Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

I don't really disagree, but again, I don't understand the point about complaining about "Pfft, Waymo can only operate in good conditions". I mean, it wasn't that long ago when Google's autonomous vehicle tech was first announced and everyone thought it looked like magic.

More and more I believe in Louis CK's bit about "everything is amazing and nobody's happy": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PdFB7q89_3U




Because there's two things going on. There's the autonomous driving technology which is god damn amazing and a huge technical achievement even if it only works in ideal conditions.

Then there's the sheisters trying to sell that technology and convince governments that "for safety" people should be required to buy their product. Poking holes in the technology is people's natural response to the very real fear that their ability to operate a vehicle that isn't literally controlled by a huge corporation will be taken away.

The technology is amazing, humans suck.

You see the same thing with EVs, rather than it being a purely positive thing that the market has more options for people with different driving patterns you have governments committing to banning the sale of new ICE cars when the deployment is literally in its infancy


> Then there's the sheisters trying to sell that technology and convince governments that "for safety" people should be required to buy their product.

That feels like a massive straw man. I'm not aware of anyone at this point, or with any plans, to require the use of autonomous vehicles.

> You see the same thing with EVs, rather than it being a purely positive thing that the market has more options for people with different driving patterns you have governments committing to banning the sale of new ICE cars when the deployment is literally in its infancy

That also doesn't make sense to me. Governments don't want to push to EVs because the tech is some nirvana or something, but continued use of ICE vehicles is a large contributor to climate change and we have very limited time to address that.


I assume this is referring to how Europe requires new vehicles be sold with automatic emergency braking.

If we do reach a point where self driving systems consistently outperfom humans in term or safety, I would absolutely expect a push to atleast require it in new vehicles if not some form of new law to push people towards using that technology. Personally, I find that idea attractive but I understand why people would fear it.


You have to recognize these as the right-wing dogwhistles that they are. The idea that autonomous driving and vehicle electrification are control strategies by an oppressive deep state are constantly pushed on far-right social media.


> autonomous driving and vehicle electrification are control strategies by an oppressive deep state

Wait.. what? That’s definitely a new one to me…



Why does it matter what people push that idea if there is some truth to it?


Welp, I'm as left as they come in these parts. Literally a card carrying socialist so I'm not consciously dog whistling anything.

Tech is already inundated with corporations using technology to maintain an iron grip on their products against their users interest and I'm just sad to see that autonomous driving seems to be the excuse to extend this grip further with always-on connectivity that you can't turn off "for safety" that will also conveniently used for even more tracking. I don't think it will be used for population control or anything like that but I expect it will be expand the already existing police remote shutdown.

Autonomous cars that are truly autonomous would be amazing. But what I fear we'll get is DrivingAsAService and regulatory capture.


> I'm as left as they come

I am pleased to introduce you to: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horseshoe_theory


I thought about that when I wrote that but I ended up landing on that it didn't apply because I'm not anywhere near right-wing social media and had no idea this was even a conspiracy.

I was just like the last thing in the universe I want is for a company to exercise Apple like control over my car. And despite making no logical sense companies seem to be using EVs and self-driving as an excuse to create artificial lock-in and add even more data collection. New and "different" seems to mean you're allowed to break consumer expectations for the worse.


It still looks like magic when I see cars without drivers here in PHX. We'll have them on the freeway soon enough - potentially a game changer for our city


> potentially a game changer for our city

My bet is you'll be amazed by how little changes. Sure you won't spend any time at gas stations/car dealerships and you'll be able to watch YouTube on your commute, but that's how millions of New Yorkers live and, well, it's fine. That is to say, we could have just built subways/mass transit and gotten all of the benefits.

There is a major downside though, and it's that we'll be doubling down on cars. That means all the mining we have to do for all the components, all the road/vehicle maintenance we have to do, all the waste we have to manage, all the pollution from tires, all the space taken up by roads, garages, parking spaces, all the batteries we have to build/maintain/recycle, all the sprawl and isolation we suffer will increase.


> My bet is you'll be amazed by how little changes. Sure you won't spend any time at gas stations/car dealerships and you'll be able to watch YouTube on your commute, but that's how millions of New Yorkers live and, well, it's fine. That is to say, we could have just built subways/mass transit and gotten all of the benefits.

I'm a big fan of public transportation, and I think it's sad that so many cities have underinvested. But it doesn't help your point to pretend that commuting on a bus or subway is the same thing as commuting in an autonomous personal vehicle, and these kinds of false equivalencies only serve to discredit mass transit advocates.


Oh I'm not at all pretending there's an equivalence between a personal coach that delivers you anywhere you want to go and a coarse, generic mass transit system that's relatively indifferent to your destination. I'm saying that no one at all is saying that every American (let alone anyone in the world) will have such service. This stuff is 100% marketed to upper class people. Waymo is entirely an Uber-class service, meaning that only the top 3% of people worldwide can even conceive of ever experiencing it, let alone having it be their daily experience. And for what, not having to take a bus and walk a little after taking a train? I'm trying really hard to come up with something more bourgeoisie than that, and I'm coming up with nothing.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: