4 ms·

If it's private, it should mean there is no street sign or marked as private. I'd be curious how the driver even got onto the road. IMO road hazards should be

If it's private, it should mean there is no street sign or marked as private. I'd be curious how the driver even got onto the road. IMO road hazards should be the responsibility of the property owner, what if someone got lost or even used to road to turn around?

petsfed 3y ago
I have been directed by google down roads marked "private". I have been directed by google down roads that weren't actually roads. When I was in Arches National Park, I noticed google trying to direct me to take an actual jeep trail instead of a paved road. Like, big sign at the turn out that said "high clearance, 4wd required. Do not attempt when wet" (the jeep trail actually crossed a river, which at that time was about 3 feet deep). And when i deliberately modified my path on my phone to not go down the jeep trail, within 2 miles of driving, google maps helpfully interrupted its own directions to say "we've found a route that will save you 30 minutes. If you don't want to take the new route, press ignore", which directed me back to the fucking jeep trail. I feel like Google does have some culpability here, since they make it so hard to actually avoid hazards while still using their tool. Like, how is there not an option to just avoid dirt roads the way I can avoid toll roads? I don't dispute that it is ultimately the driver's responsibility to validate the program's outputs. But if the only way to use the app at all is to not validate the outputs, then I don't think a single line clause in the EULA is sufficient to shield google from liability.
- arp242 3y ago
  A few years back there was a story where Google Maps would frequently guide people through a steep narrow street which really wasn't intended for this kind of traffic, creating a dangerous situation for both drivers and residents because this road really wasn't designed or intended for heavy thoroughfare. Residents complained to Google. Google them to go pound sand and that there isn't anything they can do. Quite frankly I'm having a hard time explaining the difference between "knowingly putting people in a dangerous situation" and "accidentally putting people in a dangerous situation and then refusing to fix it". I guess it's easy to enough to ignore these kind of externalities if they're not happening at your front door every day... I can forgive the routing mistake, which is an understandable one to make. What I can't forgive is the "well, not our problem". If you're going to make a GPS guidance app then you also need to take responsibility for what it tells people. Mistakes are okay. Pretending mistakes have nothing to do with you is not. All of that said, I find it hard to really judge this situation based on the provided information; the key question is "could Google reasonably have done better?" However, in the past Google Maps has definitely demonstrated that it doesn't take these concerns very serious and it's 100% worth a serious investigation in both this specific siltation but also whether Google Maps in general takes enough reasonable precautions to prevent this kind of thing.
  - kedean 3y ago
    As I've understood it, one reason they will refuse to do anything about those cases is because they can't really differentiate between "this is dangerous" and NIMBYs who don't want traffic down their quiet suburban street. But also, if people are actively complaining about it, maybe that's a good indicator the street shouldn't be used as a thoroughfare in directions. Being a little bit faster isn't a good justification, and back road shortcuts aren't something that should be widely advertised to tourists and visitors.
    - arp242 3y ago
      I don't doubt there are some people complaining about the smallest of things, but "I don't want my quiet suburban street swamped with traffic" is not "NIMBY", and can certainly be very reasonable. Actually, they closed off one end of a street where I lived many years ago for pretty much this reason: people kept using it as a "shortcut". If you drive it's not very obvious, but with GPS it is. Regardless, "we don't do it because it's hard" is just a different way of phrasing "we can't be arsed and don't care".
Merad 3y ago
See my other comment WRT to ownership: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37602718 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37602718

petsfed 3y ago

I have been directed by google down roads marked "private". I have been directed by google down roads that weren't actually roads. When I was in Arches National Park, I noticed google trying to direct me to take an actual jeep trail instead of a paved road. Like, big sign at the turn out that said "high clearance, 4wd required. Do not attempt when wet" (the jeep trail actually crossed a river, which at that time was about 3 feet deep). And when i deliberately modified my path on my phone to not go down the jeep trail, within 2 miles of driving, google maps helpfully interrupted its own directions to say "we've found a route that will save you 30 minutes. If you don't want to take the new route, press ignore", which directed me back to the fucking jeep trail. I feel like Google does have some culpability here, since they make it so hard to actually avoid hazards while still using their tool. Like, how is there not an option to just avoid dirt roads the way I can avoid toll roads? I don't dispute that it is ultimately the driver's responsibility to validate the program's outputs. But if the only way to use the app at all is to not validate the outputs, then I don't think a single line clause in the EULA is sufficient to shield google from liability.

arp242 3y ago
A few years back there was a story where Google Maps would frequently guide people through a steep narrow street which really wasn't intended for this kind of traffic, creating a dangerous situation for both drivers and residents because this road really wasn't designed or intended for heavy thoroughfare. Residents complained to Google. Google them to go pound sand and that there isn't anything they can do. Quite frankly I'm having a hard time explaining the difference between "knowingly putting people in a dangerous situation" and "accidentally putting people in a dangerous situation and then refusing to fix it". I guess it's easy to enough to ignore these kind of externalities if they're not happening at your front door every day... I can forgive the routing mistake, which is an understandable one to make. What I can't forgive is the "well, not our problem". If you're going to make a GPS guidance app then you also need to take responsibility for what it tells people. Mistakes are okay. Pretending mistakes have nothing to do with you is not. All of that said, I find it hard to really judge this situation based on the provided information; the key question is "could Google reasonably have done better?" However, in the past Google Maps has definitely demonstrated that it doesn't take these concerns very serious and it's 100% worth a serious investigation in both this specific siltation but also whether Google Maps in general takes enough reasonable precautions to prevent this kind of thing.
- kedean 3y ago
  As I've understood it, one reason they will refuse to do anything about those cases is because they can't really differentiate between "this is dangerous" and NIMBYs who don't want traffic down their quiet suburban street. But also, if people are actively complaining about it, maybe that's a good indicator the street shouldn't be used as a thoroughfare in directions. Being a little bit faster isn't a good justification, and back road shortcuts aren't something that should be widely advertised to tourists and visitors.
  - arp242 3y ago
    I don't doubt there are some people complaining about the smallest of things, but "I don't want my quiet suburban street swamped with traffic" is not "NIMBY", and can certainly be very reasonable. Actually, they closed off one end of a street where I lived many years ago for pretty much this reason: people kept using it as a "shortcut". If you drive it's not very obvious, but with GPS it is. Regardless, "we don't do it because it's hard" is just a different way of phrasing "we can't be arsed and don't care".

Merad 3y ago

See my other comment WRT to ownership: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37602718 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37602718