Waymo in Toronto
waymo.com
waymo.com
I'm so going to ride in one once they're open to the public.
They really do feel like magic, and give you palpable proof that you’re living in the future.
Also, you can’t praise an amazing service that takes insane amounts of r&d money to bring to market in the same breath as complaining about giving money to massive corporations. No two guys in a garage are starting a self-driving car company or a supersonic jet company by themselves. Massive capital is required to launch satellites, build cars, build datacenters, etc.
If it actually hurt companies they would stop doing it
I remain convinced that while value extraction is higher in this model, the world people generally want to live in is one where the ability of businesses to price discriminate in this way is not so unbridled.
No, in this case enshittification will be driven by the cost of entry for a new player. That'll create enough of a capital cost hurdle to prevent a duopoly or triopoly-type situation from entering a natural state of complacency and degradation.
How many tens of millions would you be willing to spend to launch your own fleet of self-driving cars in a city (just one for that price! and that's with no R&D!) just because the Waymos are dirty, smelly, and noisy?
For me, Waymos are a downgrade in the same way Uber was, too. I'm not even going to expand the conversation to German/Swiss/Dutch-style clean, fast and cheap public transportation. Waymo is basically good public transportation to places which don't have public transportation and don't want it. I have no doubt this comment won't really land with those who have not experienced the European-style taxis or public transportation.
Though, if the point is that clean/fast/cheap public transportation is the dream, then I unreservedly agree.
Waymo, I don't care how advanced it is, I am not getting into a 2K kg robot on public roads. Ironically, they are switching their fleet to the Ioniq 5 but what's under the hood must be completely different.
Burgers, not my thing, can't relate.
The "humdrum" sound of industry.
It seems like you’re into using new technology like AI, based on the success you’ve had using it:
* https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49162724 > I've recently been into AI and orchestration and have set up some pretty neat systems and side projects :)
Or maybe you think autonomous cars are as evil as AI:
* https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49644738 > There is no room for nuance. AI is capitals access to our labour. It's evil. The end.
Your views on technology sure are interesting, to say the least.
First, my only interaction with a waymo was while driving in a low traffic location and it started with me having to be extra evasive with it's cautious style shifting into it deciding to pass me despite my safe but assertive driving normal stance.
Second, lots of people (myself included) remember the talk 5-7 years ago around autonomous cars and how the leaders of such companies were talking of futures where nobody (but the ultra rich, of course) would actually own a car and everyone would just use these autonomous car services.
Where that breaks down is how the surveillance state makes the average person worry how every trip could be tracked and used against them somehow or outright denied...
But also everyone sees how once vendors have a captive market they get squeezed.
Traffic fatalities are one of the top 3 causes of death for kids in the US (iirc it's right behind firearms).
And, as an avid pedestrian and cyclist (and as a driver), the more humans we get off the road, the better.
Why would you?
I’ve never ridden in one but if I get the chance I definitely will.
I was surprised that it would do that.
Honestly the last thing I thought would happen would be that it would get lost. I thought maybe it would get confused on the road, but it drove better than most human drivers.
I wonder how reliant self-driving cars are on unchanging road infrastructure.
> half the interchanges weren't on Google Maps because they were built so recently
Here's the interchange near my hotel that's not on satellite but is on Google Maps. Unfortunately satellite coverage on Google Maps is older than Google Maps is, but you can see on streetview in April 2025 it mostly wasn't there and in May 2026 it mostly was. I think I visited a month or so after which is why it was so recent.
Sounds like someone who's never in their life driven in Austin.
It wouldn't surprise me to find it's nearly a half dozen per year, on a slow year. I only drive down there a few times a year and yet almost every time I go on my random route at least two stretches of road are just radically different from the last time I drove on it.
Sometimes it really feels like Texas' biggest industry is highway bridge/overpass construction.
If you've never experienced the rapid redevelopment of Texas exurbs and what not it's something of a marvel to behold, like watching a train wreck take place over months.
Like did a bunch of teenagers sneak out at night and build a highway?
How hard can it be to have a process where mapping companies can register with a state’s DoT and get information when they build stuff?
With how some of this urban design happens it almost feels to be the case at times.
