Self-driving cars begin testing on NYC streets | Hacker News Reader

Self-driving cars begin testing on NYC streets

amny.com

28 pointspkaeding61 comments

Self-driving is one of the most interesting technologies of our times, from a legislative/social standpoint.

Will every large city in the globe be filled with self driving cars in 2035, or will the situation be roughly identical to 2025?

Honestly it feels like it could go either way - the last ten years have been such "one step forward, two steps sideways, one half step backwards" on every front - what the technology seems able to deliver on, what companies claim they can/will do, what regulators and the common people make of them, freak accidents that inevitably sway the popular opinion, etc.

Personally I hope the technology matures and becomes ubiquitous in my lifetime (the sooner the better), because I hate driving (a few acquaintances have been in grisly accidents due to drunk drivers coming the other way) and I just want to get in a car at 10p with my backpack in tow, lie down, and wake up at 7a 600 miles away.

To the degree that self-driving cars limit the adoption of public transportation, I am wholly against the technology.

In the countryside where I am there are 2 buses a day (only during the school year, for students, although they let non students ride it) and the nearest train station is 30 minutes away.

The real concern here is people driving when they shouldn't (drunk, tired, etc.) because they have no other option, putting lives at risk, so to the degree that self-driving cars will curb that I am wholly for the technology.

You should volunteer your countryside town to be the guinea pig place for them then.

Do you really think there will be more of these in the countryside, where people are more likely to have a car? There’s not much profitability there. They will be clogging up city streets, not driving drunk people in the middle of nowhere.

"Self driving cars" is better termed as "autonomous vehicles".

There will be many modalities of autonomous vehicles and one of them will be buses. Autonomous vehicles will hopefully be a large boon to public transport or just transport for people in general as it should drive down prices along with making it more accessible as it can run 24/7/365

> There will be many modalities of autonomous vehicles and one of them will be buses.

I'd have a lot more faith in our society if we could prioritize automation of our highest density transit rather than catering to the fantasies of the wealthy.

I think we’re a long way from autonomous buses. There are lots of extra variables in how a bus operates. In fact, I doubt we would ever see a fully autonomous bus with no employee. How does it handle a disabled passenger? How does it handle security in the middle of the night? The wait is possibly long enough that these taxis have already killed transit agencies.

Maybe with cost savings from autonomous buses they could allocate resources to dedicated human driven buses for disabled persons?

The bus driver's salary is not the primary reason busses don't run 24/7

Yes, and in addition a drivers job isn't just to drive the vehicle, but to make the right call in a million different emergency situations, help people e.g. with a lack of mobility, etc.

One could argue the business-as-usual-driving is actually the easy part to automate.

I think it is true that systems with very frequent headings tend to be driverless though. However, the technology for a driverless train has been around for a long time.

Driver pay comprises about 60% of the cost of owning and operating a public transit bus.

Driver pay or labor? Because drivers are not the only labor

If a car can drive itself, what's stopping that from becoming the public transportation of the next decade?

Or are you just ideologically against anything that doesn't pack people into tubes in order to "save the planet"?

As a species, (health-wise, resource-wise) we'd be better off with "walkable cities". Continuing to push cars as the mode of transportation makes walkable cities even less likely.

Curious, are you really making light of "saving the planet"?

Space efficiency.

Wouldn't it make public transportation better? You could have mini vans basically acting like public taxis that would try to maximize capacity and minimize path traveled

Some places essentially attempted ride-hail as public transport and just like all car based services, they're far worse in terms of capacity and cost and so they essentially siphon money away from already proven modes like buses and trains. In Columbus Ohio, the attempt at this saw the consultant basically wind up shop and run away with millions of dollars in federal grants that should have just gone to cota. I expect AV as public transit to be similar.

With AI?

A mini van can hold a maximum of 7, maybe 8 passengers. That’s already worse than a bus because it means a lot more cars on the road. That’s also a best case scenario because you rarely have 7 or 8 people going from one exact location to another. Maybe your plan is instead to make multiple stops? That doesn’t sound like the best experience. Cramming 7 people into a smaller bus, sitting in traffic for an hour plus due to all the other “public taxis”.

Regardless, it means a lot more traffic and a generally worse experience for everyone. Cities should tax the hell out of these and put the money towards improving actual public transportation.

If the people who uber/taxi end up basically pooling in these vans then it's a win

Lawyers are gonna be developing a lot of precedent, here.

Welcome to New York.

I strongly believe that we are going to see many brands hit L4 and L5 before 2030.

Multiple manufacturers seem to be circling on the same advancements and leaps, they all seem to be working with each other to get regulations in place for them to deploy their cars.

I do believe we are about to see AV's version of "making reusable boosters being reused boring" moments with AVs where suddenly multiple companies are doing what others thought impossible years before. Even the much demeaned Tesla FSD is shockingly human-like and reliable on v13.

