Comment by slimsag | Hacker News Reader

Comment by slimsag | Hacker News Reader

I really like Waymo, and compared to Uber/Lyft the experience is just strictly higher quality. The ride is smoother, the cars have a consistent quality, the driver is consistent, you get the car to yourself, etc.

However, I have three major complaints.

a. In Phoenix, where Waymo has been operating for nearly 4 years, I can still only visit a third of the city[1] - I can't take a Waymo to my dentist, to the vet, etc. and these are places that are <15 minutes from the city center.

b. Waymo doesn't go on highways, only backstreets, so trips take 2x longer - and takes you through some sketchy alleyways and streets.

c. For some damn reason they refuse to let you connect to the car's speakers using Bluetooth or Airplay. Instead, you need to download the Google app, then use voice input to 'hey Google, play <xyz>' - and argue with the AI to play some music. Then it can't play music from your Apple Music or local files, because they only integrate with Google's music provider and Spotify or whatever. It's terrible and the worst music experience you could have for Apple users.

Hopefully they address some of these with their new platform.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40756191

I don't know why, but I find it fascinating that, here's this relatively brand new technology that we're still ironing out a shitload of kinks in, yet options A and B are "complaints".

I dunno, if I step back and look at it through the lens of, say, the year 2000 or even earlier, it's pretty neat that we're even at this stage already.

We can put on different hats, one for consumers and the other for technologists. As technologists the future is looking very exciting. As consumers we are right to judge products relative to the competition.

Forgive my ignorance, but... what competition? As far as I'm aware, the only robotaxi company offering rides to the public at this time is Waymo.

In the mind of the consumer, all conventional transportation is on the table for discussion, including Uber & Lyft at often lower prices. The customer is not an investor narrowing in on the self driving taxi space.

Of course it's natural for the customer to wonder why Waymo can't go on the highway. Of course it's natural for the customer to feel frustrated at the limitations of service area.

Then it's ignorance on the part of the customer - they're griping that, "This round fruit doesn't taste like this other round fruit," without realizing they're comparing apples and oranges. Just because the customer perceives them to be "the same thing" doesn't mean that they are, nor does it magically make it OK to compare the two.

Edit: And with regard to this specific comment chain, OP almost certainly knows the difference between the two.

The customer is trying to solve a problem. Uber and Lyft are absolutely on the table for discussion.

Also, the limitations discussed above are not inherent to self driving. We have good reason to expect eventual parity or even general superiority to conventional taxis. This is not an apple and orange comparison. If Waymo brings their prices down and can take highway routes, Uber and Lyft will experience serious existential crisis unless they can innovate hard.

If Waymo brings their price down and can take better routes, customers will also wonder why even choose Uber or Lyft, and it won't be due to ignorance that they make this vice versa comparison.

>The customer is trying to solve a problem.

The customer is trying to solve a problem by signing up for something that is, essentially, a beta program and complaining that it's not capable of doing things that a non-beta program with ostensibly different functionality, and different federal/state regulations, is capable of doing.

>Also, the limitations discussed above are not inherent to self driving. We have good reason to expect eventual parity or even general superiority to conventional taxis.

... that's great and all, but "eventual" is doing some heavy lifting there, to the point where I just want to go, "... so?". You then follow it up with a strong "If" statement and talk more about a potential future state. Right now, they are functionally different products even though the customer need they're trying to service is the same. That is an apples/oranges comparison - apples and oranges both provide sustenance and nutrition (read: getting a car-less individual from point A to point B), but the experience of eating them (read: riding Uber vs Waymo) is different from one another.

>The existence of apples does not put oranges into existential crisis.

It's at this point that I'm starting to get the suspicion that you're taking my comments a bit further than I've intended them to be taken. I've made no argument about the long-term existence of Waymo here, just a quick observation about how it's odd to "complain" about brand new technology that is still being ironed out.

>If Waymo brings their price down and can take better routes, customers will also wonder why even choose Uber or Lyft, and it won't be due to ignorance that they make this vice versa comparison.

Again, "if" something happens in the future. I'm talking about current state.

Maybe in the US. There are a number of companies offering robotaxi rides to the public in China.

Hedonic adaptation is one hell of a drug. It's the same with generative AI too, humans (in general) quickly adapt to novel technologies and paradigms.

Agreed on all three points!

1 and 2 I know they’re working on, and 3 hopefully this gets it on their radar!

Hello, i sent email to you j o s h s...@gmail.com. can you check it? Mtgox and BB user. Thank you so much

In January Waymo began testing on highways in Phoenix.

I wonder if C is a security thing.

c is them trying to get you to buy YT premium

Reply on news.ycombinator.com