25 ms·

Waymo: Google's self-driving car company

785 points by davidcgl 10y ago

serg_chernata 10y ago
I'm optimistic. I agree with Musks estimates. At most I see first fully autonomous vehicles being on the roads within 5 years. Yes, they may only work in places with clearly marked streets but if I could use my autonomous car for daily commute or roughly 50% of the time it's still an incredible achievement and well worth the cost.
- rm_-rf_slash 10y ago
  I live in a small enough city where I need to drive for some things but I can walk to work. If an autonomous car could help with little things like shopping for groceries or driving to get a haircut, then my last mile problem would be effectively solved. I think that there are a lot of little steps towards 100% autonomy that will still provide tremendous value to people, even if the product is far from perfect.
- fullshark 10y ago
  Those two ideas are contradictory. It's not fully autonomous if it only works in ideal conditions. There's already a bunch of prototypes that work perfectly in ideal conditions.
iblaine 10y ago
What does waymo mean?
- jl6 10y ago
  It'll cost waymo' than a regular car.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
- refulgentis 10y ago
  "Waymo stands for a new way forward in mobility."
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
graaben 10y ago
Although this site doesn't really offer any substance, I'm glad that Google is making this project more public. Not only it nice to have updates on the project (I do hope they continue to update this site with their progress) but I think PR campaigns like this will go a long way to swaying popular opinion on self driving technology. The faster they can get the public on their side, the fewer regulatory hurdles they will face.
visarga 10y ago
At least they could have given a more up to date report on what they are doing. 7 years passed since 2009 and all we've seen is a couple of promo videos with scant actual information. We have no idea how they compare to Tesla or other self driving car startups.
- mememachine 10y ago
  sums up google products
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- ucaetano 10y ago
  "how they compare to Tesla" Given that Tesla doesn't even have emergency braking and auto-steering, I'd guess they compare quite favorably...
  - wmf 10y ago
    Presumably one would compare Google's fully autonomous prototype against Tesla's fully autonomous prototype, not what Tesla is shipping now.
    - ucaetano 10y ago
      Then, per the article, Google had its first Level-5 fully-autonomous, no-backup-driver in public streets over a year ago.
  - yessql 10y ago
    Tesla will have 100,000 prototypes being trained in shadow mode for a billion miles per year across the globe within a year. Tesla will compare quite favorably
    - ucaetano 10y ago
      That's a prediction, not a comparison.
homero 10y ago
You mean Alphabet
debt 10y ago
definite old-school warner brothers inspired logo they got going on there https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iaz0YyIcmHQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iaz0YyIcmHQ
joezydeco 10y ago
Interesting that this very same day, the US Government is looking into proposals to require vehicle-to-vehicle communication in passenger cars to enhance safety. http://www.wsj.com/articles/regulators-call-on-cars-to-chat-with-each-other-1481645582 http://www.wsj.com/articles/regulators-call-on-cars-to-chat-...
- tedajax 10y ago
  Seems a little premature to require this as we don't necessarily know that this would help.
  - XaspR8d 10y ago
    I agree that you shouldn't assume any information will necessarily improve performance, but I feel that, naively, inter-car communication would have tons of useful applications. If anything else, during the transition to fully-automated, it would be wonderful if human drivers were able to visualize the intent of the automated vehicles around them. To know that a car is going to merge into my lane in 50m, or is attempting a U-turn, is so much more useful than simply seeing a turn signal.
  - Animats 10y ago
    Chris Urmson, back when he headed Google's self driving car effort, said car to car communication was unnecessary. The car has to have good enough sensors and decision-making to deal with all the things that aren't communicating, from pedestrians to deer.
    - anchpop 10y ago
      It could still be helpful, however. If your car gets a signal that there are an unusual amount of cars stopped half a mile ahead of it, it might be able to deduce that there has been an accident or something else stopping traffic and navigate away before it becomes an issue. Sort of like an automatic version of Waze
    - joezydeco 10y ago
tedajax 10y ago
So nothing new, just the name?
vthallam 10y ago
This is great. Finally a separate division with focus and more accountability on the timeline i guess.
mberger 10y ago
Interesting that they built the site with Angular 1.5.7. I thought they would want to showcase Angular 2.
- analogmemory 10y ago
  Showcase what? It's just a basic marketing site. Did they even need angular?
  - andybak 10y ago
    The problem is that many people learning web development nowadays don't realise there is anything other than impressively complex client-side MVC frameworks. They are taught that traditional HTML pages are a dinosaur and doing progressive enhancement with some simple jQuery or vanilla JS is something for amateurs and old-timers. I'm really pleased I was forced to learn the web in layers. I learnt basic HTML, then CSS came along. I realised I needed some dynamic behaviour so looked into CGI/Perl and later PHP. The DHTML became all the rage and I picked up a bit of javascript. PHP began to show it's weaknesses and luckily Django and Rails popped up. Ajax became a thing somewhere in all that and returning JSON instead of HTML snippets was sometimes useful. If you start now and dive into learning Angular/React/Ember/Whatever - you are so insulated from the lower layers it must get a bit baffling trying to understand how all the parts fit together and why some things are done the way they are. tl;dr - Get off my lawn.
  - mberger 10y ago
    Probably not. My point is that what (I'm assuming) is a brand new site is not built using the latest version. I would have thought that an organization such as Alphabet would want to dog food as much as possible and in doing so tell the world that 'Hey, look at this! It's super easy and pretty! You can have a site like this too if you adopt our technology'. Instead, it suggests to me that the barrier to learning the new shiny is big enough that whoever made it didn't want to learn it. That raises the question, should I learn it? Why, if even people at Alphabet don't want to? Do they doubt the long term prospects for Angular 2 so much that they hesitate in adopting it? Do they not consider it mature enough? TL;DR I read too much into things.
kin 10y ago
The website is pretty explicit about it being just self-driving "technology". I wonder if they just plan to work w/ one manufacturer for now or if they're in talks w/ many. With so much competition, if they're all executed to the same standards of safety, my wallet is going to go w/ better design & aesthetics.
- roymurdock 10y ago
  > Our testing fleet includes modified Lexus SUVs and custom-built prototype vehicles. We also plan to add modified Chrysler Pacifica minivans to our fleet. Probably safe to say they're in talks with other auto manufacturers that are looking to add self-driving software to their portfolios.
metakermit 10y ago
More business info in this Forbes article: http://www.forbes.com/sites/alanohnsman/2016/12/13/googles-spins-off-self-driving-car-unit-as-waymo/?utm_source=yahoo&utm_medium=partner&utm_campaign=yahootix&partner=yahootix&yptr=yahoo#31c4b6572af4 http://www.forbes.com/sites/alanohnsman/2016/12/13/googles-s... TL;DR: > “We’re now an independent company within the Alphabet umbrella,” > Google is currently equipping a fleet of 100 hybrid Chrysler minivans with its sensors and computing gear that will soon join its nearly 60 prototype autonomous vehicles. The company hasn't yet disclosed when and how it will begin generating revenue from its efforts and Krafcik declined to discuss specific business plans today.
- Ph0X 10y ago
  I still finding it silly that they are trying to go straight for L5 (which is the only case where you can fully remove the steering wheel). By the sound of it, they already have an L4 going (can drive itself in 99.99% of the situations, might need user take over in very rare cases). Why not for now release an initial car with L4, and collect pile and pile of data, which is what they need to get over that last 0.01%.
  - anonred 10y ago
    I attended one of Google's talks on this. The rationale is that humans can't be trusted to take control in a timely manner for that 0.01%. Their internal testing with an L4 system on trained Googlers (who were told to remain alert in the event that action needed to be taken) had instances of testers sleeping, eating, putting on makeup, etc. They concluded that if Googlers with explicit training couldn't behave themselves, then L4 definitely wasn't sufficient for the general public; autonomous driving had to be all or nothing.
    - amelius 10y ago
      Or ... the car could monitor the driver too, and alert them when they lose attention.
scarmig 10y ago
If you look at the cumulative miles driven, the slope has a tendency to increase, as you'd expect as you added more cars to your fleet. In 2013, though, there's a regression in number of new miles logged, and it took until 2015 to catch up to 2012 numbers. Can anyone give insight into the cause?
- a9a 10y ago
  Probably a shift from testing mostly on the highway (which was the initial proving ground for the program) to testing on surface streets
meterplech 10y ago
Obviously this vision is compelling. I'm confused by the decision of their prototype car to not have manual control overrides (e.g steering wheel or something similar). Air travel has been revolutionized with autopilot, but there are clear overrides for safety in case systems crash. I don't think we need to be wed to the pedal + wheel paradigm - but having a manual override option seems critical to safety.
- tyingq 10y ago
  You can read Google's initial rationale for "no steering wheel" here: http://www.npr.org/sections/alltechconsidered/2016/02/24/467983440/google-makes-the-case-for-a-hands-off-approach-to-self-driving-cars http://www.npr.org/sections/alltechconsidered/2016/02/24/467... They seem pretty clearly, however, to have changed their minds on the topic. It's enlightening to compare the information on this new site with information on the old site (https://www.google.com/selfdrivingcar/ https://www.google.com/selfdrivingcar/). You can see what language they've either removed, or toned down.
- the8472 10y ago
  a big red emergency switch telling it to pull over and shut down may be useful. Anything more than that would mean your system is not fully autonomous, because the driver would have to pay attention all the time. What good is manual override if there's nobody paying attention? It would also mean you need a qualified driver, you couldn't use it to ferry around children, disabled people or simply people without a license.
- yessql 10y ago
  The argument is that if you aren't paying attention 99% of the time, that you wouldn't be capable of dropping whatever you are doing in order to take control. Also, these are meant to enable transportation for people incapable of driving.
boxcardavin 10y ago
Google's commitment to SDCs has always seemed half hearted so I wonder if this indicates that they are getting more serious about it. Moonshots at X have been getting the axe, the SDC stuff seems to be the only obviously viable one right now. To the surprise of many folks (myself included) it has turned out that SDC tech is probably for existing manufacturers to develop versus software guys learning how to build cars without the massive supply chains needed to assemble 4000lb widgets. Before anyone points to Tesla, try getting inside a $140k Tesla and then a $140k Mercedes and it will be obvious what advantages there are to having manufacturing experience stretching decades.
- jessriedel 10y ago
  SDC? Self-driving cars?
- ksrm 10y ago
