4 ms·
> The other one isn't a safety driver. True, the second person is the co-driver. As Waymo has discovered[1], a single person is not safe enough. > And having
by oldgradstudent 8y ago
> The other one isn't a safety driver.
True, the second person is the co-driver. As Waymo has discovered[1], a single person is not safe enough.
> And having the safety driver doesn't tell you all that much about how it would perform without.
Theoretically true. But in reality, it tells you all you need to know - the cars are not safe without safety drivers.
[1] https://www.theinformation.com/articles/troubled-waymo-worker-shows-human-problems-continue https://www.theinformation.com/articles/troubled-waymo-worke...
- Dylan16807 8y ago> But in reality, it tells you all you need to know - the cars are not safe without safety drivers. I disagree. There are other plausible motivations to have a safety driver at this stage even for a safe car.
- oldgradstudent 8y agoOf course there are reasons to use a safety driver for some trips. The point is that they won't do even a single trip without a safety driver. They've done some PR stunts - but they won't give a single real demo to a single real journalist without a safety driver. Even with a safety driver, a few weeks before they "launched" a "commercial" "self-driving" service, they wouldn't let journalists pick their own destination.
- Dylan16807 8y agoYeah, overall it looks pretty bad.