6 ms·

I’m curious on the HN community opinion on whether Cruise is ahead of Waymo in SF, or if Waymo is just more careful and has spent less time training models spec

I’m curious on the HN community opinion on whether Cruise is ahead of Waymo in SF, or if Waymo is just more careful and has spent less time training models specific to SF, but will expand to a fully public program sooner

jdavis703 5y ago
At this point, being let’s say a “transportation safety activist” in the Bay Area, they seem about the same. That said, I’ve seen Waymo still being too cautious relative to Cruise. Like I was waiting on the crosswalk with my bike at a 45-degree angle, and Waymo seemed terrified that I was going to bike diagonally through on-coming traffic. It was kind of hilarious. That said when I’ve tried to test the safety parameters on Cruise while on my bike or skateboard and the system has called my bluff. I don’t know if this means Cruise is less safe. Or they’ve found a way to give the AI a sense of confidence and assertiveness against people using micromobility to aggressively bypass urban traffic congestion.
- bckr 5y ago
  > Or they’ve found a way to give the AI a sense of confidence and assertiveness against people using micromobility to aggressively bypass urban traffic congestion. I'm looking forward to mass robotics. I'm not looking forward to corporate dark patterns in mass robotics.
hamandcheese 5y ago
This is not very scientific at all, but I see Waymo and Cruise cars driving around SF all the time. Waymo cars appear to drive much more naturally than Cruise to my eyes.
- exhaze 5y ago
  Can you give some examples? I feel like perception of safety will be a big adoption gap. What made the Waymo cars appear more natural?
  - hamandcheese 5y ago
    It’s hard to put my finger on any specific thing, and it may even come down to the fact that I see a lot more Waymos than Cruises, and have also seen Waymos around SF for much longer (or at least noticed them for longer). I feel like Cruises are a bit more cautious, to the point of making me skeptical. But again, I’m struggling to think of any example in particular. This might be silly but I also think the Cruise cars are much more ugly.
    - exhaze 5y ago
      I wonder if it’s something like the “bozo bit”? Once you see one Waymo car doing something that looks unsafe, your entire perception of “Waymo car” becomes (nearly irreversibly) lower.
ehsankia 5y ago
Considering Waymo has had almost a year of no-one-in-driverseat service in Phoenix, I would say they are overall ahead, even though that's not in SF specifically. Being first to driverless in SF also shows that. They are definitely taking things very very carefully, as they know a single major accident is all it takes to set them back years.
- AlotOfReading 5y ago
  The first to driverless in SF was Cruise, who's had a public driverless program running there for a few months, albeit at night.
  - avthrowaway35 5y ago
    I think it’s “public” in air quotes - technically non-Cruise employees have taken rides, but it doesn’t seem like they’re pulling people organically from the waitlist. It’s mostly local influencers or Cruise investors in the few videos I’ve seen that aren’t Cruise employees.
    - AlotOfReading 5y ago
      They're pretty limited by the number of vehicles they have available and resources to support them. Even employees have trouble accessing the program due to the lack of vehicles and the waitlist is in the tens of thousands of people. I imagine they prioritized influencers or actual users since they can't possibly meet total demand.
    - spikels 5y ago
      Waymo is “public” in the same sense. The general public can’t just request a ride.
      - ehsankia 5y ago
        People who have zero connection to Google or Waymo have gotten in the program and used the service for months. Waymo also removed any sort of NDA allowing people to post videos of the full experience, hence all the videos on Youtube. Lastly, I would still say "10 PM and 6 AM at a maximum speed of 30 MPH" is quite a major restriction compared to what Waymo can do.
avthrowaway35 5y ago
My take as someone in the industry, but at neither of these two companies: Cruise is limited (by their own choice) to operating between 11 PM and 5 AM. Waymo is operating at all hours of the day. That alone indicates a much greater level of confidence in their capabilities. The complexity of driving in a busy street in SF at daytime is dramatically higher than at night, especially in SF, which tends to be pretty sleepy after hours. Note that both companies avoid driving in SOMA, FIDI, and other challenging parts of the city.
- wutbrodo 5y ago
  Cruise is running _driverlessly_ at nighttime. Like Waymo, they're driving autonomously 24/7 around San Francisco, just with a safety driver. This new announcement doesn't specify their driverless hours. I suspect that they would have highlighted it if they were the first to be driving around SF in the daytime, just as they highlighted the first of being driverlessly deployed in multiple cities. My guess (also in the industry) would be that Waymo combines Google's incredible technical skill with Google's incredible incompetence at focused execution. This is why they haven't had a milestone in a couple years since their deployment in Phoenix. I also think that this combination of strengths and weaknesses is a good fit for the AV industry.
  - avthrowaway35 5y ago
    They include footage of their drive without a safety operator and it’s in the middle of the day. https://youtu.be/O8TSA-X9UlU https://youtu.be/O8TSA-X9UlU
    - jeffbee 5y ago
      I wonder what the little icon is that the Waymo viz is putting on top of those double-parked cars.
      - CobrastanJorji 5y ago
        I'd guess you answered your own question. It's an icon of a car next to some car-shaped blobs, so "double parked" or "stopped in a traffic lane" sounds like a good guess.
ra7 5y ago
1. Cruise only operates between 10 PM and 6 AM and under 30 mph. Waymo operates all day without an artificial speed restriction. 2. Waymo's service area in SF is more than twice that of Cruise's. Unsurprisingly, both of them avoid downtown areas. 3. Waymo has hundreds of vehicles in San Francisco. Cruise only has a fraction of that — last I heard, only <10 of them were providing driverless rides. 4. According to CA DMV 2021 disengagement data, Waymo is driving almost 3x more miles than Cruise. Waymo seems to love a slow and steady approach, but when they announce a service it's fully featured as we've seen in Chandler, AZ.
- jeffbee 5y ago
  I don't think it's fair to say that either Cruise or Waymo avoid downtown areas. Cruise cars come pouring out of their depot at Van Ness and California nightly at 10pm, like bats or something. That's not downtown but it's in a very dense, very busy area. Cruise's offices are in SoMa where Dropbox used to be, and I see tons of Cruise cars in the vicinity of Folsom/Embarcadero. I also see Waymo working Embarcadero on both sides of Market, which is downtown.
  - ra7 5y ago
    Oh yes, they test in downtown areas. I meant they avoid them for their public beta program rides.
- silentsea90 5y ago
  Sounds like Google. Slow, steady and more reliable.
  - dymk 5y ago
    Reliable? https://killedbygoogle.com/ https://killedbygoogle.com/ It sounds like Waymo, sure, but not like Google. There's a reason they're separate companies.
    - fshbbdssbbgdd 5y ago
spikels 5y ago
I live/work in SF and signed up for both Cruise and Waymo yet have never been able to get an actual ride. As best I can tell almost everyone getting rides from these services in SF are employees or specially selected. Neither is available the general public. Waymo’s “Waymo One” app makes you fill out a pretty extensive questionnaire to sign up and suggests they will do some kind of checks about the other members of your household. Filled out rather invasive info out yet still no access. Cruise makes you fill out a simpler form but puts you in a cue to get the actual app. Know several people who have filled it out but none have gotten the app. So far no actual robotaxis in SF.