A bit more real of an answer is: federalism. You're assuming the state DoT is entirely in charge of these projects. Lots of different government organizations are in charge of these things, and they don't always communicate well. Cities, counties, toll operators, and others can decide when these ramps are opened or closed. It's not just the state DoT that does these things. There's no single org that can authoritatively say "these are all the roads which are open, right now."
Now, I do agree with you, making such a data set complete and public should be some level of priority. There should be reporting standards involved in defined, standardized formats. These do not really exist, and making such a thing happen is a political question not a technical one.
https://waymo.com/blog/shorts/back-to-boston/
There apparently is a concerted effort to deny Waymo the legislative changes it needs, driven by a concern about job loss:
From the viewpoint of a pedestrian, having more "drivers" that don't get distracted on their phone sounds blissful.
There are real concerns about the additional pro-car lobbying we will likely experience, as Waymo will discourage people directly and indirectly from taking transit and cycle, but I hope we can coexist.
I learn this each time Apple releases a product. New iPhones could be $500, 10x the speed, half the weight and full week battery life and a fringe loud group will post and upvote some dumb complaint.
I'm sure you were already aware of that, but its easy to forget that and think you're dealing with something more real.
There's a lot of people who have a strong opinion about these things - But they're not sure how to vocalize their thoughts about it.
Or they have strong feelings, but they're not sure what opinions emerge from it yet.
The comments we see are from people who have refined both.
Comments of a single thread, no.
For a question like "is AI a tool?", there's often little reason to comment if you agree with OP, only if you're critiquing the post.
And HN has become a very negative hole by itself, rewarding complainers and pushing people who don't complain away (positive posts or ones that push back on needless negativity get downvoted a lot these days).
Montreal would be the ultimate test, both climatically and just for navigating sheer chaos. Those Roadster jets may finally make a smooth ride throughout the whole of the city possible.
The ultimate test would be Cairo or Mumbai or Lagos :-)
It was absolute chaos. They had "half-cars" driving around (front-wheel-drive cars, with the back end missing, and replaced with a rickety wooden cart; sometimes, just like a drag cart, with no wheels).
I was just a kid, so point of view was limited.
Which is weird because humans would take a few seconds to check the line and switch it, while Waymo already knows its empty and not taking an advantage of it.
Freezing rain, for example. My god.
Montreal is a vacation compared to the great plains/prairies: -40 with half the road coved by blown snow. Lets see how the navigation system reacts to a total absence of painted lines and visible curbs. Or go to the rocky mountains. I doubt Montreal streets contain any mountain passes worthy of naming.
I'm generally enthusiastic for electric vehicles, but batteries and FSD don't really work in a 12 hour blizzard at -40. Doesn't match my use case. :)
Try starting at the east side of pooass Manitoba if you want to contend with sketchy road conditions. By the time you get back to Regina your cortisol levels will be telling you to back out of the trip altogether
;)
You're talking about one variable I'm familiar with, but it's one variable. With snow cover in a plain, you just drive much slower and turn on your hazards.
Headlights of cars in various states, and some drivers think they have them fully on when they don't.
pothole observed. Diverting a-
pothole observed. d-
pothole.
po-
You’re either dodging construction site, homeless people, or just sitting in traffic.
I was visiting my brother there shortly after the bus-hole happened, and the winter market had several vendors selling bus-hole related merch. I regret not buying any.
Toronto's winter driving is normally very reasonable compared to Montreal. My guess is the Waymos operate some ~355 days a year, taking days off after big storms.
Basically if the planes are flying the robotaxis will need to work.
My understanding is Uber etc. charge and pay based on demand, so if that means the (fewer) human drivers are that much more expensive on snowy days then so be it. If it's a blizzard and Uber fares work out to $100/h I'd be very surprised if drivers couldn't be found.
Don't hear many anecdotes about FSD in Pittsburgh on a night in January...
That is not uniformly true throughout the metro area, especially in the major burbs.
So much of winter driving is knowing what is blocked by ice and snow, what snow is probably safe to pass, and navigating around piles of ice and snow that become temporary obstacles.
Granted Toronto gets much less accumulation than a city like Montréal.
Being in mixed traffic, streetcars are easily blocked by disabled vehicles or straight-up idiots. The time between launch and one of these things sperging out and blocking streetcars will be measured in minutes.
FWIW I've never been to Toronto but legally I could go there and drive without knowing about this particular rule. If it's something unique to the area and has the potential for danger I'd be more worried about people than robots.
