6 ms·

Based on anecdotal evidence, I strongly suspect these are remotely driven cars, not completely self-driving, which means there is a remote saftey operator ready

Based on anecdotal evidence, I strongly suspect these are remotely driven cars, not completely self-driving, which means there is a remote saftey operator ready to take over if the ride starts to go bad. "Self-driving" sounds sexier and is the ultimate goal, but if it were my company I'd probably lead with "remotely monitored by safety driver" to calm any fears people might have. I'm guessing the percentage of people who are willing to put their lives in the hands of this tech is rather small and the percentage of people who don't trust tech is rather large.

akira2501 2y ago
Wouldn't the fear just become that not enough safety drivers will always be available or that the internet connection they use to "drive" the car remotely would fail? It's a taxi that you don't have to risk having a conversation with a stranger in. Outside of that it seems that all other benefits are marginal or well crafted illusions. Anyways, I'm sure I'm just being a pessimist, it's not as if large monopolistic companies with no human customer service have failed us significantly before. I mean, I trust them with my data completely, so why not my life, too?
- labrador 2y ago
  If it loses remote monitoring I'd rather it would pull over and park rather than barelling down the steep hills of San Francisco without a safety monitor.
TulliusCicero 2y ago
Waymo has been pretty clear about this: they do have remote navigators/coaches who tell the cars what to do if it gets stuck/confused, but they're not directly driving the car, they're telling it where to go, like a navigator in the front passenger seat. Remote operation is considered dangerous due to possible issues with network connection latency or stability. If it was actually happening, Waymo is big enough now (IIRC they said 50,000 paid rides each week) to where someone would've leaked such a secret.
- lopkeny12ko 2y ago
  > they do have remote navigators/coaches who tell the cars what to do if it gets stuck/confused, but they're not directly driving the car, they're telling it where to go That sounds a lot like remote operation. Waymo is notoriously tight-lipped about this. Look at the number of journalists and reporters who have, over the years, asked very basic questions, like: 1. How often do remote operators intervene? 2. How many miles are driven per intervention? How does this compare to FSD? 3. How much of a typical ride is remotely operated and not actually driven by the car itself? Waymo never provides answers, and one can only imagine it is because they are not proud of the answers.
  - TulliusCicero 2y ago
    > That sounds a lot like remote operation. If you have a friend in the front passenger seat directing you where to go, are they operating the car?
  - labrador 2y ago
    I really don't understand why they aren't transparent about this, but judging by the downvotes I'm getting it seems people really, really want to believe they are intelligent and independent self-driving machines. It's so much more futuristic with a "wow" factor that attracts press attention and future investement.
    - ra7 2y ago
      The downvotes are because your suspicions are entirely wrong. There’s no remote “driving” or “take over”. They wrote a blog post on how it works just a few weeks ago: https://waymo.com/blog/2024/05/fleet-response/ https://waymo.com/blog/2024/05/fleet-response/
      - labrador 2y ago
        So I've learned but it's not reassuring because the safer option would be to give a remote operator the ability to take over
s09dfhks 2y ago
