7 ms·

Are the doors unlocked? Could these men have open the door if they wanted to? If so, that would make these extremely dangerous vehicles. Stop the vehicle, open

Are the doors unlocked? Could these men have open the door if they wanted to? If so, that would make these extremely dangerous vehicles. Stop the vehicle, open the door, commit a crime against the occupants, and run away.

aaron695 2y ago
[flagged]
- mplewis 2y ago
  What is your problem?
dekhn 2y ago
The fact that the car was self-driven doesn't really affect any of this (the press just likes to publish rabble-rousing articles about Waymo because it gets clicks). Taxi drivers don't defend their customers on a regular basis.
- selbyk 2y ago
  In this case, the driver would also be a victim and perhaps not stop for the people acting suspiciously, or try to drive off as soon as a threat is identified.
- latexr 2y ago
  > The fact that the car was self-driven doesn't really affect any of this Of course it does, watch the video. For one, having another person in the car might have made them behave differently. For another, a human could have safely driven around them. Plus, I doubt they’d be as eager to be douche bags in front of a car if they weren’t as sure they wouldn’t be hit.
  - dekhn 2y ago
    Drive around how? To the left is the opposite side of the street (in which case the press would write an article about how a waymo drove wrong-way on the street), and the right lane is a bus lane (another article about waymo behavior badly). What you are describing are speculative solutions that a human driver may have done. I think the problems here are systemic, and related more to caddish men than driverless cars.
    - latexr 2y ago
      You’re weirdly fixated on the on the press and Waymo. I specifically mentioned what a human driver could’ve done and your response was “if Waymo did it, the press would write about it”. You’re arguing against a straw man in your head, not what was said. And completely ignoring that the simple presence of another human could itself act as a deterrent. > Drive around how? For starters, there’s a period where they got out of the way and a human could’ve just… Continued to drive forward. Mind blowing, I know. > and the right lane is a bus lane Considering the amount of cars in the video that momentarily go over it and don’t burst into flames, it seems like a perfectly acceptable approach. But again, not even that would’ve been necessary.
      - dekhn 2y ago
        I'm fixated on the press and waymo because this is an ongoing cycle of news: person has experience with waymo, puts it on social media, press covers it "oh look self driving cars can't work". Now, on to the part where you mention a person could be a deterrent: if that's the case, society has far more problems than just a single self-driving car. In particular, doesn't that seem to imply that women in cars would need some sort of protector? I'm not going too deeply into the argument. The reason the waymo didn't drive forward is that Google has programmed their cars to be exceptionally cautious- perhaps overly so- to stave off the huge negative press cycle that will happen when they hit or kill somebody in a dramatic way. Same for the bus lane- nobody at Waymo ever thought "Oh, we should violate some driving regulations to save a person from being harassed by assholes". That, like the trolley problem, is literally not something they are concerned with. Because self-driving cars aren't general intelligences designed to solve problems outside the "driving a person to a destination" problem.
- Nicksil 2y ago
  >The fact that the car was self-driven doesn't really affect any of this That's a bit ridiculous. Of course it does; how many people do you know are OK with some random dudes making an ass of themselves in the middle of the street, blocking your right-of-way? Should probably also disclose you work for Google when making such a statement about one of its products.
