need it so they don’t rely on having a car?
There’s already an autonomous metro.
Now let’s do intercity trains and tramways then
Where? I haven’t heard of any rail lines that don’t have a human operator onboard or somewhere in the loop?
i.e. Every single line in Copenhagen.
Budapest line M4 is fully automated, stations have some personnel but otherwise you can get on a train and look out straight ahead through the window, there is no cab.
Trains drive themselves, but I imagine there must be some switchboard type of thing somewhere.
I was on the newly opened Thessaloniki (Greece) subway line and it was autonomous.
Why sell $2 light rail fares when you can sell $40 Waymo fares? Now you’re thinking with capitalism!
deleted by creator
This would be more impressive if Waymos were fully self-driving. They aren’t. They depend on remote “navigators” to make many of their most critical decisions. Those “navigators” may or may not be directly controlling the car, but things do not work without them.
When we have automated cars that do not actually rely on human being we will have something to talk about.
It’s also worth noting that the human “navigators” are almost always poorly paid workers in third-world countries. The system will only scale if there are enough desperate poor people. Otherwise it quickly become too expensive.
@Curious_Canid @vegeta this is the case for the Amazon “just walk out” shops as well. Like Waymo they frame it as the humans “just doing the hard part” but who knows what “annotating” means in this context? And notably it’s clearly more expensive to run than they thought as they’ve decided to do Dash Carts instead which looks like it’s basically a portable self-service checkout. The customer does the checking. https://www.theverge.com/2024/4/17/24133029/amazon-just-walk-out-cashierless-ai-india
Back when I was a fabricator I made some of the critical components used in Amazon stores. Amazon was incredibly particular about every little detail, even on parts that didn’t call for tight tolerancing in any conceivable way. They, on several occasions, sent us one bad set of prints after another. Which we could only discover after completing a run of parts. We’re talking 20-30 thousand units that ended up being scrapped because of their shitty prints. Millions of dollars set on fire, basically.
They became such a huge pain in the ass to work with we eliminated every single SKU they ordered from us.
@SippyCup I have never heard a single good thing from anyone who works with or for them.
Ordering components with unnecessarily small tolerances is stupid and a waste of money but of course they will complain if you can’t make the parts to the specifications.
Why did you even take the order in the first place if you can’t manage to produce them to spec?
of course they will complain if you can’t make the parts to the specifications.
Why did you even take the order in the first place if you can’t manage to produce them to spec?
Where did they say anything about not being able to make the parts to spec?
Why did you even take the order in the first place if you can’t manage to produce them to spec?
They were made to spec, but the specs were wrong.
We produced everything to spec and on time, thanks.
Yeah we managed to just put the slave workers behind a further layer of obfuscation. Not just relegated to their own quarters or part of town but to a different city altogether or even continent.
Tech dreams have become about a complete lack of humanity.
I saw an article recently, I should remember where, about how modern “tech” seems to be focused on how to insert a profit-taking element between two existing components of a system that already works just fine without it.
That’s called “rent-seeking behavior,” and it’s not new
Was it The Enshittification?
The system will only scale if there are enough desperate poor people. Otherwise it quickly become too expensive.
You can also get MMORPG players to do it for pennies per hour for in-game currency or membership. RuneScape players would gladly control 5 ‘autonomous’ cars if it meant that they could level up their farming level for free.
The game is basically designed to be an incredibly time consuming skinner box that takes minimal skill and effort in order to maximize membership fees.
“Damn, I’m sorry my car killed your kids. The Carscape person didn’t get their drop”
The human operators are there for when the AI gets softlocked in a situation where it doesn’t know what to do and just sits there, not for regular driving.
Packaging the job as a video game side quest is genius. Make so the gamer has to do several simulated runs before they connect to an actual car, and give in-game expensive consequences for messing it up
It doesn’t even need to be a side quest, just a second screen activity lol
They’ll do it for pennies an hour for 12 hours a day.
Could a navigator run you over twice from different companies after they get fired from the first one?
If they have to do it a second time, they aren’t very good at it.
God, I hope so.
Sequel to snowcrash right there
I thought the human operators only step in when the emergency button is pressed or when the car gets stuck?
