←back to thread

Waymos crash less than human drivers

(www.understandingai.org)
345 points rbanffy | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.416s | 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 #
londons_explore ◴[] No.43490833[source]
> One of the drivers had 56 near crashes and 4 actual crashes in less than 20K miles!

There would be a strong argument to simply banning the worst 1% of drivers from driving, and maybe even compensating them with lifetime free taxi rides, on the taxpayers dime.

replies(5): >>43490972 #>>43491240 #>>43491803 #>>43492618 #>>43493995 #
eptcyka ◴[] No.43490972[source]
Perverse incentives will just balloon the bad driver population. Funny, since the brits have a history with these kinds of things.
replies(2): >>43491065 #>>43492673 #
n4r9 ◴[] No.43492673[source]
Hang on, why are brits suddenly being mentioned?
replies(1): >>43495360 #
1. eptcyka ◴[] No.43495360[source]
I am making rather overextended assumptions as to the ethnicity/nationality of the original poster based on their username.
replies(1): >>43498289 #
2. n4r9 ◴[] No.43498289[source]
Aahh. I think your extrapolation is indeed correct.