Waymo robotaxis are now giving rides on freeways in LA, SF and Phoenix

> Waymo was a better experience in every single way. One of the Lyfts i was in drove on the shoulder for a while like it was a lane.

These sentances conflict. I recently took a taxi from JFK to Manhattan during rush hour, and I estimate if the driver didn't use all of the paved surface, it would have taken at least 10 more minutes to arrive. (And it wouldn't have been an authentic NYC experience)

It's ok if you prefer the Waymo experience, and if you find it a better experience overall, but if a human driver saves you time, the Waymo wasn't better in every single way.

I am assuming the Lyft driver used the shoulder effectively. My experience with Lyft+Uber has been hit or miss... Some drivers are like traditional taxi drivers: it's an exciting ride because the driver knows the capabilities of their vehicle and uses them and they navigate obstacles within inches; some drivers are the opposite, it's an exciting ride because it feels like Star Tours (is this your first time? well, it's mine too) and they're using your ride to find the capabilities of their vehicle. The first type of driver is likely to use the shoulder effectively, and the second not so much.

You want your cab driver to drive on the shoulder and break the law? What?

> These sentances conflict. I recently took a taxi from JFK to Manhattan during rush hour, and I estimate if the driver didn't use all of the paved surface, it would have taken at least 10 more minutes to arrive. (And it wouldn't have been an authentic NYC experience)

My hot take is that people who "use all of the paved surface" because their whiny passenger is "in a rush" (which of course everyone stuck in traffic is) should permanently lose their license on the very first offense.

It is just gobsmackingly antisocial behavior that is 1) locally unsafe and 2) indicative of a deep moral rot.

Obviously exceptions can be made for true emergencies and what not, but "I need to save 10 minutes" is not one of them.

couldn't you have arrived 10 minutes later or was endangering life worth it?

Uh...driving in the shoulder is illegal.

My hot take is that anyone who would take a taxi from JFK to Manhattan, along the most well-served transit corridor on the continent, is probably a psycho and we shouldn't ask for their input on transportation topics.

JFK to Manhattan is actually not that easy for a newcomer. JFK → Airtrain → LIRR → Subway is a very stupid design.

That said, yes GP is obviously a psycho.

You may want to become aware of the existence of New York City. It's a pretty interesting place.

Oh my sweet summer child.

I've got news for you about how dysfunctional New York City transit planning has been and the status of transit to our three giant airports.

Yeah, that sounds like NYC nonsense. I assume it's still illegal to drive on the shoulder in New York.

Perhaps. But if you have a taxi or car service driver who's not willing to ever break any traffic laws in New York, you will not arrive at your destination in anything approaching a reasonable amount of time.

For example, getting at the back of the line for an exit rather than trying to go to the front and cut your way in could be a multi-hour mistake.

> it would have taken at least 10 more minutes to arrive. (And it wouldn't have been an authentic NYC experience)

Lived in New York for 10+ years and still go back regularly. This is unacceptable behaviour by a cabbie.

Given the amount of construction and thus police presence on that route right now, you’re lucky you didn’t get a 60-minute bonus when the cab got pulled over. (The pro move during rush hour and construction is (a) not to, but if you have to, (b) taking the AirTrain and LIRR.)

"People should break traffic laws" is a very strange position to take.

I hope robocars get really good at maintaining close formation and keeping out asshole linecutters.

Haha, this is both entirely true and entirely the reason why NYC is pretty much stuck where it is. If cities were parables, NYC would be The Parable of the Tragedy of the Commons. Globally, among cities I've been to it would have to be Delhi, but NYC is certainly in that category of South Asian cities where the infrastructure is far outpaced by the population and the population is like a swarming rat king constantly jockeying for a few inches more.

It's a viral race to the bottom.

This is absurd, and it's a**hole behavior you're defending.

You don't need to break any laws to get to where you're going, what are you even talking about? And you think that just because you're in a taxi you should get to magically cut to the front of a line of cars, made of the vast majority of New Yorkers who actually respect each other? What could possibly make you feel so entitled?

And if you think waiting in line for an exit takes multiple hours, I question whether you've ever been to NYC in the first place.

I'm sure it is in places that are dominated by strip malls and tract housing.

Here in New York City, we have a different approach altogether.

I find it much simpler and more straightforward and easy to understand. You always know exactly what another car is about to do. They are going to try to get in front of you and try to get where they are going, while not caring if that helps you go where you're going.

I never have to wonder what's going to happen next.

Meanwhile, I get off the plane in some flat state, hop in a rental car, and have immediately have no idea what the drivers are planning, what they have in store for me. It's exhausting.

Apart from not having to deal with a human, observance of traffic laws is the main advantage I see in autonomous vehicles. Once there are a decent proportion of them on the road we can ratchet up penalties against human asshole drivers, conviction aided by evidence gathered by the sensors on the surrounding non-human vehicles.

No, I don't think it's because you're in a taxi. I think everybody should try to cut to the front of the line. That's what everybody does in New York, and it works pretty well. It's pretty easy to understand what's gonna happen next.

I've lived in New York for longer than most HN posters here have been alive, most likely. A couple of times a year, I'll end up in a car with someone who doesn't understand how this whole thing works, and they'll do something insane like getting on the Brooklyn Bridge and then just staying in the right lane the entire time waiting to get off to the right. Or they'll sit on the BQE at the Flushing Avenue exit a mile back from the exit, causing me to waste large portions of my life that I will never get back.

You do realize that public transportation doesn't provide luggage carts? That you can't take those out of the airport?