The main difference is going to be scale and the chaos that brings. You see a LOT of streetcars in Toronto. For a huge chunk of downtown, it's the main subway-ish transit option. Some of the lines are on a 5min frequency, others are every ~10min or so, with some segments having 2-3 lines on it. I've seen them get backed up before an intersection, and open doors for passengers before they even reach the stop haha. I've personally hood-surfed over cars that got into the lane between the streetcar and the stop quite a few times, and sometimes it really isn't their fault.
The signal on the rear-end [1] is awful. There's a blurb saying "DO NOT PASS OPEN DOORS" which is clear enough, but there's also a sign that illuminates when the doors are open and it's NOT a stop sign. It's this do-not slashed circle with a picture of a stick figure seemingly walking into traffic. I think there's a reading of that symbol from well-meaning tourists that says "Attention boarding passengers, don't run into traffic". I could see that freaking out a waymo without a little bit of custom code.
[0] (All red lines are streetcars) https://cdn.ttc.ca/-/media/Project/TTC/DevProto/Images/Home/...
[1] https://blogto-production2-baselayer-display.blogto.com/arti...
How come? I love the streetcar.
If you're talking about having to stop when it stops, well ... just do it or go to jail.
> If you're talking about having to stop when it stops
The opposite (I don't drive). I'm talking about it having to stop because of cars stopping.
https://abcnews.com/GMA/News/waymo-issue-voluntary-software-...
I only say this hoping Toronto is not like "The Wild West" and hopefully has protections around these tech companies stealing jobs and hording wealth in the interest of public efficiencies.
This is bananas. Cops are not experts in the law. I'm sure a competent district attorney would be able to throw somebody in jail for this.
Crashed prod? Straight to jail.
It's a joke–a riff on a Parks and Recs meme making fun of Venezuela at the time. We don't jail aircraft engineers when they make a mistake because just sending people to jail doesn't work as well as encouraging them to co-operate ex post facto so the root cause can be identified.
Poe's law strikes again. Of course nobody thinks crashing prod should result in jail, or most software engineers would have spent some time behind bars by now. However it's entirely unclear whether @CountHackulus meant "of course autonomous car engineers should be jailed, just as if an engineer signed off on faulty plans" (which to be fair, also happens), or is just repeating my joke with bridges.
You'd be surprised at how many intelligent people really do want this.
When we start taking idiot drivers' licenses away, sure. Otherwise this is a silly overreaction with a calculable cost in human lives.
But the company itself should be given a citation for the majority of ordinary traffic violations, and should be the one fined.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009%E2%80%932011_Toyota_vehic...
https://apnews.com/article/robot-germany-sexual-assault-colo...
Can you extend that to this situation?
And cops do sometimes want a higher performance police cruiser than average in case a runaway speeder needs to be apprehended.
Probably going to eventually need an autonomous one of these for some police departments:
https://gmauthority.com/blog/2026/09/california-highway-patr...
No driver needed but you still need to have a Robocop inside to get out and write the citation :)
In the old days this kind of thing was often referred to as a "police interceptor".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oW8-1SYvDTI
If the violation is serious enough the autonomous predatory tow trucks will hear it on the radio then show up promptly to whisk the vehicle away, as usual. Plus in this case the driver is detained and the vehicle is impounded in the same stroke :)
After that it would only be fair that they would have to not only pay bail to the court, but also towing & storage fees before being released, like for any normal driver.
And if they skip bail, they're going back in the slammer :0
It wasn't luck though, the cars are incredibly cautious around people. Yes the car did the wrong thing here, but it wasn't driving at speed or endangering people.
> wasn't...endangering people
There's a bit of a disconnect there.
People make mistakes like that all the time, and sometimes they still get ticketed for that kind of thing, and other times they get a simple warning or don't get any form of rebuke at all. How many of us have never accidentally gone into a one-way traffic lane from the opposite side and managed to still drive through and get back on track without killing or maiming anybody? It's unlikely anybody would get charged with a crime for this, nor should they over a simple mistaken rule violation that did no harm.
It's bad, and obviously shouldn't have happened, but the car is cautious around people and didn't hit anyone. It's a far better failure mode than the typical case of a human who drives into a crowd.
