Hacker News Reader

Comment by minwcnt5 | Hacker News Reader

You can open the door and get out if it's stopped. You can press the "pull over" button to have it pull over as soon as it can safely do so. You can call rider support or 911 while the doors remain locked to the outside.

I agree that it's a slightly more vulnerable feeling than driving myself, but I still feel far less vulnerable than taking public transit or walking. And when you factor in risk of a crash, it's also safer than Uber or driving myself.

I don't think Waymos will often be targeted by criminals for anything besides vandalism, with 20+ cameras and potential remote monitors the risk:reward ratio is much worse than other options.

View on HN

> when you factor in risk of a crash, it's also safer than Uber or driving myself

It’s also predictable. Uber and Lyft have been so desperate for drivers they’ve accepted people who drive dangerously, cancel at the last minute or plain can’t follow driving directions. You skip that with Waymo.

> I still feel far less vulnerable than taking public transit or walking.

This sounds incredibly dystopian. What hellhole do you live? What are the dangers you have from taking public transit?

San Francisco. I do walk and take transit all the time, but I'm a man. My wife has been chased by mentally ill people bin broad daylight. The risk to me is low, but I still make sure I'm aware of my surroundings.

I don't think this is unique to SF. Even in very safe cities there's surely a higher chance of being mugged walking down a dark street than riding in a 5000 lbs vehicle with tinted windows.

> there's surely a higher chance of being mugged walking down a dark street than riding in a 5000 lbs vehicle with tinted windows

Please account for the danger of being struck by other people riding in 5000 lb vehicles with tinted windows!

Much better to be inside of a protective steel cage if there's a chance of getting hit by a 5000 lb vehicle.

I think in the long-run robotaxis are crime heaven. It's so easy to mug people in a robotaxi, especially when they're used like autonomous busses. Public transit is largely safe because you're in public. As soon as you put people, strangers, in a private little box with no accountability all bets are off.

I think they seem good now because you're not riding with randos. Although, randos can still trivially stop the car. But this model is unsustainable, eventually you will be riding with randos.

All of over the world there are subway cars where there are randos in the subway car with no security guard or driver. Essentially an autonomous "bus" scenario. Basically the exact same scenario you're describing. But it's not that dangerous

Those work because there's more people. It's hard to coordinate, say, 20 people to rob you (one guy).

If you ride the subway at night, with almost nobody on it, you get the same effect.

So let me get this straight. Once there are lots of people it's more dangerous, but once there are no people it's simultaneously more dangerous? I'm not following the logic here

They are saying there is safety in crowds.

>It's hard to coordinate, say, 20 people to rob you (one guy).

> But this model is unsustainable, eventually you will be riding with randos.

It's unsafe when there's lots of people, it's unsafe when there's no people. Basically they're saying it's unsafe no matter what, which just isn't true. Subway systems are an everyday part of life in many cities.

I think they are saying you are safe with a crowd, and safe with no people.

They are also claiming that Waymo will have compulsory ride sharing for some reason, and therefore wont be safe (I dont agree with this part)

The situation you want to avoid on a train or car is being trapped in a shared space with only a crazy person.

I see, but that's a very contrived situation. I think in that situation you just tell the Waymo to pull over and get out. The world is not a utopia. There will always be some sort of risk to everything we do

I agree with you that it is a contrived situation. I agree with them that the danger is highest when you are isolated with an unknown stranger.

I imagine "eventually you will be riding with randos" is more likely to work like Uber and Lyft right now, where you can get a discount if you accept a "shared" ride or pay full price for a car that's just you.

It might also be that Waymo and co have decided that the additional risk involved in putting strangers in a car together without a driver to keep an eye on them isn't worth taking on.

IMO Uber and Lyft are already unsustainable, and our current transportation infrastructure has been falling rapidly behind for a couple decades. I can't foresee a future where mass transportation is achievable with ANY single person vehicles, including robotaxis.

I hear some people say this, and my first reaction is usually yours--where do they live that could justify feeling so afraid? My 12-year-old daughter rides the subway to school in NYC every day, and she doesn't feel endangered (a bit crowded perhaps). I feel safer sending her on the train with her friends than I would putting them in a car.

Are there other cities where public transit is much more dangerous? I want to give GP the benefit of the doubt, but part of me wonders if this is an irrational fear fueled by media.

I would say Oakland BART. I'm a 200 man and not particularly fearful. I couch surfed through the arab spring revolution, but I avoid that part of BART. I have like a 50% rate of hostile homeless and mentally ill people screaming and threating me. I would not send a 12 year old daughter on it.

Also have a 12yr old in NYC and I would never let them ride the subway alone, nor do they have any desire to.

I think perception and experience (direct or indirect) makes a bigger difference than just "where do you live". Some people might be scared by the media, sure, but we have both been personally assaulted several times on the train, and many more times simply freaked out and scared by weird people, and we know lots of others who have had similar experiences or worse, so based on that, no I don't think it's an irrational fear for everyone.

