4 ms·

Blocked even from testing in NYC. Blocked from DC and Boston. Unfortunately this does have more to do with bad government than bad weather.

by xnx 3mo ago

runako 3mo ago
Boston, according to Waymo[1], is dependent on the legislature making autonomous vehicles legal. Apparently NY state laws also require a human driver at the wheel. The only surprising thing about this is that other states did not require changes in law. It's Good, Actually, that big companies are (sometimes) bound by the same laws that bind the rest of us. In any case, there are more than 2-3 "blue" states. We can note that it's also not running in cold "red" states either. The climate angle fits the data best and aligns with what Waymo says, which aligns with what we have known about the tech for at least a decade. (That note also suggests they are still testing their cold-weather kit and are not quite ready.) 1 - https://waymo.com/blog/shorts/back-to-boston/ https://waymo.com/blog/shorts/back-to-boston/
- JumpCrisscross 3mo ago
  > that big companies are (sometimes) bound by the same laws that bind the rest of us Not if they’re stupid laws!
  - lokar 3mo ago
    Even then. There is value in uniform rule of law.
    - JumpCrisscross 3mo ago
      > There is value in uniform rule of law Sure. OP's point is these products and investments are accruing disproportionately to red cities and states. Sinking together isn't a great pitch.
      - runako 3mo ago
        > these products and investments are accruing disproportionately to red cities and states Is this true at the city level? > Sinking together isn't a great pitch. Surely it's a worse pitch to suggest that companies can ignore laws they don't like, and operate above the law?
        JumpCrisscross 3mo ago
        > it's a worse pitch to suggest that companies can ignore laws they don't like, and operate above the law? It’s also worse to murder kittens. That isn’t the choice at hand. The difference is between states adapting with a regulatory framework and those sticking with economic incumbents. (Also, when the taxi medallion industry was at its peak, lenders did run roughshod over the law.)
        runako 3mo ago
        In context, your comment reads as a defense of companies ignoring laws: >> that big companies are (sometimes) bound by the same laws that bind the rest of us > Not if they’re stupid laws! States won't adapt to new technologies at the same time, this is embedded in the design of federalism.
        JumpCrisscross 3mo ago
        > States won't adapt to new technologies at the same time, this is embedded in the design of federalism …how are you missing this. I’m saying the states failing to adapt need to do so or have their governments replaced. That all of these states are also facing multi-party insurgencies doesn’t strike me as a coïncidence. Pretending the corruption in e.g. New York around this is fine is just such a weird take.
        lokar 3mo ago
        The desire to slow down and consider the fate of cab drivers (very hard working, low income people) is not automatically corruption.
- bhelkey 3mo ago
  > Apparently NY state laws also require a human driver at the wheel. Earlier this year, Waymo had a permit to test 8 autonomous vehicles with safety drivers in NYC. The permit was not renewed [1]. Waymo can no longer drive autonomously (even with a safety driver) in NYC. What changed between when the testing permit was issued and when a renewal of permit was declined? NYC had a political shift in leadership. [1] https://www.thecityreporter.nyc/2026/04/06/waymo-driverless-cars-testing-roads-autonomous-vehicle/ https://www.thecityreporter.nyc/2026/04/06/waymo-driverless-...
Zambyte 3mo ago
Getting around Boston is very easy. Flooding the streets with more cars won't make it easier. A government that listens to the people it governs is a good government.
- xnx 3mo ago
  Eh, the impression I got from this podcast (https://www.searchengine.show/the-trial-of-the-driverless-car/ https://www.searchengine.show/the-trial-of-the-driverless-ca...) was that unions and other special interests were blocking something that the broader population would be interested in.
  - Zambyte 3mo ago
    Ok. As someone who lives there, I get the impression that the broader population is not interested in more cars on the streets.

Blocked even from testing in NYC. Blocked from DC and Boston. Unfortunately this does have more to do with bad government than bad weather.

by xnx 3mo ago

Blocked even from testing in NYC. Blocked from DC and Boston. Unfortunately this does have more to do with bad government than bad weather.

runako 3mo ago

Boston, according to Waymo[1], is dependent on the legislature making autonomous vehicles legal. Apparently NY state laws also require a human driver at the wheel. The only surprising thing about this is that other states did not require changes in law. It's Good, Actually, that big companies are (sometimes) bound by the same laws that bind the rest of us. In any case, there are more than 2-3 "blue" states. We can note that it's also not running in cold "red" states either. The climate angle fits the data best and aligns with what Waymo says, which aligns with what we have known about the tech for at least a decade. (That note also suggests they are still testing their cold-weather kit and are not quite ready.) 1 - https://waymo.com/blog/shorts/back-to-boston/ https://waymo.com/blog/shorts/back-to-boston/

JumpCrisscross 3mo ago
> that big companies are (sometimes) bound by the same laws that bind the rest of us Not if they’re stupid laws!
- lokar 3mo ago
  Even then. There is value in uniform rule of law.
  - JumpCrisscross 3mo ago
    > There is value in uniform rule of law Sure. OP's point is these products and investments are accruing disproportionately to red cities and states. Sinking together isn't a great pitch.
    - runako 3mo ago
      > these products and investments are accruing disproportionately to red cities and states Is this true at the city level? > Sinking together isn't a great pitch. Surely it's a worse pitch to suggest that companies can ignore laws they don't like, and operate above the law?
      - JumpCrisscross 3mo ago
        > it's a worse pitch to suggest that companies can ignore laws they don't like, and operate above the law? It’s also worse to murder kittens. That isn’t the choice at hand. The difference is between states adapting with a regulatory framework and those sticking with economic incumbents. (Also, when the taxi medallion industry was at its peak, lenders did run roughshod over the law.)
        runako 3mo ago
        In context, your comment reads as a defense of companies ignoring laws: >> that big companies are (sometimes) bound by the same laws that bind the rest of us > Not if they’re stupid laws! States won't adapt to new technologies at the same time, this is embedded in the design of federalism.
        JumpCrisscross 3mo ago
        > States won't adapt to new technologies at the same time, this is embedded in the design of federalism …how are you missing this. I’m saying the states failing to adapt need to do so or have their governments replaced. That all of these states are also facing multi-party insurgencies doesn’t strike me as a coïncidence. Pretending the corruption in e.g. New York around this is fine is just such a weird take.
        lokar 3mo ago
        The desire to slow down and consider the fate of cab drivers (very hard working, low income people) is not automatically corruption.
bhelkey 3mo ago
> Apparently NY state laws also require a human driver at the wheel. Earlier this year, Waymo had a permit to test 8 autonomous vehicles with safety drivers in NYC. The permit was not renewed [1]. Waymo can no longer drive autonomously (even with a safety driver) in NYC. What changed between when the testing permit was issued and when a renewal of permit was declined? NYC had a political shift in leadership. [1] https://www.thecityreporter.nyc/2026/04/06/waymo-driverless-cars-testing-roads-autonomous-vehicle/ https://www.thecityreporter.nyc/2026/04/06/waymo-driverless-...

Zambyte 3mo ago

Getting around Boston is very easy. Flooding the streets with more cars won't make it easier. A government that listens to the people it governs is a good government.

xnx 3mo ago
Eh, the impression I got from this podcast (https://www.searchengine.show/the-trial-of-the-driverless-car/ https://www.searchengine.show/the-trial-of-the-driverless-ca...) was that unions and other special interests were blocking something that the broader population would be interested in.
- Zambyte 3mo ago
  Ok. As someone who lives there, I get the impression that the broader population is not interested in more cars on the streets.