Do they actually get driven by people in normal operation?
The claim is that the remote operators do not actually drive the cars. However, they do routinely “assist” the system, not just step in when there’s an emergency.
I think they’ve got 1 person watching dozens of cars though, it’s not 1 per car like if there was human drivers.
Has anyone found the places where the navigators work to see how it goes? Has a navigator shared their experience on the web somewhere?
I am very curious as to what they are asked to do and for how many cars And for how much money
i knew it that AI is just some guy in india responding to my queries.
AI - Actually Indian
Considering the sort of driving issues and code violations I see on a daily basis, the standards for human drivers need raising. The issue is more lax humans than it is amazing robots.
it’s hard to change humans. It’s easy to roll out a firmware update.
Raising the standards would result in 20-50% of the worst drivers being forced to do something else. If our infrastructure wasn’t so car-centric, that would be perfectly fine.
:Looks at entire midwest and southern usa:
The bar is so low in these regions you need diamond drilling bits to go lower.
What’s a zipper merge?
Screams in Midwestern
I have spent many years in both the midwest and the south.
In some areas of the south, people drive extremely aggressively and there are lots of issues with compliance to various traffic laws but it is usually not difficult to get over if you need to. People will let you in. The zipper merge is a well-honed machine and almost everyone uses it and obeys it.
In the midwest, drivers tend to me more docile, cautious, and lawful overall but have an extreme sense of entitlement over their place in line. “How dare that person use that completely empty lane to get ahead of me! Can they not see there is a line!” They will absolutely not let you in. It does not matter if the zipper merge would improve traffic flow. It just is not going to happen.
“You don’t have to be faster than the bear, you just have to be faster than the other guy”
I am once again begging journalists to be more critical
of tech companies.But as this happens, it’s crucial to keep the denominator in mind. Since 2020, Waymo has reported roughly 60 crashes serious enough to trigger an airbag or cause an injury. But those crashes occurred over more than 50 million miles of driverless operations. If you randomly selected 50 million miles of human driving—that’s roughly 70 lifetimes behind the wheel—you would likely see far more serious crashes than Waymo has experienced to date.
[…] Waymo knows exactly how many times its vehicles have crashed. What’s tricky is figuring out the appropriate human baseline, since human drivers don’t necessarily report every crash. Waymo has tried to address this by estimating human crash rates in its two biggest markets—Phoenix and San Francisco. Waymo’s analysis focused on the 44 million miles Waymo had driven in these cities through December, ignoring its smaller operations in Los Angeles and Austin.
This is the wrong comparison. These are taxis, which means they’re driving taxi miles. They should be compared to taxis, not normal people who drive almost exclusively during their commutes (which is probably the most dangerous time to drive since it’s precisely when they’re all driving).
We also need to know how often Waymo intervenes in the supposedly autonomous operations. The latest we have from this, which was leaked a while back, is that Cruise (different company) cars are actually less autonomous than taxis, and require >1 employee per car.
edit: The leaked data on human interventions was from Cruise, not Waymo. I’m open to self-driving cars being safer than humans, but I don’t believe a fucking word from tech companies until there’s been an independent audit with full access to their facilities and data. So long as we rely on Waymo’s own publishing without knowing how the sausage is made, they can spin their data however they want.
edit2: Updated to say that ournalists should be more critical in general, not just about tech companies.
Journalist aren’t even critical of police press releases anymore, most simply print whatever they’re told verbatim. It may as well just be advertisement.
I agree with you so strongly that I went ahead and updated my comment. The problem is general and out of control. Orwell said it best: “Journalism is printing something that someone does not want printed. Everything else is public relations.”
The meat of the true issue right here. Journalism and investigative journalism aren’t just dead, their corpses has been feeding a palm tree like a pod of beached whales for decades. It’s a bizarre state of affairs to read news coverage and come out the other side less informed, without reading literal disinformation. It somehow seems so much worse that they’re not just off-target, but that they don’t even understand why or how they’re fucking it up.
I was going to say they should only be comparing them under the same driving areas, since I know they aren’t allowed in many areas.