  I haven't been in either. What differences do you mean?
  - uw_rob 10y ago
    I think mostly it is the fit and finish. I've been in a 2016 BMW 750i and a 2013 Model S, for about a total of maybe 30 minutes in the BMW and 10 in the Tesla. The interior of the 7 series seemed special to me. All of the buttons felt great, seats looked beautiful and were super comfortable to sit in. The control panel had many small OLED displays and they looked great. And small details like when I went to adjust the seat, by placing my fingers on the buttons, information about my seat configuration popped up on the center console, so I could see what I was changing. Also the rear passenger seats and rear windshield had power sunscreens. Here is a picture of the iterior of the BMW: http://st.motortrend.com/uploads/sites/5/2015/11/2016-BMW-750i-xDrive-interior.jpg http://st.motortrend.com/uploads/sites/5/2015/11/2016-BMW-75... Here is a video of the 7 series interior: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHDMAibH1G4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHDMAibH1G4 In comparison, the Tesla's interior felt mostly large and empty. Here is a picutre of the interior of a 2016 Model X: http://st.motortrend.com/uploads/sites/5/2016/03/2016-Tesla-Model-X-P90D-interior.jpg http://st.motortrend.com/uploads/sites/5/2016/03/2016-Tesla-... Don't get me wrong, Tesla makes some super amazing cars. But the high price tag isn't for the interior. (Disclaimer: I own a lowly 3 series so I may be slightly biased to BMW)
SippinLean 10y ago
Sounds like "lame-o" D:
dictum 10y ago
This is such a minor nitpick, but I'm bothered by it because I see so much performance-shaming coming from some Googlers: The site loads large pictures for all viewport widths (ideally they'd load downscaled images for smaller viewports — it's wasteful to load a large image for small devices) and the image files are PNGs when they should be jpeg or webp (example: http://waymo.com/static/images/journey/streets.png http://waymo.com/static/images/journey/streets.png)
- Govannon 10y ago
  That example isn't even compressed, which could drastically reduce its size.
  - abailin 10y ago
    The image shouldn't be a png in the first place.
- mercer 10y ago
  I've noticed this quite a bit with Google stuff. There's blogger, for example, which is one of the rare sites that doesn't show me anything until I whitelist the entire site in uMatrix.
- antisthenes 10y ago
  How about It loads a fucking video ? That's pretty much all you need to know about performance.
- zellyn 10y ago
  Hmmm. I'm more usually aware of helpful, insightful, useful articles on how to improve performance, and a constant stream of optimizations to web technology to the same end. Not that the site in question isn't bloated brochure-ware. Just that I wouldn't characterize Google that way.
- btian 10y ago
  Waymo is not Google.
aoeu345 10y ago
This repels me for a few reasons: - Instead of talking about their car's capabilities on the front page, they include a pathos about drunk driving. I feel embarrassed how Google doesn't have more things to say about the car. - It looks really unattractive, I could hardly call it cute. - It's not in production, it's in testing. These companies are sitting on mountains of cash! And they still fail to do things effectively! Apple and Google are just sitting on their fat cashflows while the world is getting very scary very fast. I'm tired of these "technology" companies doing complete fails of R&D projects, too damn shy to leave their advertising revenues. We need leaders with real courage.
- mabbo 10y ago
  They've told you exactly what matters to them: not sexy cars, not the kinds of technology used, but the goal they have in mind. Tesla, by comparison, is building sexy fast cars that happen to be self-driving.
  - RIMR 10y ago
    And Tesla's "Self-Driving" autopilot already has one attributed death. Google has a few fender-benders...
pookieinc 10y ago
This is really exciting! I see these cars all over the place in the Bay Area, so it's nice to see that they're at least one step closer in making it into a product and thus bringing it to reality. I wonder about the internationalization of this product, especially if (or when?) it's brought to other countries and regions, such as the Middle East. In some of those countries, women aren't allowed to drive and men drive with extreme speed (and park in the most horrible of ways). While this will cut down on things like speeding / drinking / etc, it may also potentially impact social norms as well. I'm hoping to keep a level-head about this project, but any step forward in this endeavor is worth being excited about.
- positr0n 10y ago
  Women aren't allowed to drive in, e.g. Saudi Arabia, because they aren't allowed to be out of their home without a blood relative or husband. That could lead to mingling with the opposite sex or something like that. “What would happen if a woman got in a car accident? Then she would be forced to deal with the male driver of the other car, a stranger, with no oversight." [0] So I don't think self driving cars will solve that problem at all, sadly. [0]: http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/10/-negative-physiological-impacts-why-saudi-women-arent-allowed-to-drive/280343/ http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/10/-ne... Quora answers from people that appear to be saudi: https://www.quora.com/Why-are-women-not-allowed-to-drive-in-Saudi-Arabia https://www.quora.com/Why-are-women-not-allowed-to-drive-in-...
  - pookieinc 10y ago
    I appreciate the reply, that's pretty sad to hear. Thanks for the links, they're really interesting.
chirau 10y ago
Welp, the site no longer works. Let's hope they didn't shut down the project already, Google Wave style.
joeguilmette 10y ago
I'm interested to see where all the major players end up in 5yrs: • Tesla bootstrapping a ride service on the backs of buyers • Waymo directly rolling their own fleet • Uber trying to get a self-driving fleet up, burning mountains of money to maintain their "monopoly" on Uber for rides • Lyft working with GM to get a fleet up • All of the other car manufacturers trying to get autonomous vehicles going, presumably hoping for consumers to still want to own a vehicle rather than just pay $1 to get a ride So: How much is Uber's market share worth? I suspect it'll evaporate overnight in every market where another service has autonomous vehicles and they don't. Also: Private car ownership is going to fall off a cliff shortly after autonomous ride services arrive. Which probably means general demand for vehicles will fall off a cliff. I predict blood on the walls.
- scarmig 10y ago
  Is there a particular reason to think Uber is going to be last to autonomous vehicles? I can see a good argument that they're head of the pack today, between Tesla's not-really-autonomous vehicles and Google's perpetual inability to execute.
  - joeguilmette 10y ago
    This is a fair point. Uber has yet to ship any hardware, and really any software aside from an app that is a couple steps above "Uber for X" that are whipped out in a weekend. I know they gobbled up a bunch of researchers, but moonshot engineering feats like autonomous driving is not (yet) in their DNA. And their current business model is not profitable and will die the moment they go up against an autonomous service. They don't need to be last to market to lose, they need to be first in order to survive.
    - mikedh 10y ago
      >yet to ship any hardware Except for the fleet of Ford Fusions and XC90's covered in very nicely implemented custom sensor rafts http://theincline.com/2016/12/12/three-months-of-self-driving-cars-in-pittsburgh-a-look-back/ http://theincline.com/2016/12/12/three-months-of-self-drivin...
heywire 10y ago
On days like today, when there are several inches of snow on the ground and more to come, I always wonder how autonomous vehicles will handle such situations. What happens when snow (or mud, etc) accumulates on the camera or sensors? I don't doubt that a computer can react quicker and with more precision in an "event", but what about when it simply can't "see"? I don't see a steering wheel in these videos, so I guess there is no manual failsafe?
- ProAm 10y ago
  If it can't see, you can't see either.
- mmbleh 10y ago
  The sensors are primarily radar based. Mud/snow won't really affect them.
  - treehau5 10y ago
    False -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clutter_(radar) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clutter_(radar) Anyways, if this is true, it's a grim future then. Radar is incredibly trivial to interfere with.
    - mmbleh 10y ago
      From the "How it works" Google self driving car page: "Sensors Lasers, radars and cameras detect objects in all directions" It uses many kinds of sensors. Yes I know about clutter, I've spent quite a lot of time in the radar industry. But by combining data from radars of multiple wavelengths, it becomes pretty feasible. Though yes, difficult. https://www.google.com/selfdrivingcar/how/ https://www.google.com/selfdrivingcar/how/
      - treehau5 10y ago
        It strikes me as curious that someone who spent a lot of time in the radar industry would make the original statement you made, at least in that fashion. Also, radar is subject to interference as well. In addition, there are many things that act as "natural" corner reflectors that would pose more challenges, I can only think of some mountainous snowy / icey nothern US/Canadian routes and just thinking No way Light sensors and Radar sensors will conquer this. We need to fundamentally redesign our road systems to accommodate self driving cars. That might happen... in 50-100 years...after we address the already crumbling infrastructure we have. For perfect, sunny conditions, like the roads in Nevada all these self driving startups are doing their testing, with straight flat landscapes, I am sure the tech can work fine. Rest of the country, maybe not so much.
hartator 10y ago
> Imagine if everyone could get around easily and safely, without tired, drunk or distracted driving. I don't really think we should place drunk driving at the same level as tired or distracted driving.
iMuzz 10y ago
The only thing I really learned watching that video is that google decided to call its autonomous vehicle unit 'Waymo'. While I'm excited, I'd love to know how they actually plan to roll this out!
cjcole 10y ago
"The average US city gets 26 inches of snow per year." http://www.bestplaces.net/climate/city/california/mountain_view http://www.bestplaces.net/climate/city/california/mountain_v... "Snowfall is 0 inches." http://www.bestplaces.net/climate/city/arizona/phoenix http://www.bestplaces.net/climate/city/arizona/phoenix "Snowfall is 0 inches." http://www.bestplaces.net/climate/city/texas/austin http://www.bestplaces.net/climate/city/texas/austin "Snowfall is 1 inches." http://www.bestplaces.net/climate/city/washington/kirkland http://www.bestplaces.net/climate/city/washington/kirkland "Snowfall is 4 inches." I hope they are driving far enough from their home bases to get some snow miles under their belt. http://www.bestplaces.net/climate/city/massachusetts/boston http://www.bestplaces.net/climate/city/massachusetts/boston "Snowfall is 47 inches."
- emmett 10y ago
  Do you really think it hasn't occurred to WayMo/Google that maybe they should test their cars in snow/rain/sleet/fog/confetti?
  - revelation 10y ago
    I'm sure it has. I'm not sure they have.
  - bambax 10y ago
    Well, they only tested in US cities, so it's unclear what has occurred to them. How will it work in small crowded streets in India, China, or just Italy?
    - DrScump 10y ago
      Or Boston?
    - IshKebab 10y ago
      I agree it is unlikely to work on non-US roads for a while but I can't really blame them for starting in the easiest conditions. It doesn't have to work everywhere at the outset to be useful.
jeffmcjunkin 10y ago
They have a number of blog posts that just launched on Medium: https://medium.com/waymo https://medium.com/waymo
- cbr 10y ago
  It looks like they're converting many of their articles from https://www.google.com/selfdrivingcar/reports/ https://www.google.com/selfdrivingcar/reports/ to Medium?
SmokyBourbon 10y ago
Waymo? They own Waze. Did they consider Wayzo or Wayzmo? Or are they going to rebrand Waze as Waym?