When people point out "reckless" behavior of autonomous cars to me, the conversation simply isn't worth having unless you're comparing to current conditions. We're looking at 40,000 deaths per year so, endless community meetings and hand-wringing around regulations is not an option, unless we're ready to first stop all human driving and have the same process for those.
[1]:https://abc7news.com/post/80-year-old-san-francisco-driver-k...
And that's an easy case to prosecute too, because the driver clearly broke laws beyond just "crashing into people":
>when they were killed by Lau, driving 70 miles an hour in the residential area of West Portal in San Francisco.
Horrifying. Life is short, enjoy what you have.
Why?
Process B has killed none to do the same job.
I'm sure per mile driven, there is an "acceptable death rate", but should we atleast wait till the autonomous cars are on the board to make that a priority?
Driverless meaning no backup safety driver either.
There are drive-by-wire cars on the road. ABS systems can disable breaks.
If a malfunction is caused by the control software of that car or a mechanical malfunction by bad design it seems to me like the same thing. Do you/we don't have a solution for that already?
I would be shocked if that was the case.
I also live in Denver, and while the quote is technically true, it is misleading. A Waymo did drive into a farmers market...before there were barricades up, when other cars were still driving through as well for set-up time. Nobody would have been charged with anything.
> “It entered through our food truck area,” said Nicole Jarman, the production director of the farmers market... there was a “Road Closed” sign on one side of the street, but the other side of the street was still open to vendor traffic during set up and the Waymo followed a vendor vehicle past the sign and then turned onto the 1400 block of South Pearl Street.
> “It’s still load-in, our barricades are moved to the side, so there’s vehicular access, and it followed that traffic, went slow, and then made its way on out at Arkansas and kept going” she said.
> “It was not anything that made us nervous,” Jarman said.
[0]: https://kdvr.com/news/local/waymo-drives-through-denver-farm...
A taxi company that kept a drunk employed might be liable for damages that drunk causes, same rules should apply to your own self driving fleet.
https://www.nbclosangeles.com/investigations/westwood-99-ran...
I don't say this to suggest excusing autonomous car companies from bearing liability, but just for context.
Perhaps we should not make the regulations too punitive on the AV companies as that would reduce the speed of replacing bad human drivers who currently cause 40,000 deaths a year in the US.
I have zero insight into their pricing mechanism, but I was getting in the car coming back from, no exaggeration, one of the most expensive cities on the planet and so if I was Waymo I would probably price that ride pretty aggressively based on the location alone. Then you throw in all the other data points Google has about its users and I had my first "fuck me" moment where dynamic pricing really slapped me in the face (I've seen it firsthand with the airlines but Waymo is particularly insidious because of the use of my Google history).
And of course I'm aware Waymo has to price high while they're fleet-constrained or folks are going to be waiting forever for a car, but I hope they don't get too content with the absurd margin at $10+/mile. They will be tempted to do just that and so instead of flooding the market with fleet decide they'll put just enough cars in service to maximize profit instead of going for market share (of all riders I mean). But I fear that's exactly what's going to happen until there's credible competition.
On Wednesday afternoon, before school dismissal, a cross-town, 50-minute epic ride cost me $33.39. But it also cost nearly $25 to go 2 miles on that same evening.
Upon introduction here in Phoenix, Waymo had a promotion called "GoPass" which you'd purchase for $10 and it lasted for 30 days. It would give an across-the-board 10% discount on every ride, and 5 free cancellations. It was a great deal if you were a heavy user. A few months ago, they killed that off and replaced it with "Waymo Premier" which is a $29.99 monthly subscription (auto-renews) with no discount. Instead, you earn Waymo Cash at a base rate of 10%, and you get those 5 free cancellations, and you also get priority pickup. That means, if you're not paying for Premier, you cannot get priority pickup, and you may wait a lot longer, depending on demand.
I'm still saving money with Premier, but sometimes the cost is outrageous. Especially considering that I'm qualified for disabled transport in the region, and they've got a new matching app that will let me get a Lyft or Uber for $3 flat fee, no tipping.
Exactly. We could talk about the billions that Waymo has invested in developing this technology, and how much people really do like it, or how safe it is, but at the end of the day the only thing that will give us the reduced prices that this tech could deliver, is competition.
And that's how it should be.
(But they will always have to charge a bit more for this service due to the political sensitivities that require them to load up on local partners who will require a slice.)