But you’re right, it’s even tighter than that.
These articles frustrate the shit out of me. They accept both the company’s own framing and its selectively-released data at face value. If you get to pick your own framing and selectively release the data that suits you, you can justify anything.
@[email protected] @[email protected]
to amplify the previous point, taps the sign as Joseph Weizenbaum turns over in his graveA computer can never be held accountable
Therefore a computer must never make a management decision
tl;dr A driverless car cannot possibly be “better” at driving than a human driver. The comparison is a category error and therefore nonsensical; it’s also a distraction from important questions of morality and justice. More below.
Numerically, it may some day be the case that driverless cars have fewer wrecks than cars driven by people.(1) Even so, it will never be the case that when a driverless car hits and kills a child the moral situation will be the same as when a human driver hits and kills a child. In the former case the liability for the death would be absorbed into a vast system of amoral actors with no individuals standing out as responsible. In effect we’d amortize and therefore minimize death with such a structure, making it sociopathic by nature and thereby adding another dimension of injustice to every community where it’s deployed.(2) Obviously we’ve continually done exactly this kind of thing since the rise of modern technological life, but it’s been sociopathic every time and we all suffer for it despite rampant narratives about “progress” etc.
It will also never be the case that a driverless car can exercise the judgment humans have to decide whether one risk is more acceptable than another, and then be held to account for the consequences of their choice. This matters.
Please (re-re-)read Weizenbaum’s book if you don’t understand why I can state these things with such unqualified confidence.
Basically, we all know damn well that whenever driverless cars show some kind of numerical superiority to human drivers (3) and become widespread, every time one kills, let alone injures, a person no one will be held to account for it. Companies are angling to indemnify themselves from such liability, and even if they accept some of it no one is going to prison on a manslaughter charge if a driverless car kills a person. At that point it’s much more likely to be treated as an unavoidable act of nature no matter how hard the victim’s loved ones reject that framing. How high a body count do our capitalist systems need to register before we all internalize this basic fact of how they operate and stop apologizing for it?
(1) Pop quiz! Which seedy robber baron has been loudly claiming for decades now that full self driving is only a few years away, and depends on people believing in that fantasy for at least part of his fortune? We should all read Wrong Way by Joanne McNeil to see the more likely trajectory of “driverless” or “self-driving” cars.
(2) Knowing this, it is irresponsible to put these vehicles on the road, or for people with decision-making power to allow them on the road, until this new form of risk is understood and accepted by the community. Otherwise you’re forcing a community to suffer a new form of risk without consent and without even a mitigation plan, let alone a plan to compensate or otherwise make them whole for their new form of loss.
(3) Incidentally, quantifying aspects of life and then using the numbers, instead of human judgement, to make decisions was a favorite mission of eugenicists, who stridently pushed statistics as the “right” way to reason to further their eugenic causes. Long before Zuckerberg’s hot or not experiment turned into Facebook, eugenicist Francis Galton was creeping around the neighborhoods of London with a clicker hidden in his pocket counting the “attractive” women in each, to identify “good” and “bad” breeding and inform decisions about who was “deserving” of a good life and who was not. Old habits die hard.Honestly I should just get that slide tattooed to my forehead next to a QR code to Weizenbaum’s book. It’d save me a lot of talking!
So let me make sure I understand your argument. Because nobody can be held liable for one hypothetical death of a child when an accident happens with a self driving car, we should ban them so that hundreds of real children can be killed instead. Is that what you are saying?
As far as I know of, Waymo has only been involved in one fatality. The Waymo was sitting still at a red light in traffic when a speeding SUV (according to reports going at extreme rate of speed) rammed it from behind into other cars. The SUV then continued into traffic where it struck more cars, eventually killing someone. That’s the only fatal accident Waymo has been involved in after 50 million miles of driving. But instead of making it safer for children, you would prefer more kids die just so you have someone to blame?
So let me make sure I understand your argument. Because nobody can be held liable for one hypothetical death of a child when an accident happens with a self driving car, we should ban them so that hundreds of real children can be killed instead. Is that what you are saying?