jdavis703 5y ago

At this point, being let’s say a “transportation safety activist” in the Bay Area, they seem about the same. That said, I’ve seen Waymo still being too cautious relative to Cruise. Like I was waiting on the crosswalk with my bike at a 45-degree angle, and Waymo seemed terrified that I was going to bike diagonally through on-coming traffic. It was kind of hilarious. That said when I’ve tried to test the safety parameters on Cruise while on my bike or skateboard and the system has called my bluff. I don’t know if this means Cruise is less safe. Or they’ve found a way to give the AI a sense of confidence and assertiveness against people using micromobility to aggressively bypass urban traffic congestion.

bckr 5y ago
> Or they’ve found a way to give the AI a sense of confidence and assertiveness against people using micromobility to aggressively bypass urban traffic congestion. I'm looking forward to mass robotics. I'm not looking forward to corporate dark patterns in mass robotics.

hamandcheese 5y ago

This is not very scientific at all, but I see Waymo and Cruise cars driving around SF all the time. Waymo cars appear to drive much more naturally than Cruise to my eyes.

exhaze 5y ago
Can you give some examples? I feel like perception of safety will be a big adoption gap. What made the Waymo cars appear more natural?
- hamandcheese 5y ago
  It’s hard to put my finger on any specific thing, and it may even come down to the fact that I see a lot more Waymos than Cruises, and have also seen Waymos around SF for much longer (or at least noticed them for longer). I feel like Cruises are a bit more cautious, to the point of making me skeptical. But again, I’m struggling to think of any example in particular. This might be silly but I also think the Cruise cars are much more ugly.
  - exhaze 5y ago
    I wonder if it’s something like the “bozo bit”? Once you see one Waymo car doing something that looks unsafe, your entire perception of “Waymo car” becomes (nearly irreversibly) lower.

ehsankia 5y ago

Considering Waymo has had almost a year of no-one-in-driverseat service in Phoenix, I would say they are overall ahead, even though that's not in SF specifically. Being first to driverless in SF also shows that. They are definitely taking things very very carefully, as they know a single major accident is all it takes to set them back years.