The issue that Waymo specifically is going to have is scalability. Unlike other brands who have AV, Waymo doesn't have manufacturing capabilities in-house currently nor logistic or a generalizable model. I think Waymo is definitely ahead of the pack but time will tell if the brands who went slower will pass them up due to Waymo not having a financial reason to push to financial viability on any timeline shorter than "after Google runs out of money".

If Waymo's plan is to have to map the entire US to be capable of driving in it, that's going to cost a lot of money and take a lot of time vs having cars that can roll out of the factory and drive straight to their assigned city unassisted.

Interesting! I take the opposite of this argument.

I ride in Waymos constantly. They are boring technology to me that I no longer think about. Effectively complete trust in them for the areas they drive in. The driving is so steady and consistent that I forget I'm in an autonomous vehicle. The only thing I want is for them to be able to take me to Oakland and to SFO via the freeway, but am comfortable waiting for those to become unlocked on the assumption that my trust level will remain consistent as their unlocked region footprint grows.

I don't trust Tesla's self-driving as far as I can throw it. I'm not a huge Elon hater or anything like that. https://teslafsdtracker.com/ gives me pause! 1 in 10 rides has a critical disengagement and it hasn't improved in three years. I will concede that the distance travelled appears to be improving rapidly, and increasing distance could explain why rides continue to have a critical disengagement, but man I just can't overstate how uncomfortable that makes me feel. I want nothing to do with sitting in the back seat of an autonomous vehicle that needs someone to take over every 1 in 10 drives.

Also, as a consumer, the notion of wanting to choose a system that relies purely on vision over one that is a combination of lidar and vision is just nonsense. Just because humans drive with vision + thinking doesn't make me feel like that is the ideal solution. I want systems that use all the tech at the machine's disposal to make me as safe as possible by handling edge cases that a human driver would fail at.

For Tesla to even be in the conversation with Waymo is very promising for the concept of low-tech solutions to autonomous vehicles, which in turn is very promising for how scalable this technology can be.

As far as I know, a self-driving Tesla, such as what they are operating in Texas, is almost the same hardware as an off-the-shelf Tesla, whereas each Waymo is a custom built vehicle, with added manufacturing costs (on top of the base vehicle) in the hundreds of thousands of dollars. The significance of the Tesla service being comparable to Waymos cannot be overstated IMHO.

"If Waymo's plan is to have to map the entire US to be capable of driving in it, that's going to cost a lot of money and take a lot of time"

So Waymo doesn't have access to Google Maps/Street View vehicles' data? Because that sounds like what you're describing here.

Also, would NYC be the first real test city for self driving with seasons? Besides SF's 3 daily seasons. The city should put up bleachers and sell tickets for the first snow.

Waymo has to scan with its entire sensor suite which includes LiDAR. I am not entirely sure if the Google Maps cars has LiDAR equipped. Definitely would seem sane to do since they are both Alphabet products even if Maps has no use for the data.

I don't believe that at all. The problem is same like replacing managers with AI - no accountability. Computer can't make decisions which may or may not kill people, because when that will happen, who is responsible for injury? Driver who is not driving? Developer of such system? Company who made the car? Company who created the self driving system?

> Developer of such system? Company who made the car? Company who created the self driving system?

Those would in many cases be the same company. And yes, the entity responsible for injury would be the car manufacturer, not the driver or riders. Taking on legal liability for the car is part of the 'qualifications' for L3.

The specifics of what part of the system failed can be litigated if defendants (companies) need to be added to the case but in no case will the people inside of a vehicle designated higher than SAE L3 be held at fault for the accident.

And that's why I think we will never see L4 or L5 system. These system would be constantly "broken" due to i.e. dirty/miscalibrated sensors to prevent possible lawsuits which would be so often that they would become essentially useless.

The company who operates the car is responsible for this. Broken systems is not a way to avoid lawsuit but a sure way to be convicted.

If system is broken, it is not working. If it is not working then it can't drive you around.

If today I buy a brand new car, drive off the lot and the breaks fail causing me to plough into a pedestrian and kill them, who is to blame?

In my jurisdiction, damages from car crashes are strict liability, so you would in fact be legally liable. Limited to ~10 million USD for damages to objects, no limit for damages to persons. Of course the manufacturing defect would give you a credible claim against the manufacturer, but that's a separate matter. Which is why automotive liability insurance is mandatory.

Doesn't this answer the question then? Dodgy breaks or dodgy AI, it's on you if your car cleans out someone crossing the road.

The manufacturer obviously, but they can sell the car in the first place because this defect risk is quantifiable for their liability insurance provider, who can evaluate how risky said car company is in terms of their manufacturing and how likely it is they'll need to pay out a claim, etc.

For self-driving, that evaluation is almost impossible. Sure it can look good statistically, but for things like brake lines, brake pad material, brake boosters, etc, they are governed by the laws of physics which are more understandable than any self-driving algorithm.

I think with Waymo we're probably at the point where an insurer could have decent stab at what their liability would be if asked to cover AI-related accidents. In fact, given that these cars are on the road and have reportedly been in accidents, I would imagine this is past being a hypothetical concern and now well into the territory of 'solved problem'.