No, this strawman is obviously not my argument. It’s curious you’re asking whether you understand, and then opining afterwards, rather than waiting for the clarification you suggest you’re seeking. When someone responds to a no-brainer suggestion, grounded in skepticism but perfectly sensible nevertheless, with a strawman seemingly crafted to discredit it, one has to wonder if that someone is writing in good faith. Are you?
For anyone who is reading in good faith: we’re clearly not talking about one hypothetical death, since more than one real death involving driverless car technology has already occurred, and there is no doubt there will be more in the future given the nature of conducting a several-ton hunk of metal across public roads at speed.
It should go without saying that hypothetical auto wreck fatalities occurring prior to the deployment of technology are not the fault of everyone who delayed the deployment of that technology, meaning in particular that these hypothetical deaths do not justify hastening deployment. This is a false conflation regardless of how many times Marc Andreesen and his apostles preach variations of it.
Finally “ban”, or any other policy prescription for that matter, appeared nowhere in my post. That’s the invention of this strawman’s author (you can judge for yourself what the purpose of such an invention might be). What I urge is honestly attending to the serious and deadly important moral and justice questions surrounding the deployment of this class of technology before it is fully unleashed on the world, not after. Unless one is so full up with the holy fervor of technoutopianism that one’s rationality has taken leave, this should read as an anodyne and reasonable suggestion.
I was asking in good faith because the way you talk is not easily comprehensible. I can barely follow whatever argument you are trying to make. I think you are trying to say that we shouldn’t allow them on the road until we have fully decided who is at fault in an accident?
Also, only one death has occurred so far involving driverless cars, which is where a speeding SUV rammed into a stopped driverless car and then the SUV continued on and hit 5 other cars where it killed someone. That’s it. The only death involved a driverless car sitting still, not moving, not doing anything… and it wasn’t even the car that hit the car in which the person died. So I would say it is hypothetical when talking about hypothetical deaths that are the fault of a driverless car.
Ah yes I’m supposed to believe an ars technica writer and a bunch of papers written by waymo itself as opposed to actual peer-reviewed studies by actual independant experts
We always knew good quality self-driving tech would vastly outperform human skill. It’s nice to see some decent metrics!
My drive to work is 8 minutes. This morning i almost had a crash because a guy ran a stop sigh. I don’t think the bar is very high at this point.
That’s the beauty of it - we’ve only just begun to improve the situation. It’s going to get better and better until eventually traffic accidents are a rarity.
deleted by creator
Indeed
“After 6 miles, Teslas crash a lot more than human drivers.”
So only drive 5 miles. I guess that’s good advice in general
I hate felon musk but I honestly believe their self driving tech is safer than humans.
Have you seen the average human? They’re beyond dumb. If they’re in cars it’s like the majority of htem are just staring at their cell phones.
I don’t think self driving tech works in all circumstances, but I bet it is already much better than humans at most driving, especially highway driving.
I think the fair comparison would be humans that drive legally.
Idiots that drive high or drunk or without prescription glasses or whatever, shouldn’t count as “normal” human driving.
In the same way a self driving car can have issues that will make it illegal.The problem is that legal self driving Tesla is not as safe as a legal person. I sees poorly at night, it gets confused in situations people handle routinely. And Tesla is infamous for not stopping when the road is blocked from 1m and up, and for breaking without reason. I’ve seen videos where they demonstrated an unnecessary break every ½ hour!! Where a large part was the German Autobahn, which is probably some of the easiest driving in the world!!
I think the fair comparison would be humans that drive legally.
Humans don’t drive legally. I don’t believe for a second there is a human on this planet who has never violated a rule of the road. The easy default is that we all speed.
Who hasn’t done a rolling stop at a stop sign? Taken a turn they legally shouldn’t have? (No U turns? lol) Taken a right on red when it says not to but there’s literally nobody around?
Cell phones are mostly illegal everywhere while driving and if you look around almost everyone is staring at them.
This mythical person who never, ever does anything against the rules is impossible.
And Tesla is infamous … for breaking without reason.
No notes!
We discussed the test here on Lemmy a few days ago. It was a German 6 hour test.
I can’t find the video that was debated, but you can’t be serious about not knowing about this issue?!?!?