And, yeah, them charging more makes sense strictly on quality of experience so a price premium makes sense, but if there is margin to be eroded and these other providers roll out more broadly the prices will end up coming down.
One other thing I found interesting here and you and others might as well... I couldn't help but give feedback about my happiness with the service overall, but my reluctance at the current pricing and I specifically said I don't need to receive a reply to my request (Waymo asks if you want someone to reply when you give feedback and I said "no"). But sure enough they replied and the gist of it was we're sorry we're not a good fit for you now because of the price and hope you'll give us another chance down the road.
I'm not sure what I expected them to say, but at this still-early hour I would've expected more nuance in reply. Would've been better for them to not reply at all given the tone of the reply they sent.
Personalized dynamic pricing seems like something that should absolutely be illegal across the board.
My intent is not to spread misinformation so I guess I’ll believe there’s a solid wall up between Waymo and Google data sharing.
I ask because I find my Tesla Model Y FSD to be incredible, requiring effectively no intervention (only in parking lots because I am picky about where I like to park), and I often wonder if it is purely bureaucratic inertia that is preventing it from being treated as unsupervised.
The real heart of what I am getting at: will Waymo in Canada nudge the regulators to reconsider Tesla FSD or does it have something special that Tesla is lacking?
I can’t possibly imagine a world in which I want to connect all of my comings and goings with a Google account. This is exactly the kind of advertising surveillance company that I would least want to have my physical movement data.
They cause traffic obstructions during rush hour every single day. Blocking entire lanes of traffic to pick up Uber customers.
No argument or anything here, just saying what I think is an interesting nuance as someone who has spent a lot of life driving in snowy places.
I’m in Denver now and it’ll be really interesting to see how these things handle the effects of a real storm. If I had to make a guess it would be that they’ll all just stop driving for a day or two.
For a press release from a private company operating in Ontario there is no legal requirement to publish in both languages. Some companies might do so anyway if they have operations that are regulated by the federal government and/or they just want the goodwill.
Imported products have to meet Federal packaging laws, which do require both languages.
> In 2021, 591,855 Ontarians (4.2% of the population) had French as one of their mother tongues. While this number varied little from 1991 to 2006 (+11,065 people), it increased steadily from 2006 to 2021 (+58,995 people).
- In 2021, 78.2% of these residents (463,120 people) had French as their only mother tongue, while 21.8% (128,740 people) had French along with other languages.
https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/89-657-x/89-657-x2023017...
There was also controversy over proper names v. descriptions. "Macdonalds" is a proper name but should "Burger King" be translated to "Burger Roi"?
In general this is untrue outside of Quebec (and maybe Ontario). I'm in Vancouver and while there's some federally mandated bilingual text, the French-speaking population here is extremely low and day-to-day everything is English-only. Even local public sector things like announcements on the train. You're more likely to see signs in Mandarin than French.
However that might be because I am an anglophone from Ontario and my mind filters out the French language on signs if an English equivalent is present.
both!
Ford is already removing bike lanes.
Tax dollars to put in bike lanes, and then tax dollars to remove them.
In Canada, it's currently vogue to hate on all things American. (I'm making this observation as a Canadian resident)
Includes St Louis, Chicago, Detroit, Pittsburg, Minneapolis etc.
You can walk or cycle... Modern bikes are light and pretty fast too.
We need regulation to ensure they don't come here.
IMO legislating for them is legislating against humans , their jobs, their families .
This all feels kinda like the Soviet Union building a shit ton of concrete “monuments” everywhere, pretending that was what people “wanted”
The tech is truly impressive but I wish we were able to step out of the local maxima of “optimising this shitty experience until it is less shitty” and start taking “optimising live in cities so it feels nice again” as an actual goal?
Some countries seem to have stumbled on it and the science of urbanism is progressing, but man if that amount of ingenuity that went into self driving cars had went into green and efficient cities…
When snowing in Toronto you usually cannot see the painted lines on the road, there's just the lines from cars driving through the snow that you follow. Sometimes two lane roads become an unofficial one lane road depending on what feels safe.
The falling snow also bounces the laser pulses(?) back at the lidar. Snow fall can be pretty heavy and make it difficult to see objects far ahead. Not sure how well their handling of rain ports over to snow, but it will be interesting to see!
https://path.berkeley.edu/automation/development-advanced-ro...
