19 ms·
Waymo the Leapfrog
- rqtwteye 2y agoMakes me wonder what Waymo’s endgame is. Become another Uber, become a car company or provide the tech to other car companies?
- cwillu 2y agoWhat's google's endgame everywhere else? Captive audience to put advertising in front of.
- treflop 2y agoTheir endgame is usually to build a product that they can abandon.
- aPoCoMiLogin 2y agoGCP/Gdrive/Gdocs is not putting ads anywhere, and the list can go on. what they are doing, they are looking for other streams of money
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- UncleOxidant 2y agoI don't get why Tesla keeps touting that they're going to have FSD taxis... in a few years. And their stock goes up when they (usually it's Musk, let's be clear) tout this. Waymo already has this (in limited areas). Why wouldn't Musk just partner with Waymo on this? Isn't this a situation where the more people using the tech will make it better faster than trying to have a dozen different companies chasing it essentially duplicating effort and training? Self driving seems like an area where it would be beneficial to share training data as much as possible.
- Detrytus 2y agoMusk's ego is just too big at this point for partnering with anyone on anything. He'd rather just "show them how it's done".
- yiyayo110 2y agoUsing FSD every single day and it's amazing how well it works.
- vinni2 2y agoI guess fundamental difference is that Waymo uses a lot of sensors while Tesla FSD is relying on AI and computer vision.
- mupuff1234 2y agoMore sensors doesn't mean waymo doesn't rely on AI and computer vision.
- blerb795 2y agoThis feels a little pedantic; I assume the commenter means that Tesla relies exclusively on vision, whereas Waymo additionally has sensors (i.e. lidar)
- seanmcdirmid 2y agoParent should have said “on only AI and vision, no lidar.”
- xnx 2y agoNot sure Waymo has anything to gain from a partnership with Tesla.
- opinion-is-bad 2y agoAt some point Waymo is going to want a lot of cars if things go well. Those cars need to be electric, due to the power draw of the computer and sensors. A partnership doesn’t necessarily make sense between these companies, but I can see possible synergies.
- shreezus 2y agoI have been riding Waymo around LA for over a year with no issues. To me, it's just an Uber with an invisible driver, and more predictable experience. Riding it is now a mundane experience, and that's a marvel in itself. Every time I'm forced to get an Uber in another city (or do airport rides as Waymo doesn't do pickups/dropoffs in LAX yet), I feel like I went 5 years back in time. My Tesla has FSD and that has gotten progressively better the last few updates, however Waymo still feels ahead. I can truly "relax" in a Waymo, where FSD still makes me uneasy at times, like I'm supervising a teenage driver.
- panarky 2y agoIt's been a consistently excellent experience for me in both SF and LA. The cars are well maintained and clean inside and out. They are very careful and considerate drivers. They navigate complex and ambiguous situations with unprotected turns, pedestrians, bicyclists, double-parked cars, construction zones and narrow streets. They're better than Uber in every respect. And I dare say I think they're now a safer and more capable driver than I am, at least within their designated operating territories.
- thefounder 2y agoI heard Tesla has no real FSD. Just a broken prototype with customers used as Guinea pigs.
- dvt 2y agoI've been taking Waymo in LA for about half a year now, and I love it and it's a great party trick (always pick up my dates in one lmao), but a handful of times it's (a) accidentally blocked traffic and gotten incessantly honked at (kind of hilarious considering there's no driver), and (b) went the wrong way on a one-way back alley and got stuck when a lady was going the opposite direction lol. Again, kinda funny when she started honking, got out of the car, and realized there's no driver. In the latter case, we actually had support call us in the car. I think if there's something weird/bad going on, someone manually takes over (but not sure if that's confirmed or not). Still a cool experience, but the real world is a lot more complicated than it first seems. Even with all that, it definitely feels like the future.
- petters 2y ago> They’re commercially available. Anyone can download the app and hail one Alas, not if you're from Europe it seems. I'd love to try one when I'm in the Bay area
- ghaff 2y agoIt's very limited geographically at this point. It's pretty clear it's going to be a long time before it's something near-universal and something you can just do with your own car--at a similar price point--today.
- vinni2 2y agoI am from Europe and managed to try Waymo in SF recently. Not sure why you couldn’t.
- Angostura 2y agoI think you misread. If they go to the Bay Area they would like to try it.
- fooker 2y agoMost new tech takes about 5-8 years to be available in Europe nowadays. For good reason sure, but might as well accept it.
- xnx 2y agoCredit to the author for pointing out the public transit aspect of Waymo. In the same way that mobile phones and solar are allowing the developing world to skip a big middle step of fixed infrastructure, Waymo could allow cities to skip (or eliminate) expensive and limited use rail networks.