It’s a years old issue that is still not fixed!!! It’s commonly known as Phantom breaking. AKA breaking without reason.https://www.carscoops.com/2025/02/german-court-finds-teslas-autopilot-defective-after-lawsuit/
The way I edited the quote, it was just a like joke about braking vs breaking.
Like I could make a pedantic reply about spelling, but no teslas in fact brake unexpectedly AND break unexpectedly. So, no notes!
Ah OK didn’t notice that. English is 2nd language.
No worries. I’m glad I explained it then!
The first thing that comes to mind for popular media using “no notes” the way I did is probably John Oliver. I spent 10 seconds stacking for a clip or a montage of him saying it but came up empty.
Bro I saw a video of their car drive through a wall and hand the controls back to the driver. No, it absolutely is not.
When was the last time you saw a “wall” erected on a freeway that was perfectly painted to mimic the current time of day, road, weather, etc. I’m not talking about for that example, i’m talking about in the real world.
The answer is never.
Yes, the optical sensors are fooled by an elaborate ruse that doesn’t exist in real world operating conditions on a highway.
I still argue that for most normal driving circumstances, it is massively safer than humans who malfunction constantly.
I will never, ever buy a tesla so long as felon musk has any ownership in it whatsoever. The guy is irredeemable. Still have way more faith in self driving tech overall (industry wide) than human drivers though. That’s the work of engineers, not an asshole.
Human drivers have an extremely long tail of idiocy. Most people are good (or at least appropriately cautious) drivers, but there is a very small percentage of people who are extremely aggressive and reckless. The fact that self driving tech is never emotional, reckless or impaired pretty much guarantees that it will always statistically beat humans, even in somewhat basic forms.
It’s all about the whole dunning-kruger effect where most just know nothing despite thinking otherwise, right?
I honestly believe their self driving tech is safer than humans.
That’s how it should be. Unfortunately, one of the main decision maker on tesla’s self driving software is doing their best to make it perform worse and worse every time it gets an update.
Your username is a lie huh?
Unprofessional human drivers (yes, even you) are unbelievably bad at driving, it’s only a matter of time, but call me when you can do it without just moving labor done by decently paid locals to labor done remotely in the third world.
Are you talking about remote controlling cars from India or something?
That last sentence makes very little sense to me.How is that relevant? I’m pretty sure the latency would be too high, so it wouldn’t even work.
Ah OK you are talking about the navigators, that “help” the car when it can’t figure out what to do.
That’s a fair point.But still 1 navigator can probably handle many cars. So from the perspective of making a self driving taxi, it makes sense.
Thanks, but I am not, others on the road however, abysmal.
I find the scariest people on the road to be the arrogant ones that think they make no mistakes.
I would t consider anyone who hasn’t done at least a dozen track days, experienced several different extreme scenarios (over/under steer, looping, wet grass at speed, airtime (or at least one or more wheels off the ground), high speed swerving, snap oversteer, losing systems, like brakes, engine, or the steering wheel lock engaging, etc) to be remotely prepared to handle a car going more than 25 or so mph. An extreme minority of drivers are actually prepared to handle an incoming collision in order to fully mitigate a situation. And that is only covering the mechanical skill of piloting the car, it doesn’t even touch in the theoretical and practical knowledge (rules of the road, including obscure and unenforced rules) and it definitely doesn’t even broach the discipline that is required to actually put it all together.
If you a driver has never been trained, or even have an understanding of what will happen in an extreme scenario in a car, how could we consider them trained or sufficiently skilled.
We don’t let pilots fly without spending time in a simulator, going over emergency scenarios and being prepared for when things go sideways. You can’t become an airline pilot if you don’t know what happens when you lose power.
We let sub par people drive because restricting it too much would be seen as discrimination, but the overwhelming majority of people are ill equipped to actually drive.
I hope this is a copy pasta lmao, if you actually go to a training course where you learn to handle oversteer, understeer and spin you out, they tell you that you have about a fuck all chance of recovering, even when there when you have warning and you know it’s coming and you have a fairly low speed you have very little chance of counter steering correctly.