melling 10y ago
The hardest problem to solve will be the humans who bully the polite self-driving cars: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2016/11/17/humans-will-bully-robot-cars-mercedes-chief-warns/ http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2016/11/17/humans-will...
- pg314 10y ago
  It seems that could be easily solved with regulation. The self-driving cars could even automatically send a video of incidents to the police.
  - melling 10y ago
    You want to regulate politeness?
    - TillE 10y ago
      Reckless driving is already a crime (not just a civil offense) in many states. In New York: "Reckless driving shall mean driving...in a manner which unreasonably interferes with the free and proper use of the public highway" Simple aggressive driving as described in the linked article is, well, not a real problem. Unless you cause an accident.
      - melling 10y ago
        No one was talking about reckless driving. Aggressive driving could be a problem. That's why it is being discussed.
- drakonandor 10y ago
  Manual overrides (or 'defensive' mode) needs to be available. Or carjackers will simply be able to stand in the road and wait.
shogun21 10y ago
I feel like they're really getting on the cute-sy theme, from the car's friendly design to the name "Waymo". The lack of control is still kind of terrifying so I think they're trying to make it as non-threatening as possible.
- Mizza 10y ago
  > "The lack of control is still kind of terrifying so I think they're trying to make it as non-threatening as possible." This is true of all Google products, and has been the basis of Google's branding strategy from the very beginning. The dorky, colorful logo isn't an accident. They are a scary, dangerous and harmful company with an extremely friendly face.
- dsymonds 10y ago
  I've seen what happens when humans have control of cars. It's not pretty.
  - brwr 10y ago
    This is the point that I see everyone discounting. Whether autonomous cars turn out to be feasible or not, we know for a fact that humans are bad drivers. Don't we owe it to ourselves to try something different?
    - euyyn 10y ago
      There's a nice analogy with fighter jets taking off from aircraft carriers. They have handlebars in the top of the cabin that the pilots are required to grab during take off. Experience had shown that, when they took off with their hands in the steering stick, the acceleration was so high that they'd react by pushing the stick, plunging the plane into the ocean.
ticktockten 10y ago
Am I the only one getting a 404 on this URL?
rudolf0 10y ago
Really shallow of me, but the name kind of turns me off. "Uber" or "Lyft" are just whatever, but Waymo sounds like... something an infant would sputter out. Or "Lame-o".
- tmzt 10y ago
  Goo-gol?
arijun 10y ago
I still don't understand why every company doing self driving cars is focusing on consumer cars while no major player is doing interstate trucking. Interstate trucking could pretty much be done now, and has several advantages. Driving on interstate freeways is orders of magnitude easier than driving in a city with pedestrians, bikes, cars parked in the road, etc. And there is a great monetization scheme--no driver means you can get it to its destination more quickly and more cheaply. (The thought is you'd hand off to a real driver once you get in to a city)
- arjie 10y ago
  If you solve the consumer car problem, you own personal transportation. That's why. Besides, your premise is untrue anyway. Otto is the autonomous truck thing. Rolls Royce is the drone ship.
- ma2rten 10y ago
  I think Otto/Uber and Mercedes are working on that.
- DrScump 10y ago
  "Driving on interstate freeways is orders of magnitude easier than driving in a city with pedestrians, bikes, cars parked in the road, etc." Yes, it's easy and safe if competing traffic is only fellow truckers or other level-headed, observant drivers. It's when you mix in the distracted, newbie, or skittish drivers that things get difficult. Long-haul truckers (the majority, the good ones) develop a sixth sense about such risks; I can't imagine thoroughly coding a software replacement.
  - manmal 10y ago
    About the sixth sense - does this not also apply to good doctors? And yet, they are easily outdiagnosed by many ML implementations. I can imagine deep learning to also gain this sixth sense. E.g. a cyclist in front of you looks to the left - a proficient driver predicts that cyclist might turn left very soon. Why should a self driving car/truck not learn the same?
shardo 10y ago
I'm not sure how I would feel about the absence of steering wheels and pedals within their cars. Tesla's auto-pilot can be over-ridden due to the presence of the steering wheels and the pedals. But in a car that has none, you're not in control. And that, is scary no matter how you look at it.
- pg314 10y ago
  Once the technology is mature, I don't think it would be any scarier than driving with the average driver as a passenger.
glbrew 10y ago
They will get smoked by Tesla.
pera 10y ago
Google seems to like logos with a W shape (Wallet, Wave, now Waymo). I wonder if that's on purpose, as in making a reference to WWW in some way.
googthrwwy1234 10y ago
Throwaway. They spun off to let it die in peace without causing a PR disaster for Google or other companies under Alphabet umbrella. Now watch them wind it down and let someone else take over this lost cause in the next 2-3 years. The reason why this is a lost cause is because the remaining 10% of the problem (inclement weather, bad pavement, unpredictable behavior of non-autonomous vehicles, etc) is exponentially hard and no one has a foggiest clue how to tackle it. Google rode the PR train for as long as it could, but now it's time to get off.
tzury 10y ago
Waymo will be the Android of the cars, that is, Google Technology on other's hardware. Well decided Alphabet, very well decided!
cr0sh 10y ago
This post seems like a "way-back" post - considering Google has announced pulling from the self-driving car market (another HN post details it)...
bertil 10y ago
There is an announcement today too that Google will not be operating that technology, but focus on selling self-driving to car manufacturers. Does this mean that Alphabet will keep on working on building their own cars but under a different company? The association between the two is a little confusing at the moment.
dfar1 10y ago
I am confused. Was there some news today that they wouldn't have their own car, and instead would use their tech with existing car companies?
devy 10y ago
On the FAQ section, Q: "I'd like to join the team. Where can I find a list of open roles?" A: "You can learn more about available roles here[1]." And interestingly, that link[1] is broken :) Update: it's fixed NOW! [1]: https://waymo.com/join/ https://waymo.com/join/
gpmcadam 10y ago
You'd think Google would have considered optimising the content on this page as per their own recommendations: https://developers.google.com/speed/pagespeed/insights/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwaymo.com%2F&tab=mobile https://developers.google.com/speed/pagespeed/insights/?url=...
jonthepirate 10y ago
More power to anybody who's willing to put their children in a car and not pay attention to the road or have control the outcomes of relentless traffic threats all around them. In my view, all of this technology is much better suited to aid the human driver as a safety enhancement system rather than a full replacement for vehicle navigation.
ilaksh 10y ago
So when does the Waymo app come out that I can use to get an autonomous car to drive me to the store?
dang 10y ago
There's also a Wired article about this at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13168781 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13168781.
jrowley 10y ago
How long until someone puts a personal gym inside a self driving SUV, so you can workout during your commute? I can imagine people running on a treadmill inside a car while it is stuck in traffic. Or at least sitting on a trainer.
- davej 10y ago
  And feed the energy back into the motor. Or even directly power the wheels. It could work if you make the car more lightweight and use a pedal system on gears instead of treadmill. Let's call it a... "Bicycle". :)
- kLeeIsDead 10y ago
  Or just a bed.
  - jpindar 10y ago
    Given that these cars are supposedly going to strand us on the side of the road (or in our workplace parking lot) on many snowy winter nights, they had better have beds.
- brwr 10y ago
  That would be pretty great. How do you handle the movements of the car though? Bumps in the road and stuff like that?
shanwang 10y ago
Looking at it, I'm thinking google hasn't learnt anything about the failure of google glass, who wants to buy a car like that? A car is more than a commuting tool, it really matters how it looks.
- jiggliemon 10y ago
  They're not selling a car. They're selling a driver. They're presumably going to partner with auto manufacturers.
  - shanwang 10y ago
    On their website they have pictures of both the prototype and other manufacturers' cars. it makes a lot of sense to just sell the driving system, like the android model. But I assume they designed the prototype to capture the public's attention. I just don't know why they can't spend a bit more effort to make it look desirable.
- j2bax 10y ago
  Thats the thing though... They are trying to make it "just a commuting tool". Do people care too much what the outside of their subway looks like?
  - shanwang 10y ago
    If their target is to sell tickets for a self driving fleet, I guess that makes sense.
Pica_soO 10y ago
How much alone are the parking lots worth in San Francisco? Imagine a city without those..
riprowan 10y ago
A lot of comments here and I haven't seen one that addresses the problem of impulsivity. Many / most of the times I need a car are not schedulable events but impulses. For example when I'm working on a project around the house, it's typical to need to run up to the hardware store 3 times in a day. I think autonomous transport will be very popular but shared vehicles will be hardly more popular than Uber / taxis are now. If you think that shared autonomous vehicles will be significantly more popular than shared conventional vehicles are today, I'd be interested to hear why. Is it primarily cost savings?
- guimarin 10y ago
  Yes. most people when confronted with the choice of a cheap shared ride, or the convenience of their own vehicle will choose a cheap shared ride. The cost on a per mile basis, will be close to 10x cheaper. I predict even you will change-over when confronted with that kind of choice. It seems inevitable.
- dontreact 10y ago
  What about on-demand transportation doesn't meet the needs of your impulse to run to the hardware store? Just call for a car 6 (there and back) times and you won't worry about having to park on either side.
  - brwr 10y ago
    I think the concern is more about availability. How long does it take for a car to show up each time OP needs to go to the store? This is a problem with Uber now. I need to be at the airport at 5:00 AM tomorrow morning and I'm just hoping like hell that there will be an Uber around. Most drivers will be home sleeping. Low-volume times like my example above are where autonomous vehicles can shine. Making the economics work during times of high volume is more difficult. You can always buy more cars, but that's just that many more cars you need storage space for outside of peak hours.
- brwr 10y ago
  I think you may be experiencing recall bias. How do you get to work every day? How often do you go to the grocery store? What about going out to dinner? For myself, living in the Bay Area, anything related to driving or owning a car is a nightmare -- not that that has stopped me from owning a car. Driving from Mountain View to San Mateo takes about 45 minutes in the morning at 75 minutes in the evening. I went to SF to have breakfast with a friend this past weekend and finding parking took half an hour. I'd love a self-driving car that could just drop me at my door. Autonomous cars should also lead to drastic traffic improvements, assuming the cars will eventually be able to communicate with each other in a reliable way. Maybe you live in a less densely-populated area? I have an aunt that lives in a rural area and I couldn't imagine a need or desire for autonomous cars there. There is definitely a long way to go, but think of all the advantages! Parking can be automated and condensed, which means more land is available for buildings or parks or anything else. If you suffer from traffic problems now, your daily commute could be cut by 50% or more. Shared vehicles should cost less than what you pay for gas and insurance now. High availability is a real possibility if someone can figure out how to make the economics work. Ride sharing can be almost completely automated, leading to less pollution.