I had someone remotely intervene on my last ride. A car was trying to parallel park on a narrow street and the waymo stayed put, despite there being plenty of room to go around. I heard a chime and a pop up on the screen said “we’re getting your waymo back on track” and it went around the car, like any sane driver would have done from the get go
- labrador 2y ago
  That's reassuring to me. I don't know why Waymo doesn't reassure safety conscious people like me by being explicit about this. As it stands, as a computer programmer and professional driver at different times in my career, whose seen a lot of unforeseen bugs and weird driving situations, I'm not putting my life in the hands of this software.
  - verdverm 2y ago
    https://waymo.com/blog/2024/05/fleet-response https://waymo.com/blog/2024/05/fleet-response
    - labrador 2y ago
      Interesting. This is about a month and half old, so they are getting more transparent. I am not reassured though because based on my reading, it appears the fleet response can't actually take over and drive the car in an emergency. I double checked with Claude AI Me: "does it appear the remote operator can take over and drive the car if needed." Claude: "Based on my reading of the document, it does not appear that the remote operator (referred to as "fleet response agent") can take over and drive the car directly"
      - verdverm 2y ago
        Double checking with an LLM is not the way to find the truth. They are more like creative assistants than fact checkers
  - wepple 2y ago
leumon 2y ago
They are only taken over in certain edge cases, and even then the remote operator is only placing the next destination, he is not actually remotely "driving" the vehicle. More on this here: https://waymo.com/blog/2024/05/fleet-response/ https://waymo.com/blog/2024/05/fleet-response/
- YeGoblynQueenne 2y ago
  >> Fleet response can influence the Waymo Driver's path, whether indirectly through indicating lane closures, explicitly requesting the AV use a particular lane, or, in the most complex scenarios, explicitly proposing a path for the vehicle to consider. The Waymo Driver evaluates the input from fleet response and independently remains in control of driving. This collaboration enhances the rider experience by efficiently guiding them to their destinations In my reading this is trying very hard to put a self-driving spin on an interface that allows a human operator to set waypoints for a robot to follow. This should at best be called "human remote-assisted self-driving", rather than "self-driving". Btw, NASA uses a similar setup for its Mars rovers with autonomous navigation capabilities, like Perseverance. There was a report that described how humans on Earth can guide Perseverance to plan paths avoiding areas with potentially deep sand where the rover can get seriously stuck. The human operators draw the limits of what seems to them to be the safe area and the rover's onboard planner than plans a path through the safe area. That's still the farthest that autonomous navigation can go; pun not intended. Ref: Autonomous robotics is driving Perseverance rover’s progress on Mars https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/scirobotics.adi3099 https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/scirobotics.adi3099
  - refulgentis 2y ago
    > In my reading this is trying very hard to put a self-driving spin on an interface that allows a human operator to set waypoints for a robot to follow. I can 100% confirm you're reaching way too far to find excuses to indicate Waymo isn't self-driving.
    - YeGoblynQueenne 2y ago
      OK what the bloody fuck. What is it with the tone of these discussions? You can 100% confirm I'm reaching... the hell is the matter with you? Can't you disagree like an intelligent adult? Fucking internets.