It had hands free operation (still needed someone in the seat to control the plow) and lane assist in whiteout conditions when the outside edge of the lane had a cliff (much worse than driving into the ditch).
https://path.berkeley.edu/automation/development-advanced-ro...
> This project is one of the first real-world applications derived from PATH/Caltrans research in the area of automated vehicle control. A modified snowblower with add-on sensors, actuator, computer and driver interfaces was developed, and initial field tests were conducted along the 8 guardrail sections between Kingvale and Soda Springs on the shoulders of Interstate-80 near Donner Summit.
https://path.berkeley.edu/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/develop...
> Various lateral sensing and referencing technologies were investigated for this application; what was found was that machine vision does not penetrate snow, and that the GPS system does not provide sufficient reliability under possible multipath and blockage scenarios. A magnetic-marker-based sensing system was chosen for the initial implementation primarily because of its high reliability and accuracy (better than 1 cm) under all weather conditions. The mountainous highway I-80 near Donner Summit (close to Lake Tahoe) was chosen to be the first field test site. In 2001, magnets were installed along the eastbound and westbound guardrails of I-80, at 4 feet apart and 4 feet away from the guardrail. Binary coding of the magnetic markers was designed (north pole up vs. south pole up) to provide information about guardrail characteristics, such as the shoulder side (right or left of the blower) and the end of guardrail. Eight sections of the guardrail were equipped with magnets for the initial feasibility operations with a total length of 1.46 km (0.9 mile) between Soda Springs and Kingvale.
Lidar is cool when you want to get a point cloud from a fixed location, or dealing with perfectly uniform surfaces (which cars don't because humans can't do this either), but beyond that there are better ways to do things.
“Why, thank you, Camera! You are doing a wonderful job of seeing everything in your FOV!”
“Ahh, you are very flattering, LIDAR! It’s an endearing quality in you, for sure!”
LIDAR: blushes
Not always. Definitely not all freeways.
> And every car has its own lights for seeing where you are driving
Not always far enough. Especially at freeway speeds on unlit freeways.
If humans don't have lidar but can drive it's an existence proof of the viability of that approach.
Lidar is superhuman vision.
The real answer is very simple: safe drivers slow down to adapt to poor conditions (including visibility). Lidar might reduce how much it needs to slow down but I don't think it will be eliminated because you can't drive with only lidar.
I smell smoke before I see it. Useful if there's a forest fire up ahead.
Burning rubber or smoke from the engine is an indicator of a mechanical issue.
> you can't drive with only lidar.
Nobody said you could. This is a strawman.
Tesla stans are the only ones trying to convince everyone you can only drive with cameras. Everyone else is pretty united on the usefulness of multiple inputs.
Didn't mean it in that way. I meant a car with camera+lidar would realistically still slow down because of the reduced camera visibility.
> Tesla stans are the only ones trying to convince everyone you can only drive with cameras. Everyone else is pretty united on the usefulness of multiple inputs.
Ignore them. The latest Model S and X have radar again, but possibly unused right now, so they are probably going to roll that out in a refresh of the 3 and Y eventually.
1. Fresh unplowed snow where there are no lane markers visible.
2. Significant banks that take up half a lane with two lanes in each direction.
3. Ice (often one doesn't start going through an intersection on a green until you're 100% sure that every car has cleared - I've been on both sides of this, where you don't go because there's a car sliding through, and the car sliding through because slick ice doesn't care about brakes)
4. Hard braking (the "drive slow and use the brakes lightly for a long while")
5. Cold car things. Electric battery life in the cold (heater for the passengers). Wipers frozen to the windshield. Accumulation of snow on the window. Excess snow on top of the car (considered an insecure load).
---
Tangent for the "how do you handle lanes when you can't see any" ... old school approach: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/833362
> Driving a snowplow during whiteout condition is one such example. In order to improve the safety and efficiency of the snow removal operation, a supplemental steering guidance display was proposed and instrumented in a Caltrans snowplow. The guidance information was calculated based on the magnetic markers embedded under the roadway. Operations were successfully conducted on a 6.25 km freeway over Donner Summit on Interstate 80 in California during the 1998-1999 winter season.