blancotech 10y ago
All I can think of when I hear the word Waymo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_lMu8V5Xa90 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_lMu8V5Xa90
turingbook 10y ago
The self-driving car is just a component of bigger system, as new generation of servers on cloud centers. Riding service is cloud computing. I bet on Uber or Didi in China.
walrus1066 10y ago
It feels there's a mountain of hype around autonomous vehicles. I think the core challenges to a fully autonomous vehicle (with no human backup), are still far from solved. They need to reliably deal with an almost infinite number of edge and corner cases, each quite different from the last. For example: - communication with other human drivers. In London, this is required all the time, like when parked cars block the road, allowing just one car through. Or traffic light out of action, so you negotiate with other cars using hand gestures, light flashes etc - endless roadworks, that change what lane you're allowed to go on, turn a two way road to one way road. - random debris on road. Plastic bag - safe to drive through, wooden plank - safe, plank with nail - not safe. - loss of GPS, mobile data, or both (again, surprisingly frequent) - making way for emergency vehicles (sometimes need to drive into lane you're not normally allowed to go, I.e. Bus lane, pavement) - policeman coordinating traffic So far, I haven't found any evidence of autonomous cars dealing with the above. If anyone has, please post.
- larrik 10y ago
  I'm not sure what your point is. Fully autonomous is still in progress, and still has work to do.
  - koheripbal 10y ago
    The point is that we are far far further away than commonly accepted. The day a computer can distinguish between a plastic bag in the road and a child is the day I'd support them on the road.
    - woofyman 10y ago
      Or if you see a ball cross the road there are strong odds a child might be chasing after it.
    - zoul 10y ago
      Do computer drivers have to be perfect, or is it enough to be much better than human drivers?
gaspar 10y ago
I can see the potential of self-driving cars for long distance trips (e.g. SF-LA) or for big trucks, but I can't see it for everyday use especially if someone has kids. How many times an average person in US uses her car? 2-3 without kids and maybe more than 4-5 with kids(I think my numbers are probably too low)? For this to be viable economically, the pricing has to be very low and in order to be very low all of the people has to use this "self-driving service". This creates another problem though, you will have to plan your "short ride" ahead of time, e.g. what happens if you want to leave at the last moment and no car is available around you? And then there is another problem, if the self-driving service is cheap the ownership of the car is going to be even cheaper. A lot of variables and difficult to answer questions. I don't know if we ever going to be a society without car ownership and to be honest as long as there is no traffic I like driving, and it makes me relax. I see it more as a fancy option for cars, like what Tesla does, but to completely remove the car ownership is going to take many decades. Before cars there were horses and stuff so the transition was easier. This is going to be very tough.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
kLeeIsDead 10y ago
How is this news? So what, they slapped a new name on the project. What about actual progress on the tech? Honestly, with Google's track record, I'm starting to doubt that this will ever ship. It just seems like a huge marketing tactic at this point. Plus. all of the talent has moved to companies like Otto and comma.ai; who are making tangible progress in this space.
- rak00n 10y ago
  I had thinking the same thing when I saw 600+ comments. I thought they announced L5 along with the spun out.
Skunkleton 10y ago
The name sounds like a cartoon car crash.
thomasthomas 10y ago
this comment section is hater news at its finest. autonomous will change all of our lives for the better sooner than you think. edge cases will be solved. the competition will be interesting, rooting for everyone.
fh973 10y ago
... meanwhile Microsoft successfully attacks the billion dollar office communication market. Seriously, Google has had so many growth businesses in their hands and just fails to execute on them. This might be for one part because of its internal structure but I get the impression that many of these things look not exciting enough for its leadership.
Unklejoe 10y ago
It’s going to be interesting watching how local police departments and municipalities handle the widespread adoption of autonomous vehicles. In my town (a suburban town with a low crime rate), the police spend the majority of their time enforcing traffic laws. The municipal courthouse is always filled with people, and if I had to guess, I’d say that 80% of the people are there as a result of a traffic violation, while the other 20% are there for drug offenses/other. It seems like autonomous cars would lead to a drop in traffic offenses and thus revenue. Even if only a tiny portion of the town’s revenue actually comes from traffic violations (when compared to local property tax), there would probably be a lot more idle time for police. I suspect that they will first start to raise our property taxes to compensate for the lost revenue, but I would think that the long term effect would be a reduction of municipal workers/police. Of course, this doesn’t apply to other areas like Philadelphia, where police spend only a small percentage of their time enforcing traffic laws.
- brwr 10y ago
  Anecdotally, one of Google's autonomous cars was pulled over in Mountain View, CA a while back[1]. The car was going 24 MPH in a 35 and the officer didn't realize the car was driving itself. [1]: http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/13/us/google-self-driving-car-pulled-over/ http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/13/us/google-self-driving-car-pul...
- Corrado 10y ago
  Of course, the flip side to this is the notion that autonomous vehicles will free up the existing police force to do more important things. In most cities there is a distinct lack of officers on the street, usually due to budget constraints. Now they can take all of those officers used for monitoring roads and highways and have them do other, more important things; all without increasing the number of officers or budget.
  - cjg 10y ago
    Or more realistically, make a substantial proportion of them redundant.
fareesh 10y ago
What is it about car hardware+software that gives people confidence that the operating system / some core process won't crash or reboot in the middle of a turn or brake? I'm not familiar with the architecture of "mission critical" systems which I assume would be similar to what they use in these cars.
- euyyn 10y ago
  You'll like this story about the redundancy in the Space Shuttle saving the day: https://twitter.com/marssciencegrad/status/806963662351020032 https://twitter.com/marssciencegrad/status/80696366235102003...
codecamper 10y ago
Easily mispronounced "whammo"
gist 10y ago
What's the story in the video with 'pulling at heartstrings' by featuring a blind person? The problem of a blind person getting a ride is obviously solved. But more importantly it's an edge case of a need for a vehicle that is self driving. And actually I wonder whether someone who is blind actually would rather have a human driver in the car and feel safer generally that way. Seem to me almost like a strawman in a way. In other words 'if you feel that you have to help the handicapped you need to be onboard with self driving cars'.
dispose13432 10y ago
What I don't understand is if trains aren't completely automated, planes aren't completely automated, subways aren't completely automated, ships aren't completely automated, How are CARS supposed to be automated??
- jordwest 10y ago
  > trains aren't completely automated > subways aren't completely automated https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_automated_urban_metro_subway_systems#Grade_of_Automation_4_Systems https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_automated_urban_metro_... > planes aren't completely automated https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unmanned_aerial_vehicle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unmanned_aerial_vehicle
  - dispose13432 10y ago
    >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unmanned_aerial_vehicle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unmanned_aerial_vehicle Many of which are still piloted by people on the ground. And I can't take a flight without a pilot yet.
- imh 10y ago
  When your train is carrying hundreds of passengers, the cost of somebody driving it is pretty small per passenger. In a car alone, that cost isn't split, so is more expensive. That makes it more worth pursuing.
ipreferhumans 10y ago
Being a pedestrian sharing space with moving autonomous cars is not a future I'm looking forward to, not one bit. 1. Pedestrian->driver observation and interaction are the primary factors in deciding what's safe. 2. Roads full of networked autonomous vehicles are a hack away from becoming hoards of hurtling tonnage. In my opinion this is all a solution looking for a problem and we should know better than to make our roads so utterly hostile to our own kind.
sidcool 10y ago
Somehow the link is giving 404 to me.
perseusprime11 10y ago
Do we even need a car in the future?
nojvek 10y ago
Its great that waymo has its own brand now. I really wish udacity's open self driving car takes off as well. I predict there will be a linux of self driving car software/hardware kit that will be battle tested, reliable, secure and solid with contributions and test cases from all around the world. I also really think someone should invent a solution to convert existing modern cars with brake, gas and steering from CANbus to self driving cars by installing a kit. The current car manufacturers can simply make really good cars with cameras and sensors integrated. One can then install open software adapted for the region that is always getting updates. The test cases and lidar data is put in a giant shared repo whose ownership is the community. E.g OpenStreetMap and wikipedia. Same software can be used for smaller robots to dispatch packages to the front door, or robotic lawn mowers, rubbish trucks, cleaning trucks e.t.c That would be a fantastic future to be part of.
- ktta 10y ago
  Wow, you just described everything that commaai[1] did (or tried to do). They tried the kit that can be self installed[2] but decided not to continue[3] They also have a dataset that can be downloaded by anyone[4] And they have open sourced the software on their github, [1]: http://comma.ai/ http://comma.ai/ [2]: https://techcrunch.com/2016/09/13/comma-ai-will-ship-a-999-autonomous-driving-add-on-by-the-end-of-this-year/ https://techcrunch.com/2016/09/13/comma-ai-will-ship-a-999-a... [3]: http://www.theverge.com/2016/10/28/13453344/comma-ai-self-driving-car-comma-one-kit-canceled http://www.theverge.com/2016/10/28/13453344/comma-ai-self-dr... [4]: http://research.comma.ai/ http://research.comma.ai/
laurentoget 10y ago
My real question is whether they will be able to convince american customers to give up one of their most prized status symbols. It feels from this webpage their main argument will be safety, so I guess we will find out how much human life weighs against the thrill of owning and controlling fast, expensive and shiny machines.
wiz21c 10y ago
How will this affect climate change ? I mean, will autonomous driving increase or decrease the number of cars on the roads ?