Chicago. The risk spectrum is a lot broader than "will I be murdered on the train?". You can also have a deranged person come right up and spit in your face (happened to me). Not worth it.

Assault an beatings. Most people I know wont take BART through Oakland. It is fairly common to have to deal with mentally ill or high people threatening to gut and kill you.

If you have ever been trapped in a box with an angry psychotic, you would want to avoid it.

The other people on public transport, not the least of which from them is second hand smoke from either fentanyl or meth, not sure which, nor do I care to learn.

I still ride the bus/trolley/tram/subway, especially when the streets are busy, but late at night I'll opt for a Waymo, depending on the circumstance.

Not the OP, but...

https://www.tokyoweekender.com/japan-life/news-and-opinion/w...

> What hellhole do you live?

Do a search for women and public transit. This isn't just Japan, or Europe, or the USA. It's a real problem being discussed. Honestly, I feel like this is fairly common knowledge at this point.

Well, New York City, but that is more of an edge case. Most public transit in America is safe .... I think.

> What hellhole do you live?

The US I guess.

You seriously think that walking or taking public transit in the US feels dangerous in 2024? It may have felt a bit different in the 1980s but, even then, most major cities were not in general hellholes even if some locations were sketchy.

Around where I live there’s a lot of addicts and homeless who use that as primary transport. I don’t want to generalize of course, but the camps here are frequent spots in the paper for bizarre murders and violence. It doesn’t feel safe being around unknown variables like that, for me at least.

Any large city, there are (large) areas I feel pretty comfortable in, especially not in the middle of the night. And there are areas I generally avoid including in cities that I otherwise consider "safe."

I do think you need to be aware of the environment generally and, while there is always some risk (anywhere), you can alleviate a lot of it.

I'm very familiar with a large northeast metropolitan complex and there are places/times I wouldn't go but lots of places/times I would.

People sure are reading a lot into my comment that I feel "more vulnerable" on the sidewalk than in a Waymo. That doesn't mean I think walking is dangerous. (It can definitely be unpleasant in some locations though, for a variety of reasons.)

I don't know, I was just answering in behalf of the parent comment

hell yes it is if you're a woman and/or have anything valuable on your person

I guess I question why anyone would live somewhere, unless that really had no economic choice, where they felt so unsafe. I sure wouldn't and don't.

ADDED: Probably unfair. Some are willing to tradeoff safety for culture etc. so long as they can essentially buy their way out of some of the potentially uncomfortable urban aspects (which is presumably what's being discussed here). This is a perfectly understandable attitude--as it probably was in NYC in the 80s or so.

It's also highly variable. There are lots of nearby areas that feel unsafe, and the people in those areas that make me question safety ride the busses more. Do i feel unsafe in my home? No, but i don't have a lot of addicts mulling around my house or i'd move (like you said).

Then of course there's differences in opinion on actual risk. I don't generally feel comfortable around variables i don't understand. I grew up around addicts and found them to be very unpredictable, and so my reaction may be biased. Nonetheless it's true for me personally.

edit: Conversely though, i think humans have a tendency to get used to nearly anything. We then can downplay the risks of things we've become accustomed to. Even if the risk of violence is low, risk of general unpleasant interactions would be enough to make me avoid the bus/etc.

A lot is familiarity.

I was in Detroit for an event a couple years ago. A number of us didn't really feel safe after dark and there were a couple incidents that other attendees experienced. Part of it was the general reputation but we also just didn't really know.

Whereas I'll walk down 5th avenue in Manhattan at two in the morning with no real concerns though I'm being more alert than if it were noon.

As you say, it also wouldn't take many bus/subway incidents to make me go: "That's a nope from now on."

You would live there if you can effectively shield yourself from the safety risks, by doing things like avoiding mass transit and bad neighborhoods.

Also, because you may have family and ties to the area.

Uhm, I've seen videos about how NYC was in the 1970s? I'm sure SF was similar. It was pretty rough back then, the 80s were slightly better, and then things got pretty good past the 90s, and now they are getting bad again.

I lived in Manhattan a summer in the 80s. Went to school in Cambridge in the 70s. There were definitely areas one avoided and cities were losing population.

Relatively recently (maybe 5 years ago), a work colleague got an AirBnB "bargain" on a house in the Roxbury area of Boston for a group of people for a conference and told me there was a shooting down the street. I was, like, IDIOT, you might have asked a local why it might have been such a bargain. (To be clear I'm not sure how objectively dangerous it was but I wouldn't have been staying there and walking at night.)

Not sure most of Manhattan was unsafe generally but you were certainly careful. Not sure that accidentally taking the express subway up to 125th street was actually a guarantee to walking out to a hail of bullets but you were definitely careful to a degree you probably aren't today. I never a foot in Brooklyn until much later. And I remember a somewhat scary drive from LaGuardia to the Port Authority late at night along 42nd Street because of some confusion around schedules.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com