-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Waymo
- Thread starter Daniel in SD
- Start date
EVNow
Well-Known Member
Waymo shills should address all the concerns raised in this letter by San Francisco Against Waymo.
Why? This is not a fact/science/technical document. It's a political statement based on the fear of loss of jobs et.c. Waymo will counter it. They are already stepping up their PR activities there.
But let's assume everything they say is true, you need to accept some tradeoffs in the short term to get to driverless.
Like @Dewg said, "If we stopped the space program when a rocket exploded on the launch pad, or a shuttle exploded on take-off, we'd be nowhere near where we are today with technology."
Last edited:
I'm sorry for the dogs, but this is just too funny.
Waymo kills dog that comes out from behind occluded area: @EVNow says "Ban Waymo"
Human driven Tesla L2 kills dog that is visible for almost three full seconds without the car reacting: @EVNow says "It's the driver's fault" with 'irony'.
Yet Tesla FSD is more or less ahead of Waymo? Yeah... Riiiight?
bkp_duke
Well-Known Member
SF wants to keep from losing jobs, they should focus cleaning up the city, not harass Waymo and others.
My visit 2 months ago, there was
on every other block and the homeless were everywhere. Not exactly good for business.Nice interview with Waymo Co-CEO Tekedra Mawakana
On with Kara Swisher: Look Ma, No Hands! With Waymo Co-CEO Tekedra Mawakana on Apple Podcasts
Show On with Kara Swisher, Ep Look Ma, No Hands! With Waymo Co-CEO Tekedra Mawakana - Jun 8, 2023
podcasts.apple.com
So way down from last year. Cool.(moderator edit: snipped the quoted post)
Some people get very antsy when TSLA goes up - wonder why
View attachment 944898
Waymo is now literally killing puppies.
Self-driving Waymo car kills dog amid increasing concern over robotaxis
Collision occurred as canine ran out from behind another car, but autonomous vehicle could not stop in time to avoid contactwww.theguardian.com
Tesla driver hits a dog, claims they were on Full Self-Driving Beta
A Tesla driver hit and killed a dog. They claimed they were driving using Full Self-Driving (FSD) Beta. Full Self-Driving...
electrek.co
And now Teslas are killing dogs. Not surprising since they can't even handle the most basic of highway lane changes, let alone suburbia.
But then because it isn't actually autonomous (actually years, if ever, away *snigger*), a human chose to kill the dog?
Just following Tesla's lead in how to be a loss making company for years.
Always helps when other divisions make billion$
How dem appreciating asset robotaxis going? Making you $30K/year?
EVNow
Well-Known Member
Yes - some people think this is just a Tesla bashing thread.
This thread is for everything Waymo - doesn't have to be only Waymo PR-approved.
Doggydogworld
Active Member
Concerns?
The horror!
OK, starting with pages 2-3:
Cruise causes problems, so let's shackle Waymo?
OBE
On page 4-5 they list additional requests for more data plus requests to prevent Waymo from operating at profitable scale and in the most profitable locations/hours. Followed by requests for workshops, protest procedures, rules committees, etc.. They close by saying more nice things about Waymo.
Pages 6-10 are divided into three Sections.
Almost all Cruise (as even they admit).
More data, more workshops, etc.
They never talk about actual Waymo problems. It's Cruise problems plus problems that Waymo could in theory cause. They want Waymo to stay tiny and non-threatening for years and provide mountains of data so SF transit can study these potential problems, hold workshops to discuss them, create rule-making committees to meet and debate them and so on.
This is what politicians and bureaucrats do. Sometimes it's helpful, but most of the time it's simply stifling.
EVNow
Well-Known Member
‘Incompetent’ driverless cars are wreaking havoc on San Francisco
As Cruise and Waymo wrestle for dominance, local transportation agencies worry the...
According to Waymo, its AVs successfully maneuver around construction zones, emergency vehicles and double-parked cars on a regular basis. If the cars don’t quite know what to do, the company wrote, they’ll stop out of an abundance of caution.
But that means “they will stop traffic” and “stop moving if there is any sort of obstruction on the road,” former San Francisco resident Rachelle Green told SFGATE. Back in December, she said, she and other drivers were trapped by a Waymo SUV that couldn’t comprehend how to move past a double-parked produce truck.