785 points by davidcgl 10y ago

I'm optimistic. I agree with Musks estimates. At most I see first fully autonomous vehicles being on the roads within 5 years. Yes, they may only work in places with clearly marked streets but if I could use my autonomous car for daily commute or roughly 50% of the time it's still an incredible achievement and well worth the cost.

rm_-rf_slash 10y ago
I live in a small enough city where I need to drive for some things but I can walk to work. If an autonomous car could help with little things like shopping for groceries or driving to get a haircut, then my last mile problem would be effectively solved. I think that there are a lot of little steps towards 100% autonomy that will still provide tremendous value to people, even if the product is far from perfect.
fullshark 10y ago
Those two ideas are contradictory. It's not fully autonomous if it only works in ideal conditions. There's already a bunch of prototypes that work perfectly in ideal conditions.

iblaine 10y ago

What does waymo mean?

jl6 10y ago
It'll cost waymo' than a regular car.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
refulgentis 10y ago
"Waymo stands for a new way forward in mobility."
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]

graaben 10y ago

Although this site doesn't really offer any substance, I'm glad that Google is making this project more public. Not only it nice to have updates on the project (I do hope they continue to update this site with their progress) but I think PR campaigns like this will go a long way to swaying popular opinion on self driving technology. The faster they can get the public on their side, the fewer regulatory hurdles they will face.

visarga 10y ago

At least they could have given a more up to date report on what they are doing. 7 years passed since 2009 and all we've seen is a couple of promo videos with scant actual information. We have no idea how they compare to Tesla or other self driving car startups.

mememachine 10y ago
sums up google products
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
ucaetano 10y ago
"how they compare to Tesla" Given that Tesla doesn't even have emergency braking and auto-steering, I'd guess they compare quite favorably...
- wmf 10y ago
  Presumably one would compare Google's fully autonomous prototype against Tesla's fully autonomous prototype, not what Tesla is shipping now.
  - ucaetano 10y ago
    Then, per the article, Google had its first Level-5 fully-autonomous, no-backup-driver in public streets over a year ago.
- yessql 10y ago
  Tesla will have 100,000 prototypes being trained in shadow mode for a billion miles per year across the globe within a year. Tesla will compare quite favorably
  - ucaetano 10y ago
    That's a prediction, not a comparison.

homero 10y ago

You mean Alphabet

debt 10y ago

definite old-school warner brothers inspired logo they got going on there https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iaz0YyIcmHQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iaz0YyIcmHQ

joezydeco 10y ago

Interesting that this very same day, the US Government is looking into proposals to require vehicle-to-vehicle communication in passenger cars to enhance safety. http://www.wsj.com/articles/regulators-call-on-cars-to-chat-with-each-other-1481645582 http://www.wsj.com/articles/regulators-call-on-cars-to-chat-...

tedajax 10y ago
Seems a little premature to require this as we don't necessarily know that this would help.
- XaspR8d 10y ago
  I agree that you shouldn't assume any information will necessarily improve performance, but I feel that, naively, inter-car communication would have tons of useful applications. If anything else, during the transition to fully-automated, it would be wonderful if human drivers were able to visualize the intent of the automated vehicles around them. To know that a car is going to merge into my lane in 50m, or is attempting a U-turn, is so much more useful than simply seeing a turn signal.
- Animats 10y ago
  Chris Urmson, back when he headed Google's self driving car effort, said car to car communication was unnecessary. The car has to have good enough sensors and decision-making to deal with all the things that aren't communicating, from pedestrians to deer.
  - anchpop 10y ago
    It could still be helpful, however. If your car gets a signal that there are an unusual amount of cars stopped half a mile ahead of it, it might be able to deduce that there has been an accident or something else stopping traffic and navigate away before it becomes an issue. Sort of like an automatic version of Waze
  - joezydeco 10y ago

tedajax 10y ago

So nothing new, just the name?

vthallam 10y ago

This is great. Finally a separate division with focus and more accountability on the timeline i guess.

mberger 10y ago

Interesting that they built the site with Angular 1.5.7. I thought they would want to showcase Angular 2.

analogmemory 10y ago
Showcase what? It's just a basic marketing site. Did they even need angular?
- andybak 10y ago
  The problem is that many people learning web development nowadays don't realise there is anything other than impressively complex client-side MVC frameworks. They are taught that traditional HTML pages are a dinosaur and doing progressive enhancement with some simple jQuery or vanilla JS is something for amateurs and old-timers. I'm really pleased I was forced to learn the web in layers. I learnt basic HTML, then CSS came along. I realised I needed some dynamic behaviour so looked into CGI/Perl and later PHP. The DHTML became all the rage and I picked up a bit of javascript. PHP began to show it's weaknesses and luckily Django and Rails popped up. Ajax became a thing somewhere in all that and returning JSON instead of HTML snippets was sometimes useful. If you start now and dive into learning Angular/React/Ember/Whatever - you are so insulated from the lower layers it must get a bit baffling trying to understand how all the parts fit together and why some things are done the way they are. tl;dr - Get off my lawn.
- mberger 10y ago
  Probably not. My point is that what (I'm assuming) is a brand new site is not built using the latest version. I would have thought that an organization such as Alphabet would want to dog food as much as possible and in doing so tell the world that 'Hey, look at this! It's super easy and pretty! You can have a site like this too if you adopt our technology'. Instead, it suggests to me that the barrier to learning the new shiny is big enough that whoever made it didn't want to learn it. That raises the question, should I learn it? Why, if even people at Alphabet don't want to? Do they doubt the long term prospects for Angular 2 so much that they hesitate in adopting it? Do they not consider it mature enough? TL;DR I read too much into things.

kin 10y ago

The website is pretty explicit about it being just self-driving "technology". I wonder if they just plan to work w/ one manufacturer for now or if they're in talks w/ many. With so much competition, if they're all executed to the same standards of safety, my wallet is going to go w/ better design & aesthetics.

roymurdock 10y ago
> Our testing fleet includes modified Lexus SUVs and custom-built prototype vehicles. We also plan to add modified Chrysler Pacifica minivans to our fleet. Probably safe to say they're in talks with other auto manufacturers that are looking to add self-driving software to their portfolios.

metakermit 10y ago

More business info in this Forbes article: http://www.forbes.com/sites/alanohnsman/2016/12/13/googles-spins-off-self-driving-car-unit-as-waymo/?utm_source=yahoo&utm_medium=partner&utm_campaign=yahootix&partner=yahootix&yptr=yahoo#31c4b6572af4 http://www.forbes.com/sites/alanohnsman/2016/12/13/googles-s... TL;DR: > “We’re now an independent company within the Alphabet umbrella,” > Google is currently equipping a fleet of 100 hybrid Chrysler minivans with its sensors and computing gear that will soon join its nearly 60 prototype autonomous vehicles. The company hasn't yet disclosed when and how it will begin generating revenue from its efforts and Krafcik declined to discuss specific business plans today.

Ph0X 10y ago
I still finding it silly that they are trying to go straight for L5 (which is the only case where you can fully remove the steering wheel). By the sound of it, they already have an L4 going (can drive itself in 99.99% of the situations, might need user take over in very rare cases). Why not for now release an initial car with L4, and collect pile and pile of data, which is what they need to get over that last 0.01%.
- anonred 10y ago
  I attended one of Google's talks on this. The rationale is that humans can't be trusted to take control in a timely manner for that 0.01%. Their internal testing with an L4 system on trained Googlers (who were told to remain alert in the event that action needed to be taken) had instances of testers sleeping, eating, putting on makeup, etc. They concluded that if Googlers with explicit training couldn't behave themselves, then L4 definitely wasn't sufficient for the general public; autonomous driving had to be all or nothing.
  - amelius 10y ago
    Or ... the car could monitor the driver too, and alert them when they lose attention.

scarmig 10y ago

If you look at the cumulative miles driven, the slope has a tendency to increase, as you'd expect as you added more cars to your fleet. In 2013, though, there's a regression in number of new miles logged, and it took until 2015 to catch up to 2012 numbers. Can anyone give insight into the cause?

a9a 10y ago
Probably a shift from testing mostly on the highway (which was the initial proving ground for the program) to testing on surface streets

meterplech 10y ago

Obviously this vision is compelling. I'm confused by the decision of their prototype car to not have manual control overrides (e.g steering wheel or something similar). Air travel has been revolutionized with autopilot, but there are clear overrides for safety in case systems crash. I don't think we need to be wed to the pedal + wheel paradigm - but having a manual override option seems critical to safety.

tyingq 10y ago
You can read Google's initial rationale for "no steering wheel" here: http://www.npr.org/sections/alltechconsidered/2016/02/24/467983440/google-makes-the-case-for-a-hands-off-approach-to-self-driving-cars http://www.npr.org/sections/alltechconsidered/2016/02/24/467... They seem pretty clearly, however, to have changed their minds on the topic. It's enlightening to compare the information on this new site with information on the old site (https://www.google.com/selfdrivingcar/ https://www.google.com/selfdrivingcar/). You can see what language they've either removed, or toned down.
the8472 10y ago
a big red emergency switch telling it to pull over and shut down may be useful. Anything more than that would mean your system is not fully autonomous, because the driver would have to pay attention all the time. What good is manual override if there's nobody paying attention? It would also mean you need a qualified driver, you couldn't use it to ferry around children, disabled people or simply people without a license.
yessql 10y ago
The argument is that if you aren't paying attention 99% of the time, that you wouldn't be capable of dropping whatever you are doing in order to take control. Also, these are meant to enable transportation for people incapable of driving.

boxcardavin 10y ago

Google's commitment to SDCs has always seemed half hearted so I wonder if this indicates that they are getting more serious about it. Moonshots at X have been getting the axe, the SDC stuff seems to be the only obviously viable one right now. To the surprise of many folks (myself included) it has turned out that SDC tech is probably for existing manufacturers to develop versus software guys learning how to build cars without the massive supply chains needed to assemble 4000lb widgets. Before anyone points to Tesla, try getting inside a $140k Tesla and then a $140k Mercedes and it will be obvious what advantages there are to having manufacturing experience stretching decades.