You are for failing to check that your car is in drivable state before setting on your journey. This is actual law in my country.

2030 is an interesting target date. Waymos were driving on public roads for eight or nine years before taking the safety driver out of the vehicle and offering rides to the public.

Elon, of course wants to do that much faster. But he was also supposed to be on Mars by now.

Self driving car companies have been trying to get into NYC for a while now. It's a prestigious and sought after testing ground.

The now defunct Cruise automation was in talks to test in NYC beginning in 2018. Cruise was welcomed by the governor but shut down by the Mayor's office, however not before acquiring a small garage and filling it with (maybe) a dozen robocars.

Cruise kept the space open for a few years, presumably they did some mapping but mostly they were just twiddling their thumbs waiting for their permit to go through, and of course that never happened.

Waymo has only been granted a limited testing permit, they still have a fight ahead of them before Robotaxis will be taking passengers in NYC. The Taxi and Limousine comission isn't going to take it lying down.

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/10/17/gms-cruise-will-test-self-dr...

I don’t think they’ve been desperate to launch here. NYC is the least car-friendly city in North America — for many it’s a badge of honour not to need a car, and the city just enacted congestion charging.

The thing is there is any number of cities that would happily roll out the red carpet for a company like Waymo. Waymo wants the Big Apple, in spite of the political resistance.

Otherwise I agree, I think robotaxis would most benefit people living in sprawling car dependant areas with poor transit, where driving is currently the only viable option for getting around.

> Driverless cars have clogged streets, obstructed emergency vehicles, and caused accidents, injuries and even deaths. They are a threat to pedestrians, cyclists and other drivers.

A human rideshare driver would never do any of this

It is more likely that human driver will get a clue from a blinking wee-woo car and moves aside.

I predict one of the surprises, to some people anyway, is going to be that autonomous vehicles don't clog city streets. Uber's CEO recently remarked that Waymo vehicles complete more rides per day than 99% of human ride hailing drivers. The Waymo fleet in each of its service areas is remarkably small. It's an easy bet that a fully mature Waymo operation that competes toe to toe with human power ride hailing will need only a fraction of the number of human drivers in personal vehicles.

I wonder what the number of passenger-transporting miles driven per hour is.

It seems likely that the 99% number is due to running more hours than a human per day.

It will be interesting to see how well Waymo does with snow!

Waymo has been testing in winter conditions on closed courses for almost a decade, now. Presumably they wouldn't be making moves in a place like NYC if they didn't feel ready to take it to the streets.

when was the last time NYC had any snow?

As a European, US Unions seem absurd. I can't recall a Union in a country I lived in so blatantly agitating against technology (though I am sure you can find examples if you go looking). Maybe because they tend to be much much larger and represent broader slices of the economy, so they would advocate for retraining and education programs for the workers they represent.

In the context of autonomous busses in public transport I didn't see any statements by Verdi, the German union covering this sector, that opposed them in principle.

E.g. in Hamburg:

"Wenn das autonome Fahren dazu führt, dass der ÖPNV ausgebaut und der Takt höher wird, dann ist das ein positives Zeichen in Richtung der von uns geforderten dringend notwendigen Verkehrswende. Wir erwarten aber von den Gesellschaftern unter der Federführung unseres ersten Bürgermeisters Dr. Peter Tschentscher, Finanzsenator Dr. Andreas Dressel und Verkehrssenator Dr. Anjes Tjarks, dass die Einführung von autonomen Verkehren unter Gewährung aller Mitbestimmungsrechte des Betriebsrates der Hamburger Hochbahn eingeführt wird – ganz im Sinne von Hamburg als Stadt der guten Arbeit mit Vorbildcharakter."

---

If autonomous driving leads to an expansion of public transport and more frequent service, then that is a positive sign toward the urgently needed mobility transition that we are demanding. However, we expect the shareholders, under the leadership of our First Mayor Dr. Peter Tschentscher, Finance Senator Dr. Andreas Dressel, and Transport Senator Dr. Anjes Tjarks, to ensure that the introduction of autonomous transport services is carried out with full respect for the co-determination rights of the works council of Hamburger Hochbahn — fully in line with Hamburg’s role as a city of good work and a model for others.

Well people don’t want to lose their jobs and their livelihood to automation, it is a scary prospect for many in the states where most people live paycheck to paycheck and cost of living keeps rising.

Earlier:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44986949

I am excited about self driving cars, but self driving cars made by Google feels like a monkey's paw deal in the making.

I saw a waymo yesterday and was wondering what it was doing here!

If they can make it there, they'll make it anywhere.

"If you can dodge a wrench, you can dodge a ball"

How did they train the AI to drive like an asshole?

No need, if you're the "security supervisor" who has to remotely take over any of these cars any time they inevitably crap themselves, by the end of the day you will drive like the best of NY's, or even more asshole than that.

By driving in the rest of the country.

I prefer the subway over the street traffic in NYC but often have a problem finding a bathroom. So startup idea: a Waymo but you poop in it.

In San Francisco we just call it “a Waymo”

Reply on news.ycombinator.com