- AlexandrB 2y agoSkip the efficient transit and go straight to jammed up roads. Doesn't seem like a good move.
- xnx 2y agoIn the US (outside of possibly NYC) existing rail transit isn't especially money or time efficient. Trains require expensive dedicated right of way and don't take you directly from where you are to where you want to be. Trains are also highly susceptible to delays because they can rarely circumvent obstructed tracks. A single sick or disruptive passenger can delay hundreds of people. Waymo vehicles take you from exactly where you are to where you want to be on existing roads and can alter their route in the case of obstacles.
- kredd 2y agoHow cheap Waymos have to get to actually make a dent on the amount of people who drive or use public transport on a daily basis? It’s definitely an upgrade over hailing an Uber though, hope it ramps up and we eventually see it up here in Canada as well.
- kemotep 2y agoWhen I could take the bus it cost me around 50 cents a trip. This was 5 years ago. And was in a mid sized City in the Midwest. Took twice as long as driving but I did not need to pay for parking or drive in the snow when I took the bus.
- 2y ago
- jayroh 2y agoIf Waymo could operate in downtown Boston? Safely, reliably? Then, at that point, color me impressed!
- cjsplat 2y agoSF is worse, except for the snow. You can complain about Boston drivers, but they are pretty predictable compared to SF tourists. Snow is an issue, but they'll get that done.
- mazugrin2 2y agoI don't think the drivers are the issue. The infrastructure, including the signage and road markings are vastly more sane and regular in SF than in Boston. And have you seen the road layout in Boston? I have no idea if this will be a challenge for Waymo, but I could imagine why someone would think it would.
- ghaff 2y agoThere are some areas of Boston where the roads are pretty bad. I took a friend into the medical area around the Fens recently and it was really a cut over here and don't let them in sort of situation.
- ghaff 2y agoThere's an argument that "aggressive Boston driving" was a result of how the old Central Artery was built.
- tempest_ 2y agoThey don't tend to operate anywhere it might snow.
- pm90 2y ago> In fact, this might bring American public transportation to a leapfrog moment. Many pundits have lamented that developing cities elsewhere have “leapfrogged” the US on public transportation — building subways and rail networks that put ours to shame. Over a hundred years ago, we built first-generation public transit.15 Over the last forty years, other countries built second-generation public transit. Now we have the opportunity as a nation to lead the world on third-generation public transit, and in that course develop products and expertise that can be exported. This is quite the stretch. Even in the best case scenario, Waymos won’t beat well run public transit lines in dense cities, especially in east and south asia. This piece is way too optimistic about Waymo. They’ve mastered a couple of cities over many years. To do that for more cities would require just as much time. It’s conceivable that ride share will continue to exist until that happens, which is likely several decades.
- fnordpiglet 2y agoI’m not sure I agree with this. Autonomous cooperative cars would convoy in dynamic flocks in a way that does point to point transit with a lot of the advantages of trains (in that a major advantage of trains is they don’t congest). This would actually have a significant advantage over every other type of transit. Even having a modest percent of all cars on the roads cooperative autonomous vehicles using basic control theory to relieve congestion would aid the entire cities traffic (there have been several studies proving this).
- ben-schaaf 2y ago> Autonomous cooperative cars would convoy in dynamic flocks in a way that does point to point transit with a lot of the advantages of trains The main advantages of trains are: * Dedicated right of way - which you cant't get with cars. * High route capacity - even a unrealistic 10x improvement still doesn't compete with trains. At 2x it's worse than busses. * Cheap running & maintenance costs - doubtful running costs are similar, certainly not maintenance. Trains do however congest, you get that a lot in the USA when you don't have dedicated passenger lines. > Even having a modest percent of all cars on the roads cooperative autonomous vehicles using basic control theory to relieve congestion would aid the entire cities traffic (there have been several studies proving this). There have also been several studies into something called induced demand. The result of reducing car traffic is that more people choose to drive, resulting in more car traffic. The only way to actually reduce traffic is viable alternatives to driving.
- cwillu 2y agoGoogle product, and therefore mark my words: today's peaceful book-reading ride will be ad-infested in 20 years, if not less.
- zitterbewegung 2y agoIf anything goes wrong during your ride a real person will have to let you out and you will be stranded . A person has been taking many rides with Waylon but on the other hand this is really an alpha or beta project. See https://youtu.be/TbEplrZ-uSA?si=OCZt46gfVN9EfFhz https://youtu.be/TbEplrZ-uSA?si=OCZt46gfVN9EfFhz
- sverhagen 2y agoYou getting stranded and stuck is one thing, I guess. This could arguably happen with your own car too. But what if that USPS supervisor, or in another situation some upset business owner, makes much bigger deal out of it, things could escalate...