jessriedel 10y ago
SDC? Self-driving cars?
ksrm 10y ago
I haven't been in either. What differences do you mean?
- uw_rob 10y ago
  I think mostly it is the fit and finish. I've been in a 2016 BMW 750i and a 2013 Model S, for about a total of maybe 30 minutes in the BMW and 10 in the Tesla. The interior of the 7 series seemed special to me. All of the buttons felt great, seats looked beautiful and were super comfortable to sit in. The control panel had many small OLED displays and they looked great. And small details like when I went to adjust the seat, by placing my fingers on the buttons, information about my seat configuration popped up on the center console, so I could see what I was changing. Also the rear passenger seats and rear windshield had power sunscreens. Here is a picture of the iterior of the BMW: http://st.motortrend.com/uploads/sites/5/2015/11/2016-BMW-750i-xDrive-interior.jpg http://st.motortrend.com/uploads/sites/5/2015/11/2016-BMW-75... Here is a video of the 7 series interior: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHDMAibH1G4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHDMAibH1G4 In comparison, the Tesla's interior felt mostly large and empty. Here is a picutre of the interior of a 2016 Model X: http://st.motortrend.com/uploads/sites/5/2016/03/2016-Tesla-Model-X-P90D-interior.jpg http://st.motortrend.com/uploads/sites/5/2016/03/2016-Tesla-... Don't get me wrong, Tesla makes some super amazing cars. But the high price tag isn't for the interior. (Disclaimer: I own a lowly 3 series so I may be slightly biased to BMW)

SippinLean 10y ago

Sounds like "lame-o" D:

dictum 10y ago

This is such a minor nitpick, but I'm bothered by it because I see so much performance-shaming coming from some Googlers: The site loads large pictures for all viewport widths (ideally they'd load downscaled images for smaller viewports — it's wasteful to load a large image for small devices) and the image files are PNGs when they should be jpeg or webp (example: http://waymo.com/static/images/journey/streets.png http://waymo.com/static/images/journey/streets.png)

Govannon 10y ago
That example isn't even compressed, which could drastically reduce its size.
- abailin 10y ago
  The image shouldn't be a png in the first place.
mercer 10y ago
I've noticed this quite a bit with Google stuff. There's blogger, for example, which is one of the rare sites that doesn't show me anything until I whitelist the entire site in uMatrix.
antisthenes 10y ago
How about It loads a fucking video ? That's pretty much all you need to know about performance.
zellyn 10y ago
Hmmm. I'm more usually aware of helpful, insightful, useful articles on how to improve performance, and a constant stream of optimizations to web technology to the same end. Not that the site in question isn't bloated brochure-ware. Just that I wouldn't characterize Google that way.
btian 10y ago
Waymo is not Google.

aoeu345 10y ago

This repels me for a few reasons: - Instead of talking about their car's capabilities on the front page, they include a pathos about drunk driving. I feel embarrassed how Google doesn't have more things to say about the car. - It looks really unattractive, I could hardly call it cute. - It's not in production, it's in testing. These companies are sitting on mountains of cash! And they still fail to do things effectively! Apple and Google are just sitting on their fat cashflows while the world is getting very scary very fast. I'm tired of these "technology" companies doing complete fails of R&D projects, too damn shy to leave their advertising revenues. We need leaders with real courage.

mabbo 10y ago
They've told you exactly what matters to them: not sexy cars, not the kinds of technology used, but the goal they have in mind. Tesla, by comparison, is building sexy fast cars that happen to be self-driving.
- RIMR 10y ago
  And Tesla's "Self-Driving" autopilot already has one attributed death. Google has a few fender-benders...

pookieinc 10y ago

This is really exciting! I see these cars all over the place in the Bay Area, so it's nice to see that they're at least one step closer in making it into a product and thus bringing it to reality. I wonder about the internationalization of this product, especially if (or when?) it's brought to other countries and regions, such as the Middle East. In some of those countries, women aren't allowed to drive and men drive with extreme speed (and park in the most horrible of ways). While this will cut down on things like speeding / drinking / etc, it may also potentially impact social norms as well. I'm hoping to keep a level-head about this project, but any step forward in this endeavor is worth being excited about.

positr0n 10y ago
Women aren't allowed to drive in, e.g. Saudi Arabia, because they aren't allowed to be out of their home without a blood relative or husband. That could lead to mingling with the opposite sex or something like that. “What would happen if a woman got in a car accident? Then she would be forced to deal with the male driver of the other car, a stranger, with no oversight." [0] So I don't think self driving cars will solve that problem at all, sadly. [0]: http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/10/-negative-physiological-impacts-why-saudi-women-arent-allowed-to-drive/280343/ http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/10/-ne... Quora answers from people that appear to be saudi: https://www.quora.com/Why-are-women-not-allowed-to-drive-in-Saudi-Arabia https://www.quora.com/Why-are-women-not-allowed-to-drive-in-...
- pookieinc 10y ago
  I appreciate the reply, that's pretty sad to hear. Thanks for the links, they're really interesting.

chirau 10y ago

Welp, the site no longer works. Let's hope they didn't shut down the project already, Google Wave style.

joeguilmette 10y ago

I'm interested to see where all the major players end up in 5yrs: • Tesla bootstrapping a ride service on the backs of buyers • Waymo directly rolling their own fleet • Uber trying to get a self-driving fleet up, burning mountains of money to maintain their "monopoly" on Uber for rides • Lyft working with GM to get a fleet up • All of the other car manufacturers trying to get autonomous vehicles going, presumably hoping for consumers to still want to own a vehicle rather than just pay $1 to get a ride So: How much is Uber's market share worth? I suspect it'll evaporate overnight in every market where another service has autonomous vehicles and they don't. Also: Private car ownership is going to fall off a cliff shortly after autonomous ride services arrive. Which probably means general demand for vehicles will fall off a cliff. I predict blood on the walls.

scarmig 10y ago
Is there a particular reason to think Uber is going to be last to autonomous vehicles? I can see a good argument that they're head of the pack today, between Tesla's not-really-autonomous vehicles and Google's perpetual inability to execute.
- joeguilmette 10y ago
  This is a fair point. Uber has yet to ship any hardware, and really any software aside from an app that is a couple steps above "Uber for X" that are whipped out in a weekend. I know they gobbled up a bunch of researchers, but moonshot engineering feats like autonomous driving is not (yet) in their DNA. And their current business model is not profitable and will die the moment they go up against an autonomous service. They don't need to be last to market to lose, they need to be first in order to survive.
  - mikedh 10y ago
    >yet to ship any hardware Except for the fleet of Ford Fusions and XC90's covered in very nicely implemented custom sensor rafts http://theincline.com/2016/12/12/three-months-of-self-driving-cars-in-pittsburgh-a-look-back/ http://theincline.com/2016/12/12/three-months-of-self-drivin...

heywire 10y ago

On days like today, when there are several inches of snow on the ground and more to come, I always wonder how autonomous vehicles will handle such situations. What happens when snow (or mud, etc) accumulates on the camera or sensors? I don't doubt that a computer can react quicker and with more precision in an "event", but what about when it simply can't "see"? I don't see a steering wheel in these videos, so I guess there is no manual failsafe?

ProAm 10y ago
If it can't see, you can't see either.
mmbleh 10y ago
The sensors are primarily radar based. Mud/snow won't really affect them.
- treehau5 10y ago
  False -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clutter_(radar) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clutter_(radar) Anyways, if this is true, it's a grim future then. Radar is incredibly trivial to interfere with.
  - mmbleh 10y ago
    From the "How it works" Google self driving car page: "Sensors Lasers, radars and cameras detect objects in all directions" It uses many kinds of sensors. Yes I know about clutter, I've spent quite a lot of time in the radar industry. But by combining data from radars of multiple wavelengths, it becomes pretty feasible. Though yes, difficult. https://www.google.com/selfdrivingcar/how/ https://www.google.com/selfdrivingcar/how/
    - treehau5 10y ago
      It strikes me as curious that someone who spent a lot of time in the radar industry would make the original statement you made, at least in that fashion. Also, radar is subject to interference as well. In addition, there are many things that act as "natural" corner reflectors that would pose more challenges, I can only think of some mountainous snowy / icey nothern US/Canadian routes and just thinking No way Light sensors and Radar sensors will conquer this. We need to fundamentally redesign our road systems to accommodate self driving cars. That might happen... in 50-100 years...after we address the already crumbling infrastructure we have. For perfect, sunny conditions, like the roads in Nevada all these self driving startups are doing their testing, with straight flat landscapes, I am sure the tech can work fine. Rest of the country, maybe not so much.

hartator 10y ago

> Imagine if everyone could get around easily and safely, without tired, drunk or distracted driving. I don't really think we should place drunk driving at the same level as tired or distracted driving.

iMuzz 10y ago

The only thing I really learned watching that video is that google decided to call its autonomous vehicle unit 'Waymo'. While I'm excited, I'd love to know how they actually plan to roll this out!

cjcole 10y ago

"The average US city gets 26 inches of snow per year." http://www.bestplaces.net/climate/city/california/mountain_view http://www.bestplaces.net/climate/city/california/mountain_v... "Snowfall is 0 inches." http://www.bestplaces.net/climate/city/arizona/phoenix http://www.bestplaces.net/climate/city/arizona/phoenix "Snowfall is 0 inches." http://www.bestplaces.net/climate/city/texas/austin http://www.bestplaces.net/climate/city/texas/austin "Snowfall is 1 inches." http://www.bestplaces.net/climate/city/washington/kirkland http://www.bestplaces.net/climate/city/washington/kirkland "Snowfall is 4 inches." I hope they are driving far enough from their home bases to get some snow miles under their belt. http://www.bestplaces.net/climate/city/massachusetts/boston http://www.bestplaces.net/climate/city/massachusetts/boston "Snowfall is 47 inches."

emmett 10y ago
Do you really think it hasn't occurred to WayMo/Google that maybe they should test their cars in snow/rain/sleet/fog/confetti?
- revelation 10y ago
  I'm sure it has. I'm not sure they have.
- bambax 10y ago
  Well, they only tested in US cities, so it's unclear what has occurred to them. How will it work in small crowded streets in India, China, or just Italy?
  - DrScump 10y ago
    Or Boston?
  - IshKebab 10y ago
    I agree it is unlikely to work on non-US roads for a while but I can't really blame them for starting in the easiest conditions. It doesn't have to work everywhere at the outset to be useful.

jeffmcjunkin 10y ago

They have a number of blog posts that just launched on Medium: https://medium.com/waymo https://medium.com/waymo

cbr 10y ago
It looks like they're converting many of their articles from https://www.google.com/selfdrivingcar/reports/ https://www.google.com/selfdrivingcar/reports/ to Medium?

