←back to thread

Waymo granted permit to begin testing in New York City

(www.cnbc.com)
597 points achristmascarl | 5 comments | 22 Aug 25 17:02 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
vinkelhake ◴[22 Aug 25 17:40 UTC] No.44987373[source]▶
I live in the bay and occasionally ride Waymo in SF and I pretty much always have a good time.

I visited NYC a few weeks ago and was instantly reminded of how much the traffic fucking sucks :) While I was there I actually thought of Waymo and how they'd have to turn up the "aggression" slider up to 11 to get anything done there. I mean, could you imagine the audacity of actually not driving into an intersection when the light is yellow and you know you're going to block the crossing traffic?

replies(13): >>44987402 #>>44987434 #>>44987566 #>>44987773 #>>44987794 #>>44988469 #>>44988487 #>>44988623 #>>44989128 #>>44989185 #>>44989296 #>>44992865 #>>44993957 #
QuantumSeed ◴[22 Aug 25 17:56 UTC] No.44987566[source]▶
I was in a Waymo in SF last weekend riding from the Richmond district to SOMA, and the car actually surprised me by accelerating through two yellow lights. It was exactly what I would have done. So it seems the cars are able to dial up the assertiveness when appropriate.
replies(3): >>44987686 #>>44987711 #>>44988089 #
sowbug ◴[22 Aug 25 18:35 UTC] No.44988089[source]▶
When red-light cameras are installed at an intersection, the number of rear-end accidents typically increases as drivers unexpectedly slow down instead of speeding up at yellow lights.

The cost of these accidents is borne by just about everyone, except the authority profitably operating the red lights. (To be fair, some statistics also show a decrease in right-angle collisions, which is kinda the point of the red-light rules to begin with.)

replies(2): >>44988260 #>>44988348 #
9dev ◴[22 Aug 25 18:52 UTC] No.44988348[source]▶
That seems only like a temporary problem until people get used to actually stopping at red lights, as they are supposed to. After the initial acceptance phase, it should minimise accidents over the longer term.
replies(1): >>44988482 #
hammock ◴[22 Aug 25 19:02 UTC] No.44988482[source]▶
Unless there is a warning of how long is left on the yellow light, it’s an unsolvable problem because there is an asymmetric risk of stopping vs accelerating
replies(2): >>44988836 #>>44992300 #
1. ithkuil ◴[22 Aug 25 19:30 UTC] No.44988836{3}[source]▶
The lights should be designed so that if you don't have enough space to stop with a mild deceleration you should just go through. If a mild deceleration get you rear ended then of course that's an unsolvable problem
replies(2): >>44989136 #>>44991029 #
2. devilbunny ◴[22 Aug 25 20:01 UTC] No.44989136[source]▶
Then they shorten the yellow so that it isn't "with a mild deceleration" but a full-on stomp-on-the-brakes stop.
3. hammock ◴[22 Aug 25 23:07 UTC] No.44991029[source]▶
No one wants to risk a ticket with a guess at how long the yellow is going to be, or whether they’ll make it thru or not. That is the unsolvable part. Yellows are inconsistent , and you aren’t accounting for slow-moving traffic ahead of you that might cause you to block the intersection, etc.

There was actually a scandal in Chicago were a study found that the city systematically reduced the length of yellows only on lights that had red light cameras in order to harvest tickets.

replies(1): >>44991226 #
4. tptacek ◴[22 Aug 25 23:30 UTC] No.44991226[source]▶
I feel like the subtext of all these concerns is that you'd need to drive very carefully to reliably avoid camera tickets... and nobody wants to drive that carefully. I get it, I don't either, and I do get occasional camera tickets. But like: I should also be driving more carefully.
replies(1): >>44992192 #
5. hammock ◴[23 Aug 25 01:42 UTC] No.44992192{3}[source]▶
Slamming on the breaks because you’re anxious about a yellow light is not careful driving. But that’s what red light cameras do