  - dekhn 2y ago
    Generally, if I'm driving in SF (which I do on occasion) and somebody is making an ass of themselves int he middle of the street, I don't do anything. Moving the car often prompts such people to spend even more time in the street. I don't work at Google. Why do you think I work at Google (I worked at Google, but not on self-driving cars; I am sympathetic to their mission, but also skeptical about the product's future). And even so, why would that matter? All I'm doing is pointing out there are systemic problems and having a driver in the car really wouldn't have addressed any of those.
    - Nicksil 2y ago
      >I don't work at Google. Why do you think I work at Google [...] >[...] I worked at Google
      - jerlam 2y ago
        It's in the past tense.
        Nicksil 2y ago
        Right. They asked why I thought they worked at Google and it's because they said they worked at Google.
      - dekhn 2y ago
        As I said, I don't work at google. I worked at Google. I'm mainly curious how people identify me on HN (I've gotten email from folks who looked at my submissions to figure out my real life identity). The reason I'm defending waymo is not that I worked at Google. It's that I think self-driving cars are a good idea and I don't want to see them invalidated through viral social media and "think of the children" press articles.
- grugagag 2y ago
  > The fact that the car was self-driven doesn't really affect any of this Not sure if I follow. If I were driving I’d feel somewhat in control. But alone on the backseat somewhat more vulnerable. Without a driver in some situations even more so. In the moment I’d hope the drivers doors were locked but how to know for sure?
- silisili 2y ago
  Even if they don't defend their passengers, they like nearly all humans are interested in self preservation. If this person had presented a gun or other imminently dangerous situation, a taxi driver would surely flee. Would a self driven vehicle?
  - Lammy 2y ago
    Relevant Bill Hicks: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08Khc2wqtCQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08Khc2wqtCQ (1992)
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  > fact that the car was self-driven doesn't really affect any of this Not fundamentally. But therein lies the solution. A driver would have yelled at and presumably threatened the young mean. The Waymo, in turn, could chastise the men over loudspeaker before turning it over to a remote human being who can remind the men that they’re being recorded. That said, a driver can credibly threaten to impact someone threatening them or ram a car in a way self-driving vehicles cannot.
  - throwaway81523 2y ago
    > The Waymo, in turn, could chastise the men over loudspeaker Put down your weapon! You have 20 seconds to comply!! > That said, a driver can credibly threaten to impact someone threatening them or ram a car See "The Deadlier Weapon" by Larry Niven.
AStonesThrow 2y ago
No. Waymo automatically locks the passengers in when they press "Start Ride". I am unsure whether doors can be opened while in motion, unless you've issued a "Pull Over" command, but I suppose that I could find out! Typically, it takes a double-pull on the inside handle to open the door, just for safety's sake. Also whenever these hijinks occur, you're strongly urged to contact Support immediately, and they are empowered to dispatch a human agent and/or emergency services. In terms of the context-free social media post which spurred this rabble-rousing article, I'd say that other bystanders are more likely to intervene and fight off the aggressors, than joining in seemingly random harassment of seemingly innocent women. It's probably already illegal to stand in the middle of a moving traffic lane just to impede its flow, yeah?