Here is what you actually have to do to drive safely:
1, dont be a dumbass that thinks you need to go through 12 years of Formula 1 training to drive on the road, if anything the fact that you think training can make you prepared for extreme situations and that you can handle it is what’s arrogant and dangerous.
2, dont be a dumbass and adjust your speed to driving conditions
3 dont be a dumbass and don’t push the limits of your car on public roads
4, defensive driving, assume people on the road are idiots and will fuck up and drive accordingly.
5, learn how your car works, eg. just because you have an e-Handbrake you can still pull on it and it will stop the car
6, and most important, because people don’t know how to do it, learn to emergency break, meaning your hazard lights come on.
I completely disagree.
You are using the hand brake as an example. 95 percent of people (including you, evidently) don’t even understand that the handbrake is not an emergency brake, they don’t get how the behavior works, or the fact that it’s meant to be used as a parking brake, I consistently see people slam their parking pawls verytime they get out of their car. (Not to mention that it doesn’t even work while you are driving on most modern cars and has no modulation, as it’s just a button)
If not being an idiot was good enough to drive a car, then it wouldn’t be so deadly. It’s also possible to fly a plane with common sense, but you wouldn’t be happy if your pilot told you they don’t have training.
Driving isn’t easy, it’s just that we accept an absolutely catastrophic amount of accidents as a cost of doing business.
It is an emergency brake when your brake fails, you donut. Again, it’s part of safety driving courses, that you clearly didn’t take.
I am also from Europe, drivers are much better here compared to the US, just because your country absolutely sucks at training it’s drivers despite being entirely reliant on them is not my fault
But when it does crash, will Google accept the liability?
Probably depends who is at fault. I also would be that Google has insurance for this sort of thing.
They both own and operate the car. Even if it was a manned taxi, they’d be liable.
They consult Gemini. If it gives a cogent answer, they consider it a “yes”. So, no.
I used to hate them for being slow and annoying. Now they drive like us and I hate them for being dicks. This morning, one of them made an insane move that only the worst Audi drivers in my area do, a massive left over a solid yellow across no stop sign with me coming right at it before it even began acceleration into the intersection.
No shit. The bar is low. Humans suck at driving. People love to throw FUD at automated driving, and it’s far from perfect, but the more we delay adoption the more lives are lost. Anti-automation on the roads is up there with anti-vaccine mentality in my mind. Fear and the incorrect assumption that “I’m not the problem, I’m a really good driver,” mentality will inevitably delay automation unnecessarily for years.
It’d probably be better to put a lot of the R&D money into improving and reinforcing public transport systems. Taking cars off the road and separating cars from pedestrians makes a bigger difference than automating driving.
In my country at least (US) that’s just not going to happen.
WVU has a tram system called the “PRT”. It’s semi-automated cars on a track around campus and downtown. It’s not great, but goddamn does it handle a large school population just fine. Very high throughput, and it keeps congestion down. … as down as you can be with such a high density town.
That, and the inevitable bureaucratic nightmare that awaits for standardising across makes and updating the infrastructure.
Car infrastructure was a mistake. Automation isn’t the solution, it’s less cars and car-based spaces.
Why not both? We can automate the trains (more), the busses, and the occasional rural drive.
Sure that’s great, but read the room. It’s like advocating for gun legislation in the US, it can only go so far realistically. The vast majority of US cities are built around automotive infrastructure and the culture is very much anti-public transport. That requires heavy government level buy in. Car automation can be driven primarily by industry. One can happen in a major way in a few years, the other will take decades if it happens at all. Personally I’m all for it, but it’s such a different discussion that it just comes across as distracting when talking about very real delays in car automation and it’s not a valid criticism of moving forward and promoting decreased barriers to fully automated vehicle infrastructure.
The rural drive is the fun one, though…
Automation also can be abused, which I’m very very cautious about.
As a techno-optimist, I always expected self-driving to quickly become safer than human, at least in relatively controlled situations. However I’m at least as much a pessimist of human nature and the legal system.
Given self-driving vehicles demonstrably safer than human, but not perfect, how can we get beyond humans taking advantage, and massive liability for the remaining accidents?
