After 50 million miles, Waymos crash a lot less than human drivers
-
This post did not contain any content.
-
System shared this topic on
-
This post did not contain any content.
How are they with parking lots, tho'?
-
This post did not contain any content.
That's what happens when you have a reasonable sensor suite with LIDAR, instead of trying to rely entirely on cameras like Tesla does.
-
How are they with parking lots, tho'?
Or yielding to emergency vehicles.
-
This post did not contain any content.
And yet it's still the least efficient mode of transport.
-
How are they with parking lots, tho'?
I think "veritasium" or what the yt channel is called made a video about those.
It did manage to bring him to a store with a big parking lot, it did it.
-
And yet it's still the least efficient mode of transport.
What's more efficient?
In terms of getting to an exact location.
Public transportation only can get you near your target mostly. Not on point like a car, bike etc.
-
This post did not contain any content.
That doesn't seem like a very high bar to achieve
-
This post did not contain any content.
Why are we still doing this? Just fucking invest in mass transit like metro, buses and metrobuses. Jesus
Also, Note that this is based on waymo's own assumptions, that's like believing a 5070 gives you 4090 performance...
-
This post did not contain any content.
I am once again begging journalists to be more critical of tech companies.
But as this happens, it’s crucial to keep the denominator in mind. Since 2020, Waymo has reported roughly 60 crashes serious enough to trigger an airbag or cause an injury. But those crashes occurred over more than 50 million miles of driverless operations. If you randomly selected 50 million miles of human driving—that’s roughly 70 lifetimes behind the wheel—you would likely see far more serious crashes than Waymo has experienced to date.
[...] Waymo knows exactly how many times its vehicles have crashed. What’s tricky is figuring out the appropriate human baseline, since human drivers don’t necessarily report every crash. Waymo has tried to address this by estimating human crash rates in its two biggest markets—Phoenix and San Francisco. Waymo’s analysis focused on the 44 million miles Waymo had driven in these cities through December, ignoring its smaller operations in Los Angeles and Austin.
This is the wrong comparison. These are taxis, which means they're driving taxi miles. They should be compared to taxis, not normal people who drive almost exclusively during their commutes (which is probably the most dangerous time to drive since it's precisely when they're all driving).
-
What's more efficient?
In terms of getting to an exact location.
Public transportation only can get you near your target mostly. Not on point like a car, bike etc.
If someone can't walk a few blocks, that's on them. Airplanes don't get you exactly to the destination either. There's a tradeoff.
-
This post did not contain any content.
"Waymo reports that Waymo cars are the best"
-
I am once again begging journalists to be more critical of tech companies.
But as this happens, it’s crucial to keep the denominator in mind. Since 2020, Waymo has reported roughly 60 crashes serious enough to trigger an airbag or cause an injury. But those crashes occurred over more than 50 million miles of driverless operations. If you randomly selected 50 million miles of human driving—that’s roughly 70 lifetimes behind the wheel—you would likely see far more serious crashes than Waymo has experienced to date.
[...] Waymo knows exactly how many times its vehicles have crashed. What’s tricky is figuring out the appropriate human baseline, since human drivers don’t necessarily report every crash. Waymo has tried to address this by estimating human crash rates in its two biggest markets—Phoenix and San Francisco. Waymo’s analysis focused on the 44 million miles Waymo had driven in these cities through December, ignoring its smaller operations in Los Angeles and Austin.
This is the wrong comparison. These are taxis, which means they're driving taxi miles. They should be compared to taxis, not normal people who drive almost exclusively during their commutes (which is probably the most dangerous time to drive since it's precisely when they're all driving).
I was going to say they should only be comparing them under the same driving areas, since I know they aren't allowed in many areas.
But you're right, it's even tighter than that.
-
This post did not contain any content.
Focusing on airbag-deployments and injuries ignores the obvious problem: these things are unbelievably unsafe for pedestrians and bicyclists. I curse SF for allowing AVs and always give them a wide berth because there's no way to know if they see you and they'll often behave erratically and unpredictably in crosswalks. I don't give a shit how often the passengers are injured, I care a lot more how much they disrupt life for all the people who aren't paying Waymo for the privilege.
-
If someone can't walk a few blocks, that's on them. Airplanes don't get you exactly to the destination either. There's a tradeoff.
Yeah fuck disabled and elderly people.
-
If someone can't walk a few blocks, that's on them. Airplanes don't get you exactly to the destination either. There's a tradeoff.
Rip disabled people.
-
If someone can't walk a few blocks, that's on them. Airplanes don't get you exactly to the destination either. There's a tradeoff.
@meco03211 @Jayk0b cars can't either - it's a false premise. Not everything is drive-thru. How far is, say, the bakery section from your car when you go to the supermarket?
-
What's more efficient?
In terms of getting to an exact location.
Public transportation only can get you near your target mostly. Not on point like a car, bike etc.
Bicycles? ride/ walk to were you need to be? Why do you need to be driven to an exact point? All the space needed for parking is just wasted.
You need to create a specific scenario in order to make cars seem more efficient than alternatives. They cause more accidents, take up more space while carrying fewer people at any given time while also causing more pollution than other modes of transport.
-
That's what happens when you have a reasonable sensor suite with LIDAR, instead of trying to rely entirely on cameras like Tesla does.
-
I was going to say they should only be comparing them under the same driving areas, since I know they aren't allowed in many areas.
But you're right, it's even tighter than that.