aaron695 2y ago

[flagged]

mplewis 2y ago
What is your problem?

dekhn 2y ago

The fact that the car was self-driven doesn't really affect any of this (the press just likes to publish rabble-rousing articles about Waymo because it gets clicks). Taxi drivers don't defend their customers on a regular basis.

selbyk 2y ago
In this case, the driver would also be a victim and perhaps not stop for the people acting suspiciously, or try to drive off as soon as a threat is identified.
latexr 2y ago
> The fact that the car was self-driven doesn't really affect any of this Of course it does, watch the video. For one, having another person in the car might have made them behave differently. For another, a human could have safely driven around them. Plus, I doubt they’d be as eager to be douche bags in front of a car if they weren’t as sure they wouldn’t be hit.
- dekhn 2y ago
  Drive around how? To the left is the opposite side of the street (in which case the press would write an article about how a waymo drove wrong-way on the street), and the right lane is a bus lane (another article about waymo behavior badly). What you are describing are speculative solutions that a human driver may have done. I think the problems here are systemic, and related more to caddish men than driverless cars.
  - latexr 2y ago
    You’re weirdly fixated on the on the press and Waymo. I specifically mentioned what a human driver could’ve done and your response was “if Waymo did it, the press would write about it”. You’re arguing against a straw man in your head, not what was said. And completely ignoring that the simple presence of another human could itself act as a deterrent. > Drive around how? For starters, there’s a period where they got out of the way and a human could’ve just… Continued to drive forward. Mind blowing, I know. > and the right lane is a bus lane Considering the amount of cars in the video that momentarily go over it and don’t burst into flames, it seems like a perfectly acceptable approach. But again, not even that would’ve been necessary.
    - dekhn 2y ago
      I'm fixated on the press and waymo because this is an ongoing cycle of news: person has experience with waymo, puts it on social media, press covers it "oh look self driving cars can't work". Now, on to the part where you mention a person could be a deterrent: if that's the case, society has far more problems than just a single self-driving car. In particular, doesn't that seem to imply that women in cars would need some sort of protector? I'm not going too deeply into the argument. The reason the waymo didn't drive forward is that Google has programmed their cars to be exceptionally cautious- perhaps overly so- to stave off the huge negative press cycle that will happen when they hit or kill somebody in a dramatic way. Same for the bus lane- nobody at Waymo ever thought "Oh, we should violate some driving regulations to save a person from being harassed by assholes". That, like the trolley problem, is literally not something they are concerned with. Because self-driving cars aren't general intelligences designed to solve problems outside the "driving a person to a destination" problem.
Nicksil 2y ago
>The fact that the car was self-driven doesn't really affect any of this That's a bit ridiculous. Of course it does; how many people do you know are OK with some random dudes making an ass of themselves in the middle of the street, blocking your right-of-way? Should probably also disclose you work for Google when making such a statement about one of its products.
- dekhn 2y ago
  Generally, if I'm driving in SF (which I do on occasion) and somebody is making an ass of themselves int he middle of the street, I don't do anything. Moving the car often prompts such people to spend even more time in the street. I don't work at Google. Why do you think I work at Google (I worked at Google, but not on self-driving cars; I am sympathetic to their mission, but also skeptical about the product's future). And even so, why would that matter? All I'm doing is pointing out there are systemic problems and having a driver in the car really wouldn't have addressed any of those.
  - Nicksil 2y ago
    >I don't work at Google. Why do you think I work at Google [...] >[...] I worked at Google
    - jerlam 2y ago
      It's in the past tense.
      - Nicksil 2y ago
        Right. They asked why I thought they worked at Google and it's because they said they worked at Google.
    - dekhn 2y ago
      As I said, I don't work at google. I worked at Google. I'm mainly curious how people identify me on HN (I've gotten email from folks who looked at my submissions to figure out my real life identity). The reason I'm defending waymo is not that I worked at Google. It's that I think self-driving cars are a good idea and I don't want to see them invalidated through viral social media and "think of the children" press articles.
grugagag 2y ago
> The fact that the car was self-driven doesn't really affect any of this Not sure if I follow. If I were driving I’d feel somewhat in control. But alone on the backseat somewhat more vulnerable. Without a driver in some situations even more so. In the moment I’d hope the drivers doors were locked but how to know for sure?
silisili 2y ago
Even if they don't defend their passengers, they like nearly all humans are interested in self preservation. If this person had presented a gun or other imminently dangerous situation, a taxi driver would surely flee. Would a self driven vehicle?
- Lammy 2y ago
  Relevant Bill Hicks: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08Khc2wqtCQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08Khc2wqtCQ (1992)
JumpCrisscross 2y ago
> fact that the car was self-driven doesn't really affect any of this Not fundamentally. But therein lies the solution. A driver would have yelled at and presumably threatened the young mean. The Waymo, in turn, could chastise the men over loudspeaker before turning it over to a remote human being who can remind the men that they’re being recorded. That said, a driver can credibly threaten to impact someone threatening them or ram a car in a way self-driving vehicles cannot.
- throwaway81523 2y ago
  > The Waymo, in turn, could chastise the men over loudspeaker Put down your weapon! You have 20 seconds to comply!! > That said, a driver can credibly threaten to impact someone threatening them or ram a car See "The Deadlier Weapon" by Larry Niven.

AStonesThrow 2y ago

No. Waymo automatically locks the passengers in when they press "Start Ride". I am unsure whether doors can be opened while in motion, unless you've issued a "Pull Over" command, but I suppose that I could find out! Typically, it takes a double-pull on the inside handle to open the door, just for safety's sake. Also whenever these hijinks occur, you're strongly urged to contact Support immediately, and they are empowered to dispatch a human agent and/or emergency services. In terms of the context-free social media post which spurred this rabble-rousing article, I'd say that other bystanders are more likely to intervene and fight off the aggressors, than joining in seemingly random harassment of seemingly innocent women. It's probably already illegal to stand in the middle of a moving traffic lane just to impede its flow, yeah?