If you're traveling with a family or group, it really is often going to be much easier to take an XL Uber than deal with turnstiles and transfers and stairs and everything.

> I think everybody should try to cut to the front of the line. That's what everybody does in New York, and it works pretty well.

I'm sorry, but you clearly don't live here, or at least don't drive here. You're describing some kind of Mad Max fantasy, like the image of New York people get from movies and fiction where everyone is flipping everyone else the bird every thirty seconds.

People in NYC are pretty cooperative. Driving isn't every-man-for-himself. I don't know why you're trying to paint this picture of some lawless fantasy. Maybe you think it's exciting, but it's not connected to reality.

There are many, many, many airports to which it is easier to travel via public transit from their associated city than it is from Manhattan to JFK. For example, all of these global-top-25 airports have single-train access:

London Heathrow (LHR)

Tokyo Haneda (HND)

Amsterdam Schiphol (AMS)

Paris-Charles de Gaulle (CDG)

Frankfurt (FRA)

Dubai (DXB)

Seoul Incheon (ICN)

Guangzhou (CAN)

Shanghai Pudong (PVG)

New Delhi (DEL)

Madrid Barajas (MAD)

Beijing Capital (PEK)

Chicago O'Hare (ORD)

Denver (DEN)

I live in Portland where we generally drive like sane humans. Your insinuation that anyone who cares about driving safely is from a flyover state is frankly baffling.

This just sounds like an argument to ban cars for private use and invest more in transit.

So what you're saying is if you're not in a big group or traveling with family, you absolutely SHOULD take public transportation.

...no? Maybe re-read the first half.

I've come from abroad with two large checked bags, a carry-on, and a backpack. You think I'm trying to take all that through the subway?

Obviously, yeah if you're traveling solo with a carry-on, most people take public transportation.

Or not, if it's 1 am and you don't want to be waiting 20 minutes for each connection.

Also, if you're a tourist new to the city after a long flight, the last thing you want to do is figure out the massively complicated transit system. Just having someone take you straight to your hotel where you can shower and sleep and deal with jet lag can be an important priority.

Certainly it sounds like that. However whatever cultural transformation turns Man into Rat King has already occurred so you'll notice that it costs over a billion dollars per mile of subway in NYC. Everyone who hasn't figured out how to leech off the government is a fattened milk cow whose production is harvested industrially.

New Yorkers are already incapable of non-extractive development. Like the GP they have been transformed into zero-sum zombies by their city. A cautionary tale of culture.

I don't get the gripe. AirTrain gets you to A,E,J,Z, and LIRR, all of which get you to "Manhattan" or a significant number of intermediate destinations in about an hour. LGA is far worse.

I live in New York City: no.

If everyone drove on the shoulder like a few assholes do, we just wouldn't have shoulders.

This is extremely silly.

I don't drive on the shoulder as a way of getting around people.

However, if I was behind someone who had gone all the way to the end of an exit lane but then was trying to cut back in to the regular flow of traffic, and I was in a car that wasn't willing to go around this person by driving on their shoulder to get around them as they tried to force their way in at the very last second, I would lose massive chunks of my life.

And yes, this is a daily occurrence. For example, drive on the BQE towards South Brooklyn approaching Tillary Street, and see how your life goes if you're not willing to go around the last-minute people on the shoulder.

I live and drive in NYC, and this is utter bullshit. To the extent that it's difficult to drive here, it's because of assholes who think they deserve to cut the line and fuck it up for everyone else.

Please stop driving here, you clearly aren't qualified to do so.

This is not the scenario that GP is referring to

(Disclaimer: I used to live off the Tillary exit and this is a unique problem – one that's mostly caused by the same types of people who drive on the shoulders because they're so important!)

I certainly could have arrived 10 minutes later, but I wouldn't say that arriving 10 minutes later would result in a better experience in every way. It might result in a hypothetically safer experience (in the instance, there were no collisions so safety was achieved) or a morally better experience (according to the HN consensus morals that deem me a psychopath for either taking a cab at all or because I did not intervene and let the cab driver drive as he saw fit). Up to you what criteria you judge the overall trip on, I'm just pointing out that if the trip time is longer, the trip is not better in every way; at least absent an unusual requirement such as if you wanted to see the sights on the way, a shorter but less scenic trip would be a negative; or if you had a timing constraint that you must not arrive before a certain time, a shorter trip might infringe that constraint and would be a negative --- no such constraint was mentioned.

I don't know that any life was endangered either. I would accept an argument that property was endangered, certainly the margin between vehicles was very close, but at speeds where a collision would not have been injurious.

Come to the dark side.

Americans are increasingly adopting the kind of mindset Israelis have, where following the rules makes you a sucker. https://www.thejc.com/judaism/jewish-words/freier-fa15k306

Having to take AirTrain beyond the terminals at all is annoying. LIRR should just go to JFK directly. AirTrain is slow as molasses, and the fact that it costs money is absurd. It works and I'm glad it exists, but it's nothing like e.g. the Paris RER connecting CDG.

You generally never want to take A/E/J/Z because they're sooo much slower than LIRR, unless you live along them.

Yes, LGA is far worse.

> the fact that it costs money is absurd

Bart from SFO to downtown SF is about $11 due to a surcharge and the combined fare AirTrain + subway is also about $11.50. LIRR is a bit more expensive. The Paris RER is €13. I don’t see how the fare is objectionable.

I personally appreciate the subway connections exist. Taking LIRR would require a subway transfer to most destinations anyway.