←back to thread

Waymos crash less than human drivers

(www.understandingai.org)
345 points rbanffy | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
wnissen ◴[] 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 #
dangus ◴[] No.43487761[source]
I saw a transit enthusiast YouTube video try out Waymo from the most distant part of the network to fisherman’s wharf in SF and it cost twice as much as an Uber while having a longer wait time for a car.

It also couldn’t operate on the highway so the transit time was nearly double.

One shouldn’t underestimate how economical real human operators are. It’s not like Uber drivers make a ton of money. Uber drivers often have zero capital expense since they are driving vehicles they already own. Waymo can’t share the business expense of their vehicles with their employees and have them drive them home and to the grocery store.

I’m sure it’ll improve but this tells me that Waymo’s price per vehicle including all the R&D expenses must be astronomical. They are burning $2 billion a year at the current rate even though they have revenue service.

Plus, they actually have a lot of human operators to correct issues and talk to police and things like that. Last number I found on that was over one person per vehicle but I’m not sure if anyone knows for sure.

replies(10): >>43487788 #>>43487796 #>>43487932 #>>43487948 #>>43487979 #>>43488060 #>>43488147 #>>43490331 #>>43490975 #>>43491629 #
radpanda ◴[] No.43488147[source]
Waymo rides are also potentially slower because they strictly follow speed limits. Not really problematic in downtown SF but it’ll be interesting to see how it’ll be received by riders when they expand to highway driving where most people generally expect to drive over the speed limit.
replies(2): >>43488289 #>>43491727 #
thot_experiment ◴[] No.43488289[source]
On most trips people do speeding saves an irrelevant amount of time. If somehow you encounter zero traffic from Palo Alto to SF and you go 15mph over the limit the whole way it makes the trip about 5 minutes shorter.

You have about 50% more KE at 80mph as you do at 65mph btw, if you find yourself needing to dissipate that energy rapidly.

replies(1): >>43488428 #
radpanda ◴[] No.43488428[source]
Sure, there’s the math, but there’s also the human nature part of it. If you’re sitting in the right lane doing the speed limit, watching dozens of cars consistently zip past, it feels like you’re “falling behind” all of that traffic. I wonder how that will be received by the riding public.
replies(2): >>43489399 #>>43491599 #
1. Symbiote ◴[] No.43491599[source]
For the opposite experience, take a taxi in a low- or maybe middle-income country.

There's a good chance the driver will zoom past everything else, weaving between lanes accordingly, and you'll wish you were one of the slow vehicles. Although I'd be less concerned if the seatbelts worked.

replies(1): >>43493284 #
2. Zigurd ◴[] No.43493284[source]
You mean like Boston? More than once I've had to tell an Uber driver I'll pay them more to slow down.