akira2501 2y ago

Wouldn't the fear just become that not enough safety drivers will always be available or that the internet connection they use to "drive" the car remotely would fail? It's a taxi that you don't have to risk having a conversation with a stranger in. Outside of that it seems that all other benefits are marginal or well crafted illusions. Anyways, I'm sure I'm just being a pessimist, it's not as if large monopolistic companies with no human customer service have failed us significantly before. I mean, I trust them with my data completely, so why not my life, too?

labrador 2y ago
If it loses remote monitoring I'd rather it would pull over and park rather than barelling down the steep hills of San Francisco without a safety monitor.

TulliusCicero 2y ago

Waymo has been pretty clear about this: they do have remote navigators/coaches who tell the cars what to do if it gets stuck/confused, but they're not directly driving the car, they're telling it where to go, like a navigator in the front passenger seat. Remote operation is considered dangerous due to possible issues with network connection latency or stability. If it was actually happening, Waymo is big enough now (IIRC they said 50,000 paid rides each week) to where someone would've leaked such a secret.

lopkeny12ko 2y ago
> they do have remote navigators/coaches who tell the cars what to do if it gets stuck/confused, but they're not directly driving the car, they're telling it where to go That sounds a lot like remote operation. Waymo is notoriously tight-lipped about this. Look at the number of journalists and reporters who have, over the years, asked very basic questions, like: 1. How often do remote operators intervene? 2. How many miles are driven per intervention? How does this compare to FSD? 3. How much of a typical ride is remotely operated and not actually driven by the car itself? Waymo never provides answers, and one can only imagine it is because they are not proud of the answers.
- TulliusCicero 2y ago
  > That sounds a lot like remote operation. If you have a friend in the front passenger seat directing you where to go, are they operating the car?
- labrador 2y ago
  I really don't understand why they aren't transparent about this, but judging by the downvotes I'm getting it seems people really, really want to believe they are intelligent and independent self-driving machines. It's so much more futuristic with a "wow" factor that attracts press attention and future investement.
  - ra7 2y ago
    The downvotes are because your suspicions are entirely wrong. There’s no remote “driving” or “take over”. They wrote a blog post on how it works just a few weeks ago: https://waymo.com/blog/2024/05/fleet-response/ https://waymo.com/blog/2024/05/fleet-response/
    - labrador 2y ago
      So I've learned but it's not reassuring because the safer option would be to give a remote operator the ability to take over

s09dfhks 2y ago

I had someone remotely intervene on my last ride. A car was trying to parallel park on a narrow street and the waymo stayed put, despite there being plenty of room to go around. I heard a chime and a pop up on the screen said “we’re getting your waymo back on track” and it went around the car, like any sane driver would have done from the get go

labrador 2y ago
That's reassuring to me. I don't know why Waymo doesn't reassure safety conscious people like me by being explicit about this. As it stands, as a computer programmer and professional driver at different times in my career, whose seen a lot of unforeseen bugs and weird driving situations, I'm not putting my life in the hands of this software.
- verdverm 2y ago
  https://waymo.com/blog/2024/05/fleet-response https://waymo.com/blog/2024/05/fleet-response
  - labrador 2y ago
    Interesting. This is about a month and half old, so they are getting more transparent. I am not reassured though because based on my reading, it appears the fleet response can't actually take over and drive the car in an emergency. I double checked with Claude AI Me: "does it appear the remote operator can take over and drive the car if needed." Claude: "Based on my reading of the document, it does not appear that the remote operator (referred to as "fleet response agent") can take over and drive the car directly"
    - verdverm 2y ago
      Double checking with an LLM is not the way to find the truth. They are more like creative assistants than fact checkers
- wepple 2y ago

leumon 2y ago

They are only taken over in certain edge cases, and even then the remote operator is only placing the next destination, he is not actually remotely "driving" the vehicle. More on this here: https://waymo.com/blog/2024/05/fleet-response/ https://waymo.com/blog/2024/05/fleet-response/

YeGoblynQueenne 2y ago
>> Fleet response can influence the Waymo Driver's path, whether indirectly through indicating lane closures, explicitly requesting the AV use a particular lane, or, in the most complex scenarios, explicitly proposing a path for the vehicle to consider. The Waymo Driver evaluates the input from fleet response and independently remains in control of driving. This collaboration enhances the rider experience by efficiently guiding them to their destinations In my reading this is trying very hard to put a self-driving spin on an interface that allows a human operator to set waypoints for a robot to follow. This should at best be called "human remote-assisted self-driving", rather than "self-driving". Btw, NASA uses a similar setup for its Mars rovers with autonomous navigation capabilities, like Perseverance. There was a report that described how humans on Earth can guide Perseverance to plan paths avoiding areas with potentially deep sand where the rover can get seriously stuck. The human operators draw the limits of what seems to them to be the safe area and the rover's onboard planner than plans a path through the safe area. That's still the farthest that autonomous navigation can go; pun not intended. Ref: Autonomous robotics is driving Perseverance rover’s progress on Mars https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/scirobotics.adi3099 https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/scirobotics.adi3099
- refulgentis 2y ago
  > In my reading this is trying very hard to put a self-driving spin on an interface that allows a human operator to set waypoints for a robot to follow. I can 100% confirm you're reaching way too far to find excuses to indicate Waymo isn't self-driving.
  - YeGoblynQueenne 2y ago
    OK what the bloody fuck. What is it with the tone of these discussions? You can 100% confirm I'm reaching... the hell is the matter with you? Can't you disagree like an intelligent adult? Fucking internets.