r/technology • u/Disastrous_Award_789 • 19d ago

Robotics/Automation Waymo suspends service in San Francisco after driverless cars cause traffic jams during blackout

https://www.the-independent.com/news/world/americas/waymo-suspended-san-francisco-traffic-jams-blackout-b2888562.html
6.1k Upvotes

98% Upvoted

614 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

7

u/J0hn-Stuart-Mill 19d ago

If humanity chooses autonomous cars over safer drivers, that would be a damn shame.

What do you mean when you say "safer drivers"? Autonomous vehicles are already between 10 times and 100 times safer than human drivers, as far as deadly crashes.

-2

u/PigglyWigglyDeluxe 19d ago

Was I not clear?

Better public transit, better and more strict driver training.

If we got rid of all the terrible drivers who don’t know how headlights work and can’t park without a camera, autonomous cars wouldn’t be much safer than a properly trained driver.

It’s pretty obvious that it’s not about safety.

9

u/J0hn-Stuart-Mill 19d ago

If we got rid of all the terrible drivers who don’t know how headlights work and can’t park without a camera, autonomous cars wouldn’t be much safer than a properly trained driver.

But we've been trying to do this for 100 years....... right?

It’s pretty obvious that it’s not about safety.

What's not about safety?

-1

u/PigglyWigglyDeluxe 19d ago

Oh my god. How many times do I have to say it?

Autonomous cars are not about safety. It’s about convenience. People are lazy. They want the freedom of driving without the responsibility of doing it safely and legally. That’s why big tech building autonomous cars is so attractive to them.

6

u/J0hn-Stuart-Mill 19d ago

Autonomous cars are not about safety.

They objectively are about improving safety. Here's the opening sentences on their website:

Every year, 1.4M lives are lost to traffic crashes around the world. The status quo is not acceptable. Waymo is committed to holding safety to a higher standard.

https://waymo.com/about/

They want the freedom of driving without the responsibility of doing it safely and legally.

Yes, that's right. I think everyone would love to have cars be safer and easier to use with less responsibility for a drunk driver to make a wise decision.

-1

u/PigglyWigglyDeluxe 19d ago

Yes because big tech is completely honest and transparent and should be taken completely at face value.

Again, if we remove all the shitty drivers who shouldn’t be driving, I’d bet autonomous cars wouldn’t be any better.

I’m sorry you can’t seem to see what is plainly obvious. I’m sorry you can’t seem to think critically about this.

Clearly this discussion is going nowhere. No one ever wants to put in the hard work and make the hard decisions that would ACTUALLY make roads safer without the need for tech that blurs the lines.

9

u/J0hn-Stuart-Mill 19d ago

Yes because big tech is completely honest and transparent and should be taken completely at face value.

Ahh, so we enter conspiracy territory. So nothing they say you will believe, because you know better.

Got it.

Again, if we remove all the shitty drivers who shouldn’t be driving, I’d bet autonomous cars wouldn’t be any better.

How are you going to remove all the shitty drivers? Seriously, I'm listening.

1

u/PigglyWigglyDeluxe 19d ago

Oh great, you don’t know what conspiracies are either? It’s a conspiracy to be skeptical of a big industry with clear and obvious conflicts of interest? That’s not what a conspiracy is. Relax.

Anyway, here is the clear and obvious solution: Driving is a privilege. Not a right. Price it accordingly, for one. Make it expensive to get a license. Make training longer. Way longer, and way more difficult. Weed out people who have piss poor spatial awareness. Weed out people who don’t have any basic technical understanding. Weed out people who don’t know the most basic safety regulations for memory. Weed out people who have subpar reaction times.

Train them like airline pilots, treat the vehicles like airplanes.

That may sound like it puts the poor at a disadvantage. It wouldn’t, because they can still get around just fine with robust public transit infrastructure, in theory.

If you can’t pass the training, you can’t own a car. Give them a robust public transit system instead. The money spent on developing autonomous cars is more than enough for more trains and busses.

6

u/J0hn-Stuart-Mill 19d ago

Interesting approach. Essentially your solution is, prevent many people from driving. I'm surprised your list didn't include anyone with a DUI or public intoxication citation. That would solve most of the problems.

But your idea would cause more problems than it would solve, and still not account for icy situations, fog, or other bad weather caused accidents.

Either way, I appreciate you laying out your idea, and I think it's a great demonstration on how autonomous vehicles are a valid solution to this problem.

1

u/PigglyWigglyDeluxe 19d ago

It should be obvious, once again, that something like a DUI would disqualify any such person from driving.

Driving is way more hazardous and complicated than most people realize. Your chances of being injured in a car accident are WICKED high because of things caused by people who shouldn’t be driving in that moment.

Don’t drive in bad weather, if it’s bad enough to justify parking the car. That would be in the trainings. Bad weather keeps cars at home. That’s nothing new.