SmokyBourbon 10y ago

Waymo? They own Waze. Did they consider Wayzo or Wayzmo? Or are they going to rebrand Waze as Waym?

melling 10y ago

The hardest problem to solve will be the humans who bully the polite self-driving cars: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2016/11/17/humans-will-bully-robot-cars-mercedes-chief-warns/ http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2016/11/17/humans-will...

pg314 10y ago
It seems that could be easily solved with regulation. The self-driving cars could even automatically send a video of incidents to the police.
- melling 10y ago
  You want to regulate politeness?
  - TillE 10y ago
    Reckless driving is already a crime (not just a civil offense) in many states. In New York: "Reckless driving shall mean driving...in a manner which unreasonably interferes with the free and proper use of the public highway" Simple aggressive driving as described in the linked article is, well, not a real problem. Unless you cause an accident.
    - melling 10y ago
      No one was talking about reckless driving. Aggressive driving could be a problem. That's why it is being discussed.
drakonandor 10y ago
Manual overrides (or 'defensive' mode) needs to be available. Or carjackers will simply be able to stand in the road and wait.

shogun21 10y ago

I feel like they're really getting on the cute-sy theme, from the car's friendly design to the name "Waymo". The lack of control is still kind of terrifying so I think they're trying to make it as non-threatening as possible.

Mizza 10y ago
> "The lack of control is still kind of terrifying so I think they're trying to make it as non-threatening as possible." This is true of all Google products, and has been the basis of Google's branding strategy from the very beginning. The dorky, colorful logo isn't an accident. They are a scary, dangerous and harmful company with an extremely friendly face.
dsymonds 10y ago
I've seen what happens when humans have control of cars. It's not pretty.
- brwr 10y ago
  This is the point that I see everyone discounting. Whether autonomous cars turn out to be feasible or not, we know for a fact that humans are bad drivers. Don't we owe it to ourselves to try something different?
  - euyyn 10y ago
    There's a nice analogy with fighter jets taking off from aircraft carriers. They have handlebars in the top of the cabin that the pilots are required to grab during take off. Experience had shown that, when they took off with their hands in the steering stick, the acceleration was so high that they'd react by pushing the stick, plunging the plane into the ocean.

ticktockten 10y ago

Am I the only one getting a 404 on this URL?

rudolf0 10y ago

Really shallow of me, but the name kind of turns me off. "Uber" or "Lyft" are just whatever, but Waymo sounds like... something an infant would sputter out. Or "Lame-o".

tmzt 10y ago
Goo-gol?

arijun 10y ago

I still don't understand why every company doing self driving cars is focusing on consumer cars while no major player is doing interstate trucking. Interstate trucking could pretty much be done now, and has several advantages. Driving on interstate freeways is orders of magnitude easier than driving in a city with pedestrians, bikes, cars parked in the road, etc. And there is a great monetization scheme--no driver means you can get it to its destination more quickly and more cheaply. (The thought is you'd hand off to a real driver once you get in to a city)

arjie 10y ago
If you solve the consumer car problem, you own personal transportation. That's why. Besides, your premise is untrue anyway. Otto is the autonomous truck thing. Rolls Royce is the drone ship.
ma2rten 10y ago
I think Otto/Uber and Mercedes are working on that.
DrScump 10y ago
"Driving on interstate freeways is orders of magnitude easier than driving in a city with pedestrians, bikes, cars parked in the road, etc." Yes, it's easy and safe if competing traffic is only fellow truckers or other level-headed, observant drivers. It's when you mix in the distracted, newbie, or skittish drivers that things get difficult. Long-haul truckers (the majority, the good ones) develop a sixth sense about such risks; I can't imagine thoroughly coding a software replacement.
- manmal 10y ago
  About the sixth sense - does this not also apply to good doctors? And yet, they are easily outdiagnosed by many ML implementations. I can imagine deep learning to also gain this sixth sense. E.g. a cyclist in front of you looks to the left - a proficient driver predicts that cyclist might turn left very soon. Why should a self driving car/truck not learn the same?

shardo 10y ago

I'm not sure how I would feel about the absence of steering wheels and pedals within their cars. Tesla's auto-pilot can be over-ridden due to the presence of the steering wheels and the pedals. But in a car that has none, you're not in control. And that, is scary no matter how you look at it.

pg314 10y ago
Once the technology is mature, I don't think it would be any scarier than driving with the average driver as a passenger.

glbrew 10y ago

They will get smoked by Tesla.

pera 10y ago

Google seems to like logos with a W shape (Wallet, Wave, now Waymo). I wonder if that's on purpose, as in making a reference to WWW in some way.

googthrwwy1234 10y ago

Throwaway. They spun off to let it die in peace without causing a PR disaster for Google or other companies under Alphabet umbrella. Now watch them wind it down and let someone else take over this lost cause in the next 2-3 years. The reason why this is a lost cause is because the remaining 10% of the problem (inclement weather, bad pavement, unpredictable behavior of non-autonomous vehicles, etc) is exponentially hard and no one has a foggiest clue how to tackle it. Google rode the PR train for as long as it could, but now it's time to get off.

tzury 10y ago

Waymo will be the Android of the cars, that is, Google Technology on other's hardware. Well decided Alphabet, very well decided!

cr0sh 10y ago

This post seems like a "way-back" post - considering Google has announced pulling from the self-driving car market (another HN post details it)...

bertil 10y ago

There is an announcement today too that Google will not be operating that technology, but focus on selling self-driving to car manufacturers. Does this mean that Alphabet will keep on working on building their own cars but under a different company? The association between the two is a little confusing at the moment.

dfar1 10y ago

I am confused. Was there some news today that they wouldn't have their own car, and instead would use their tech with existing car companies?

devy 10y ago

On the FAQ section, Q: "I'd like to join the team. Where can I find a list of open roles?" A: "You can learn more about available roles here[1]." And interestingly, that link[1] is broken :) Update: it's fixed NOW! [1]: https://waymo.com/join/ https://waymo.com/join/

gpmcadam 10y ago

You'd think Google would have considered optimising the content on this page as per their own recommendations: https://developers.google.com/speed/pagespeed/insights/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwaymo.com%2F&tab=mobile https://developers.google.com/speed/pagespeed/insights/?url=...

jonthepirate 10y ago

More power to anybody who's willing to put their children in a car and not pay attention to the road or have control the outcomes of relentless traffic threats all around them. In my view, all of this technology is much better suited to aid the human driver as a safety enhancement system rather than a full replacement for vehicle navigation.

ilaksh 10y ago

So when does the Waymo app come out that I can use to get an autonomous car to drive me to the store?

dang 10y ago

There's also a Wired article about this at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13168781 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13168781.

jrowley 10y ago

How long until someone puts a personal gym inside a self driving SUV, so you can workout during your commute? I can imagine people running on a treadmill inside a car while it is stuck in traffic. Or at least sitting on a trainer.

davej 10y ago
And feed the energy back into the motor. Or even directly power the wheels. It could work if you make the car more lightweight and use a pedal system on gears instead of treadmill. Let's call it a... "Bicycle". :)
kLeeIsDead 10y ago
Or just a bed.
- jpindar 10y ago
  Given that these cars are supposedly going to strand us on the side of the road (or in our workplace parking lot) on many snowy winter nights, they had better have beds.
brwr 10y ago
That would be pretty great. How do you handle the movements of the car though? Bumps in the road and stuff like that?

shanwang 10y ago

Looking at it, I'm thinking google hasn't learnt anything about the failure of google glass, who wants to buy a car like that? A car is more than a commuting tool, it really matters how it looks.

jiggliemon 10y ago
They're not selling a car. They're selling a driver. They're presumably going to partner with auto manufacturers.
- shanwang 10y ago
  On their website they have pictures of both the prototype and other manufacturers' cars. it makes a lot of sense to just sell the driving system, like the android model. But I assume they designed the prototype to capture the public's attention. I just don't know why they can't spend a bit more effort to make it look desirable.
j2bax 10y ago
Thats the thing though... They are trying to make it "just a commuting tool". Do people care too much what the outside of their subway looks like?
- shanwang 10y ago
  If their target is to sell tickets for a self driving fleet, I guess that makes sense.

Pica_soO 10y ago

How much alone are the parking lots worth in San Francisco? Imagine a city without those..

riprowan 10y ago

A lot of comments here and I haven't seen one that addresses the problem of impulsivity. Many / most of the times I need a car are not schedulable events but impulses. For example when I'm working on a project around the house, it's typical to need to run up to the hardware store 3 times in a day. I think autonomous transport will be very popular but shared vehicles will be hardly more popular than Uber / taxis are now. If you think that shared autonomous vehicles will be significantly more popular than shared conventional vehicles are today, I'd be interested to hear why. Is it primarily cost savings?

guimarin 10y ago
Yes. most people when confronted with the choice of a cheap shared ride, or the convenience of their own vehicle will choose a cheap shared ride. The cost on a per mile basis, will be close to 10x cheaper. I predict even you will change-over when confronted with that kind of choice. It seems inevitable.
dontreact 10y ago
What about on-demand transportation doesn't meet the needs of your impulse to run to the hardware store? Just call for a car 6 (there and back) times and you won't worry about having to park on either side.
- brwr 10y ago
  I think the concern is more about availability. How long does it take for a car to show up each time OP needs to go to the store? This is a problem with Uber now. I need to be at the airport at 5:00 AM tomorrow morning and I'm just hoping like hell that there will be an Uber around. Most drivers will be home sleeping. Low-volume times like my example above are where autonomous vehicles can shine. Making the economics work during times of high volume is more difficult. You can always buy more cars, but that's just that many more cars you need storage space for outside of peak hours.
brwr 10y ago
I think you may be experiencing recall bias. How do you get to work every day? How often do you go to the grocery store? What about going out to dinner? For myself, living in the Bay Area, anything related to driving or owning a car is a nightmare -- not that that has stopped me from owning a car. Driving from Mountain View to San Mateo takes about 45 minutes in the morning at 75 minutes in the evening. I went to SF to have breakfast with a friend this past weekend and finding parking took half an hour. I'd love a self-driving car that could just drop me at my door. Autonomous cars should also lead to drastic traffic improvements, assuming the cars will eventually be able to communicate with each other in a reliable way. Maybe you live in a less densely-populated area? I have an aunt that lives in a rural area and I couldn't imagine a need or desire for autonomous cars there. There is definitely a long way to go, but think of all the advantages! Parking can be automated and condensed, which means more land is available for buildings or parks or anything else. If you suffer from traffic problems now, your daily commute could be cut by 50% or more. Shared vehicles should cost less than what you pay for gas and insurance now. High availability is a real possibility if someone can figure out how to make the economics work. Ride sharing can be almost completely automated, leading to less pollution.

