←back to thread

Waymos crash less than human drivers

(www.understandingai.org)
345 points rbanffy | 1 comments | 26 Mar 25 20:57 UTC | HN request time: 0.207s | source
Show context
wnissen ◴[26 Mar 25 21:37 UTC] No.43487648[source]▶
Serious crash rates are a hockey stick pattern. 20% of the drivers cause 80% of the crashes, to a rough approximation. For the worst 20% of drivers, the Waymo is almost certainly better already.

Honestly, at this point I am more interested in whether they can operate their service profitably and affordably, because they are clearly nailing the technical side.

For example data from a 100 driver study, see table 2.11, p. 29. https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/37370 Roughly the same number of drivers had 0 or 1 near-crashes as had 13-50+. One of the drivers had 56 near crashes and 4 actual crashes in less than 20K miles! So the average isn't that helpful here.

replies(10): >>43487761 #>>43487829 #>>43487883 #>>43490189 #>>43490833 #>>43490896 #>>43491630 #>>43493210 #>>43493897 #>>43497042 #
michaelmrose ◴[26 Mar 25 21:53 UTC] No.43487829[source]▶
What about the benefit to the 80% if the 20% were obligated to use software instead of their own wetware in a hypothetical world where this was feasible in all respects. Imagine if you transitioned to most new drivers for instance being issued only permits to use self driving vehicles and older drivers being obligated to switch at 65.
replies(3): >>43488624 #>>43488645 #>>43489154 #
tim333 ◴[26 Mar 25 23:20 UTC] No.43488645[source]▶
As someone getting on towards 65 I have to point out that insurance rates are less for the 65-70s than for any group younger that 55, and claim rates are lower than for any of the under 65s. My relatives didn't really start crashing into stuff till they got to about 90. And then it was kind of slow motion. (for this data https://www.abi.org.uk/products-and-issues/choosing-the-righ...)
replies(1): >>43489370 #
potato3732842 ◴[27 Mar 25 01:06 UTC] No.43489370[source]▶
Is that because you're better or because you're less exposed?

Not a lot of 65yo people working 80hr weeks, slogging out 50-100mi commutes or plowing into moose while blinded by the 6am sun on their way back from 3rd shift.

replies(3): >>43490212 #>>43491423 #>>43491616 #
1. watwut ◴[27 Mar 25 08:24 UTC] No.43491423[source]▶
They are more careful. They drive more slowly. They are more afraid. They are safer drives considering outcomes. The problem here is that people say "better driver" can be evaluated in various ways, safety only one of them. Many people think, for example, that if you get there faster, you are better driver. Or if you can show quick thinking by sudden movements.

> Not a lot of 65yo people working 80hr weeks, slogging out 50-100mi commutes or plowing into moose while blinded by the 6am sun on their way back from 3rd shift.

People who drive in that state are one of two things: irresponsible or poor with no other choice.

Driving regularly while tired and sleep deprived is a big factor in accidents ... and that many people are somehow seeing it as heroship rather then being irresponsible is a cultural issue.