- mafuyu 2y agoIt's exciting to see Waymo and self driving technology in general doing well, but the analysis on the broader implications fell flat for me. Claims about improving commutes or being more effective than mass transit need to be substantiated - there's a ton of stuff out there on traffic engineering, mass transit, and urban planning that can help perform these sorts of analyses. Some thoughts: * For the purposes of transit efficiency, self driving cars are very similar to Ubers. They have a low passenger density (being a regular car), and once the passengers disembark, they still take up space on the road with 0 passengers. Better experience and lower costs will basically just induce more demand over more efficient mass transit options. If you imagine everyone at a bus stop ordering an Uber, or have ever seen the flurry of Ubers after a big event, it's clear why self driving isn't really addressing the core issue. * You can't really make direct cost comparisons to the infrastructure costs of bus lanes or subways like that. Infrastructure is ungodly expensive in the US, yes, but there are very well understood reasons to make dedicated bus lanes and subways: they don't compete with cars on the road. They're high density transit options, so having more reliable service will impact a lot more people (and reduce car congestion on the road!) A rideshare service is wholly unprepared to deal with the transit demands of a larger city, and imagining that we'd replace existing mass transit options with it is silly. * I don't really understand the point about suburbs. You can already get that experience today by ordering an Uber to and from work. If there's more demand, it's just going to make traffic even worse while promoting more suburban sprawl.
- shrubble 2y agoIn order for a bus to actually be an efficient mass transit option, it has to be used. Buses on regular roads create a "shadow" that affects other vehicles behind it and reduces 2 lanes in one direction to an efficiency of much less than 2 lanes, due to stops and starts. And except for peak usage times outside of a few major US cities, I would argue it is a net congestion creator rather than congestion reducer. A bus has the same effect as 10 or 15 cars, from my observation; so if there are less than 15 people on a bus, it's worse. Part of the reason that buses have wraps or tinted windows is so you can't see how few people are riding on it. At least the Waymo is not moving and not on the road when not in use.
- AlotOfReading 2y agoThe article estimates that the vehicles cost $200k based on Cruise's reported numbers in 2023 for vehicles produced in previous years. Reporting often misses just how quickly vehicle costs have dropped. When I started in the industry, vehicle costs often exceeded $500k. Almost everyone I'm aware of today is targeting sub-$100k.
- johnloeber 2y agoAuthor here - Good catch, thanks for pointing this out
- furyofantares 2y agoIt's interesting to me that the author hadn't previously considered that self driving cars would feel different. My first experiences in an Uber were very memorable, the drivers are so much more aggressive than I am. I kept thinking "they drive like an asshole so I don't have to" because it felt so much like I was being driven by my teenage self. But also -- I've been thinking about what it would be like to have nobody driving for over a decade, ever since the promise of self driving cars became a popular topic here on HN. I still really want to own one - once they're good enough to get rid of any interior controls and face the front seats backwards with a gaming table in the middle. If board game day could also have a destination dinner, I would pay a lot of money for that car.
- jolux 2y agoPage not found?
- aabhay 2y agoThe unit economic analysis here is really off. Waymo loses a billion dollars a year on operating in only two or three cities. The cost is clearly not just the CapEx of buying the vehicles, there’s an incredible amount of ongoing engineering that takes place behind the scenes. Cruise had roughly 1.5 engineers assigned to each vehicle on the road at all times.
- cycomanic 2y agoWhy is this post being downvoted? If it is incorrect someone should really reply why.
- tired_and_awake 2y agoIt's great the author is passionate about Waymo but wow this reads like an advertisement.
- johnloeber 2y agoAuthor here - not an ad, I don't even know anyone at Waymo and don't hold any associated financial incentives.