blancotech 10y ago

All I can think of when I hear the word Waymo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_lMu8V5Xa90 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_lMu8V5Xa90

turingbook 10y ago

The self-driving car is just a component of bigger system, as new generation of servers on cloud centers. Riding service is cloud computing. I bet on Uber or Didi in China.

walrus1066 10y ago

It feels there's a mountain of hype around autonomous vehicles. I think the core challenges to a fully autonomous vehicle (with no human backup), are still far from solved. They need to reliably deal with an almost infinite number of edge and corner cases, each quite different from the last. For example: - communication with other human drivers. In London, this is required all the time, like when parked cars block the road, allowing just one car through. Or traffic light out of action, so you negotiate with other cars using hand gestures, light flashes etc - endless roadworks, that change what lane you're allowed to go on, turn a two way road to one way road. - random debris on road. Plastic bag - safe to drive through, wooden plank - safe, plank with nail - not safe. - loss of GPS, mobile data, or both (again, surprisingly frequent) - making way for emergency vehicles (sometimes need to drive into lane you're not normally allowed to go, I.e. Bus lane, pavement) - policeman coordinating traffic So far, I haven't found any evidence of autonomous cars dealing with the above. If anyone has, please post.

larrik 10y ago
I'm not sure what your point is. Fully autonomous is still in progress, and still has work to do.
- koheripbal 10y ago
  The point is that we are far far further away than commonly accepted. The day a computer can distinguish between a plastic bag in the road and a child is the day I'd support them on the road.
  - woofyman 10y ago
    Or if you see a ball cross the road there are strong odds a child might be chasing after it.
  - zoul 10y ago
    Do computer drivers have to be perfect, or is it enough to be much better than human drivers?

gaspar 10y ago

I can see the potential of self-driving cars for long distance trips (e.g. SF-LA) or for big trucks, but I can't see it for everyday use especially if someone has kids. How many times an average person in US uses her car? 2-3 without kids and maybe more than 4-5 with kids(I think my numbers are probably too low)? For this to be viable economically, the pricing has to be very low and in order to be very low all of the people has to use this "self-driving service". This creates another problem though, you will have to plan your "short ride" ahead of time, e.g. what happens if you want to leave at the last moment and no car is available around you? And then there is another problem, if the self-driving service is cheap the ownership of the car is going to be even cheaper. A lot of variables and difficult to answer questions. I don't know if we ever going to be a society without car ownership and to be honest as long as there is no traffic I like driving, and it makes me relax. I see it more as a fancy option for cars, like what Tesla does, but to completely remove the car ownership is going to take many decades. Before cars there were horses and stuff so the transition was easier. This is going to be very tough.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

kLeeIsDead 10y ago

How is this news? So what, they slapped a new name on the project. What about actual progress on the tech? Honestly, with Google's track record, I'm starting to doubt that this will ever ship. It just seems like a huge marketing tactic at this point. Plus. all of the talent has moved to companies like Otto and comma.ai; who are making tangible progress in this space.

rak00n 10y ago
I had thinking the same thing when I saw 600+ comments. I thought they announced L5 along with the spun out.

Skunkleton 10y ago

The name sounds like a cartoon car crash.

thomasthomas 10y ago

this comment section is hater news at its finest. autonomous will change all of our lives for the better sooner than you think. edge cases will be solved. the competition will be interesting, rooting for everyone.

fh973 10y ago

... meanwhile Microsoft successfully attacks the billion dollar office communication market. Seriously, Google has had so many growth businesses in their hands and just fails to execute on them. This might be for one part because of its internal structure but I get the impression that many of these things look not exciting enough for its leadership.

Unklejoe 10y ago

It’s going to be interesting watching how local police departments and municipalities handle the widespread adoption of autonomous vehicles. In my town (a suburban town with a low crime rate), the police spend the majority of their time enforcing traffic laws. The municipal courthouse is always filled with people, and if I had to guess, I’d say that 80% of the people are there as a result of a traffic violation, while the other 20% are there for drug offenses/other. It seems like autonomous cars would lead to a drop in traffic offenses and thus revenue. Even if only a tiny portion of the town’s revenue actually comes from traffic violations (when compared to local property tax), there would probably be a lot more idle time for police. I suspect that they will first start to raise our property taxes to compensate for the lost revenue, but I would think that the long term effect would be a reduction of municipal workers/police. Of course, this doesn’t apply to other areas like Philadelphia, where police spend only a small percentage of their time enforcing traffic laws.

brwr 10y ago
Anecdotally, one of Google's autonomous cars was pulled over in Mountain View, CA a while back[1]. The car was going 24 MPH in a 35 and the officer didn't realize the car was driving itself. [1]: http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/13/us/google-self-driving-car-pulled-over/ http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/13/us/google-self-driving-car-pul...
Corrado 10y ago
Of course, the flip side to this is the notion that autonomous vehicles will free up the existing police force to do more important things. In most cities there is a distinct lack of officers on the street, usually due to budget constraints. Now they can take all of those officers used for monitoring roads and highways and have them do other, more important things; all without increasing the number of officers or budget.
- cjg 10y ago
  Or more realistically, make a substantial proportion of them redundant.

fareesh 10y ago

What is it about car hardware+software that gives people confidence that the operating system / some core process won't crash or reboot in the middle of a turn or brake? I'm not familiar with the architecture of "mission critical" systems which I assume would be similar to what they use in these cars.

euyyn 10y ago
You'll like this story about the redundancy in the Space Shuttle saving the day: https://twitter.com/marssciencegrad/status/806963662351020032 https://twitter.com/marssciencegrad/status/80696366235102003...

codecamper 10y ago

Easily mispronounced "whammo"

gist 10y ago

What's the story in the video with 'pulling at heartstrings' by featuring a blind person? The problem of a blind person getting a ride is obviously solved. But more importantly it's an edge case of a need for a vehicle that is self driving. And actually I wonder whether someone who is blind actually would rather have a human driver in the car and feel safer generally that way. Seem to me almost like a strawman in a way. In other words 'if you feel that you have to help the handicapped you need to be onboard with self driving cars'.

dispose13432 10y ago

What I don't understand is if trains aren't completely automated, planes aren't completely automated, subways aren't completely automated, ships aren't completely automated, How are CARS supposed to be automated??

jordwest 10y ago
> trains aren't completely automated > subways aren't completely automated https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_automated_urban_metro_subway_systems#Grade_of_Automation_4_Systems https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_automated_urban_metro_... > planes aren't completely automated https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unmanned_aerial_vehicle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unmanned_aerial_vehicle
- dispose13432 10y ago
  >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unmanned_aerial_vehicle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unmanned_aerial_vehicle Many of which are still piloted by people on the ground. And I can't take a flight without a pilot yet.
imh 10y ago
When your train is carrying hundreds of passengers, the cost of somebody driving it is pretty small per passenger. In a car alone, that cost isn't split, so is more expensive. That makes it more worth pursuing.

ipreferhumans 10y ago

Being a pedestrian sharing space with moving autonomous cars is not a future I'm looking forward to, not one bit. 1. Pedestrian->driver observation and interaction are the primary factors in deciding what's safe. 2. Roads full of networked autonomous vehicles are a hack away from becoming hoards of hurtling tonnage. In my opinion this is all a solution looking for a problem and we should know better than to make our roads so utterly hostile to our own kind.

sidcool 10y ago

Somehow the link is giving 404 to me.

perseusprime11 10y ago

Do we even need a car in the future?

nojvek 10y ago

Its great that waymo has its own brand now. I really wish udacity's open self driving car takes off as well. I predict there will be a linux of self driving car software/hardware kit that will be battle tested, reliable, secure and solid with contributions and test cases from all around the world. I also really think someone should invent a solution to convert existing modern cars with brake, gas and steering from CANbus to self driving cars by installing a kit. The current car manufacturers can simply make really good cars with cameras and sensors integrated. One can then install open software adapted for the region that is always getting updates. The test cases and lidar data is put in a giant shared repo whose ownership is the community. E.g OpenStreetMap and wikipedia. Same software can be used for smaller robots to dispatch packages to the front door, or robotic lawn mowers, rubbish trucks, cleaning trucks e.t.c That would be a fantastic future to be part of.

ktta 10y ago
Wow, you just described everything that commaai[1] did (or tried to do). They tried the kit that can be self installed[2] but decided not to continue[3] They also have a dataset that can be downloaded by anyone[4] And they have open sourced the software on their github, [1]: http://comma.ai/ http://comma.ai/ [2]: https://techcrunch.com/2016/09/13/comma-ai-will-ship-a-999-autonomous-driving-add-on-by-the-end-of-this-year/ https://techcrunch.com/2016/09/13/comma-ai-will-ship-a-999-a... [3]: http://www.theverge.com/2016/10/28/13453344/comma-ai-self-driving-car-comma-one-kit-canceled http://www.theverge.com/2016/10/28/13453344/comma-ai-self-dr... [4]: http://research.comma.ai/ http://research.comma.ai/

laurentoget 10y ago

My real question is whether they will be able to convince american customers to give up one of their most prized status symbols. It feels from this webpage their main argument will be safety, so I guess we will find out how much human life weighs against the thrill of owning and controlling fast, expensive and shiny machines.

wiz21c 10y ago

How will this affect climate change ? I mean, will autonomous driving increase or decrease the number of cars on the roads ?