“It was quite the traffic jam, because the car was just stuck dead in the middle of this intersection right in front of the school,” Durst said. Shortly after, a man with a vest and some sort of tablet — presumably a company employee — showed up and desperately tried to untangle the mess. “He was just running around the car pressing all of these things on the tablet to get it to work, I guess, and nothing was happening,” she laughed.
Similarly, “Waymo driverless AVs have committed numerous violations that would preclude any teenager from getting a California Driver’s License,” a May 31 comment from the SFMTA reads.
Waymo traffic incidents skyrocketed to about 30 per month in March and April, according to the SFMTA comment from May.
"A Waymo driverless taxi stops on a street in San Francisco for several minutes because the back door was not completely shut, while traffic backs up behind it, on Feb. 15, 2023."
The only reason Waymo wants to operate driverless is .... to save a few monopoly bucks. Once they can safely handle routine situations that humans handle easily without blocking traffic they can go driverless. Until then they should have safety drivers.
To any independent observer - it is indisputable that Waymo can't handle routine situations without blocking traffic.
Concerns?
The horror!
OK, starting with pages 2-3:
Cruise causes problems, so let's shackle Waymo?
OBE
On page 4-5 they list additional requests for more data plus requests to prevent Waymo from operating at profitable scale and in the most profitable locations/hours. Followed by requests for workshops, protest procedures, rules committees, etc.. They close by saying more nice things about Waymo.
Pages 6-10 are divided into three Sections.
Almost all Cruise (as even they admit).
More data, more workshops, etc.
They never talk about actual Waymo problems. It's Cruise problems plus problems that Waymo could in theory cause. They want Waymo to stay tiny and non-threatening for years and provide mountains of data so SF transit can study these potential problems, hold workshops to discuss them, create rule-making committees to meet and debate them and so on.
This is what politicians and bureaucrats do. Sometimes it's helpful, but most of the time it's simply stifling.
I read it more as:
1) we see problems, we need data, and confidentiality arguments are bullshit
2) show me: prove yourselves during periods where you can't a lot of damage and then you grow
3) don't forget accessibility
Rather than a sense of them stifling Waymo, I see it more as being bitten by Cruise's problems. I'd anticipate relatively rapid expansion.
EVNow
Well-Known Member
I'm not so sure - they are simply not ready. Basically the way currently Waymo and Cruise avoid accidents is by just coming to a stop when not sure. They do not assume an appropriate minimum risk position... Like parking on the side of the road.
They are simply not ready for driverless... They need a safety driver to take care of those situations - even though the safety driver in a vehicle might be needed just once a month.
Currently the robotaxis are simply not able to do what even the below average drivers are able to do - not block traffic. Humans block traffic only when there is a car problem - not because they can't figure out how to drive.
Doggydogworld
Active Member
I didn't say no one ever talked about Waymo problems. I only addressed the specific report you demanded "Waymo shills" respond to.
SF Transit recently updated their complaints. They've graduated from complaining about potential problems to lying about actual ones. Someone checked out the four "injury collisions" they cite on page 16. Only two were in fact Waymo collisions -- one was Cruise and one a regular car (allegedly) hitting a pickup while (allegedly) trying to avoid the Waymo. In both actual collsions the Waymo was rear-ended while stopped. Once at a red turn signal and once waiting for pedestrians in a crosswalk. All three Waymo events had a safety driver -- so much for their "unsafe driverless" claim.
Mayasf on Youtube has ridden 700-800 times. She only records stuff she finds interesting, e.g. fog, construction zones, etc. Her clips regularly show Waymo handling situations that "rides on rails" cultists say it can't. Most people (with one notable exception here, lol) say it drives better than an Uber driver.
Are they too law-abiding for some people? Yes. Have they safely stopped in inconvenient locations a few times in the past 2+ million driverless miles? Yes. But they're already good enough to provide Robotaxi services, and they keep improving.
EVNow
Well-Known Member
It took me two minutes to search for the one I posted. If I spend time I can find reports of other issues.
No I don’t think Waymo is not as bad as Cruise - who clearly should lose their license- but Waymo needs to demonstrate that they can safely handle all the issues the routinely come up and not block traffic. Humans just don’t block traffic like these robotaxis do.
ps : Never seen a Uber driver get stuck like the Waymo photo shown above.
Similar threads
- Article