- zamfi 2y agoThis piece makes the argument that self-driving taxis will be a winner-takes-most market, but color me skeptical. Winner-take-most markets, like Uber, tend to be two-sided marketplaces with major network effects: folks use Uber because they’re pretty ubiquitously available and relatively inexpensive; they’ve available because the many users request many trips which makes working for Uber as a driver appealing. (Ditto AirBnB, etc.) But Waymo’s competitive advantage is pretty much only technology here. There is an argument to be made that this technology has a “network effect”-style moat: you need massive amounts of data from cars to build the tech; you get that data by being first to market. But this post doesn’t make this argument, it simply points to Uber/Lyft/the-taxi-app-graveyard and says “see?” It’s also not clear that this set of data will forever be as critical as it is now, nor that in 10 years it won’t be comparatively easy to collect. If the only edge that Waymo has here is technology, that’s not a natural monopoly position on its own. Autonomous driving is surely hard, but it’s an absolute-performance-baseline task, not a zero-sum market like ads. The existence of one set of 0.0001%-accident-rate-drivers doesn’t prevent anyone else from producing a 0.0001%-accident-rate self-driving car. There’s a small market stickiness effect from being first, sure, but this is not the same kind of natural monopoly as a two-sided marketplace. It’s clear why users use Uber and AirBnB over alternatives: it’s where the drivers and properties are, and that takes time to build up and it hard to take away. It’s not clear why someone would be a tied to Waymo if another equally-available self-driving taxi were available that were substantially less expensive, even if it were marginally less safe. (Of course, everyone has their trade-off point here—consider airlines: while people are more likely to pick an airline based on convenience and price, rather than safety record, these days—United perhaps excepted—that’s only true because the overall accident rate is so low.) Assuming the baseline for “safe operation” doesn’t escalate, improvement in technology (e.g., more capable GPUs, better sensors, more public datasets) will only make this baseline easier to reach for newcomers. If the tech gets easy enough, all it will take for a new entrant is CapEx, and it’s not clear how Google would differentiate, and could end up as a single commodity provider among many, rather than a two-way marketplace owner benefitting from network effects on both sides. That said, to construct a monopoly here, Waymo does have a couple of options: 1. Argue for regulation around self-driving cars that protects incumbents, by (e.g.) setting safety standards that are impossible for new entrants to meet. The NRC has a “good” model for this: by analogy to nuclear plants, any new vehicles on the market would need to prove that they are better than existing vehicles in the market. 2. Cut deals with major auto manufacturers so that incumbents just can’t get the data through partnerships with camera-equipped vehicle manufacturers. Number 2 seems like it could be clearly anticompetitive, but number 1’s playbook is being written by the big AI companies as we speak.
- crazygringo 2y ago> Waymo becomes most interesting as an alternative to public transit. I really wonder what this looks like logistically, when you realize how inefficient it is for everyone to be in their own individual Waymo during rush hour. The obvious first step is: > Many people who currently drive themselves would probably be happy to carpool in a self-driving vehicle if it’s reliable and easy But if it's a 4-person vehicle, I'm not sure that's enough -- that's still a lot of vehicles clogging bridges and tunnels. And if you get to 12-person self-driving minibuses, it feels like too much time picking up and dropping people off if you're trying to stick to one vehicle. So I kind of wonder if there will be intermediate ~20-person self-driving buses to bring people in and out of cities, that respond instantly to demand? So in the suburbs, you take an 8-minute individual Waymo that brings you to a perfectly timed Waymo Bus that you wait 3 minutes for, get on with 19 other people for 42 minutes, everybody gets off at the same point at the edge of downtown, and everybody gets into carpooling individual Waymos already waiting, so you take 7 mimnutes to get to your office, dropping off 2 people along the same route you would have taken anyways. But the buses don't have fixed routes or stops or timetables -- they just aggregate the demand along the common long corridors. Essentially replacing light commuter rail.
- Kwpolska 2y agoThis reads very much like a Waymo advertisement. > The once-dreaded long commute is about to come back in a big and pleasant way. I would have no issue at all sitting in a Waymo for 45 minutes each way every day. It’s just a nice time to myself that I can use to nap, work, or read. In places with working public transit, you can already have that experience. While it may make the experience less stressful (because you're not driving), it is still a huge time sink. You can do something entertaining while on a bus or in a Waymo, but it still blocks off time you could spend more productively.
- johnloeber 2y ago"In places with working public transit" is a huge caveat here. The vast majority of the US does not have what I would consider "working public transit". And those places aren't going to get it any time soon. Unfortunately, sitting in a Waymo is experientially not at all the same as riding the BART or NYC subway.
- solarkraft 2y agoOne of Google's projects that actually persisted through hardships while others didn't.
- Zigurd 2y agoBroadly speaking, I agree with the article. This has the potential to leapfrog mass transit as well as Uber. But how the Waymo model develops is probably unknowable right now. Will there be a variety of Waymo vehicle purpose-built for Waymo? Will Waymo become a bus service on heavily traveled routes? Or will iit becomme a kind of franchise where the transit agency is responsible for the vehicles and Waymo becomes a white-label enabling technology or are bus routes going to be obsoleted by right-sized privately owned Waymo "mini busses" with dynamic capacity and pick up/drop off on demand? My guess is that Google will try to get out of the business of owning the vehicles and make Waymo an enabling technology. But there is a lot of experimentation to be done before anything other than how Waymo has evolved to become part of what Waymo does.