AlotOfReading 5y ago
The first to driverless in SF was Cruise, who's had a public driverless program running there for a few months, albeit at night.
- avthrowaway35 5y ago
  I think it’s “public” in air quotes - technically non-Cruise employees have taken rides, but it doesn’t seem like they’re pulling people organically from the waitlist. It’s mostly local influencers or Cruise investors in the few videos I’ve seen that aren’t Cruise employees.
  - AlotOfReading 5y ago
    They're pretty limited by the number of vehicles they have available and resources to support them. Even employees have trouble accessing the program due to the lack of vehicles and the waitlist is in the tens of thousands of people. I imagine they prioritized influencers or actual users since they can't possibly meet total demand.
  - spikels 5y ago
    Waymo is “public” in the same sense. The general public can’t just request a ride.
    - ehsankia 5y ago
      People who have zero connection to Google or Waymo have gotten in the program and used the service for months. Waymo also removed any sort of NDA allowing people to post videos of the full experience, hence all the videos on Youtube. Lastly, I would still say "10 PM and 6 AM at a maximum speed of 30 MPH" is quite a major restriction compared to what Waymo can do.

avthrowaway35 5y ago

My take as someone in the industry, but at neither of these two companies: Cruise is limited (by their own choice) to operating between 11 PM and 5 AM. Waymo is operating at all hours of the day. That alone indicates a much greater level of confidence in their capabilities. The complexity of driving in a busy street in SF at daytime is dramatically higher than at night, especially in SF, which tends to be pretty sleepy after hours. Note that both companies avoid driving in SOMA, FIDI, and other challenging parts of the city.

wutbrodo 5y ago
Cruise is running _driverlessly_ at nighttime. Like Waymo, they're driving autonomously 24/7 around San Francisco, just with a safety driver. This new announcement doesn't specify their driverless hours. I suspect that they would have highlighted it if they were the first to be driving around SF in the daytime, just as they highlighted the first of being driverlessly deployed in multiple cities. My guess (also in the industry) would be that Waymo combines Google's incredible technical skill with Google's incredible incompetence at focused execution. This is why they haven't had a milestone in a couple years since their deployment in Phoenix. I also think that this combination of strengths and weaknesses is a good fit for the AV industry.
- avthrowaway35 5y ago
  They include footage of their drive without a safety operator and it’s in the middle of the day. https://youtu.be/O8TSA-X9UlU https://youtu.be/O8TSA-X9UlU
  - jeffbee 5y ago
    I wonder what the little icon is that the Waymo viz is putting on top of those double-parked cars.
    - CobrastanJorji 5y ago
      I'd guess you answered your own question. It's an icon of a car next to some car-shaped blobs, so "double parked" or "stopped in a traffic lane" sounds like a good guess.

ra7 5y ago

1. Cruise only operates between 10 PM and 6 AM and under 30 mph. Waymo operates all day without an artificial speed restriction. 2. Waymo's service area in SF is more than twice that of Cruise's. Unsurprisingly, both of them avoid downtown areas. 3. Waymo has hundreds of vehicles in San Francisco. Cruise only has a fraction of that — last I heard, only <10 of them were providing driverless rides. 4. According to CA DMV 2021 disengagement data, Waymo is driving almost 3x more miles than Cruise. Waymo seems to love a slow and steady approach, but when they announce a service it's fully featured as we've seen in Chandler, AZ.

jeffbee 5y ago
I don't think it's fair to say that either Cruise or Waymo avoid downtown areas. Cruise cars come pouring out of their depot at Van Ness and California nightly at 10pm, like bats or something. That's not downtown but it's in a very dense, very busy area. Cruise's offices are in SoMa where Dropbox used to be, and I see tons of Cruise cars in the vicinity of Folsom/Embarcadero. I also see Waymo working Embarcadero on both sides of Market, which is downtown.
- ra7 5y ago
  Oh yes, they test in downtown areas. I meant they avoid them for their public beta program rides.
silentsea90 5y ago
Sounds like Google. Slow, steady and more reliable.
- dymk 5y ago
  Reliable? https://killedbygoogle.com/ https://killedbygoogle.com/ It sounds like Waymo, sure, but not like Google. There's a reason they're separate companies.
  - fshbbdssbbgdd 5y ago

spikels 5y ago

I live/work in SF and signed up for both Cruise and Waymo yet have never been able to get an actual ride. As best I can tell almost everyone getting rides from these services in SF are employees or specially selected. Neither is available the general public. Waymo’s “Waymo One” app makes you fill out a pretty extensive questionnaire to sign up and suggests they will do some kind of checks about the other members of your household. Filled out rather invasive info out yet still no access. Cruise makes you fill out a simpler form but puts you in a cue to get the actual app. Know several people who have filled it out but none have gotten the app. So far no actual robotaxis in SF.