Forget unplowed snow. Often in Calgary where I live there's no lane markers visible under the snow for months at a time, even if it's plowed regularly
I frankly think it's a legit POV, and I'm also local to this, so I'm going to use my own much higher karma to post it again:
https://techfordemocracy.ca/2026/04/29/say-no-to-waymo/
I think there are legitimate concerns in promoting American BigTech as provider of infrastructure/services in Toronto. Concerns about data collection, about technological autonomy, and local employment.
> Digital sovereignty and privacy is at stake.
This is the most strongest argument, and luckily that's the first one. Many ways to solve this so not really a big problem.
> Ontarians’ jobs risk being outsourced
What jobs are being displaced by driverless cars? The best argument here is uber drivers are going to be affected. Who would you rather drive you at 3am if you're a drunk woman? An uber driver or Waymo?
> Public transit could lose riders
What is the goal here? The goal is to move people efficiently and decrease the reliance on human driving, which can cause deaths. Public transportation is vital but again, there are times when subway / buses wont work.
Also, if public transit is a major concern, shouldnt we be asking Uber (see point #2) to go away?
The last two points are super generic, it isnt even worth discussion.
Not convinced with the approach here.
I'll let you rewrite this, since as written it implies having a disease makes you in some way bad.
[1] https://www.thecityreporter.nyc/2026/04/06/waymo-driverless-...
Letting women get home safely with a robot driver is a thing that can happen today.
Maybe it's a bit like cops: they're not all bad, but the system is kind of set up so that bad ones thrive and good ones burn out. It's going to be a particularly kind of person who is willing to spend their late Friday night driving drunk people home from the club, and honestly if you're a vulnerable person, maybe the guy most willing to do that job is the one you least want as your particular driver.
Whether this is one of those "we accept some number of school shootings cause gun freedoms are just so great" issues or not is I guess its own matter for debate. But the fact that this happens, and then as dudes we get to discuss it at arms length on the internet and opine about whether "99% of trips completed without incident" is reason to dismiss it all out of hand may help explain why an individual woman getting home from the bar might choose to walk or take waymo vs getting in a cab and risk joining the unlucky 1%.
https://assets.ctfassets.net/q8mvene1wzq4/4jxkFTH5YCQK8T96ST...
1% Is a gross exageration if you go by this article / document.
Since you mentioned weapons: Robotaxis will have a social cost, and in Canada that is important in a way not seen in the US. Unlike weapons, there will be not much discussion about robo-everything.
Lets not hide profits behind women's safety.
At the end of the day, a man driving them home and knowing their home address while right there is a much more immediate and specific point of threat than "I'm being surveilled while I travel in a Google-controlled robotaxi".
Also, like it or hate it, but Google actually has a pretty decent track record with protecting their customers from their own employees. Gmail and gsuite content stays private, and there are enough protections in place to satisfy insurance companies, medical institutions, banks, and even governments. If a Waymo kidnapped or killed someone under the control of an overseas remote operator, it would be national news and congressional hearings; a person getting assaulted by a cab driver is nowhere near that level.
I just don't think "but Google/Waymo bad too" is a reason to poo poo someone feeling more comfortable sitting alone in a robotaxi than sitting alone in a cab or an uber.
Its not anymore of a threat than the taxi itself in case of Waymo. If you have already designated the driver as the threat actor then the Waymo is just as much a threat. In case of the driver the threat is visible. In a robotaxi the threat actor is invisible and multiple. You can be remotely locked in, driven away, suffocated, driven into water , driven in middle of a shooting.
You are just trading a visible threat with an invisible one.
Doesn’t change my desire for better public transport though.
Saying "Think of the women" as you say "think of the children" as a blanket statement can be malicious. Reasoning requires hard data, not evoking feelings.
Its very bigoted and regressive that you can be charged a 'cover' just because you have the wrong genitalia and belong to the wrong gender. I don't see how that's any better then charging a cover because someone has the 'wrong' skin color.
Of course, we have very bigoted courts here in the US that consistently rule to discriminate against men. I promise you if people respond to this comment it will be to argue how discrimination against men is justified and should continue.
Now what about a 3-drivers taxi?
The answer is always the same, people hope to lower the driver cost, which I believe is significant for a 1-driver taxi.
There are lots of reasons somebody might prefer a driverless car and lots of reasons somebody might prefer a human driver. Why not have a choice?
For your Women's safety POV. just because now youre alone in the car doesn’t really mean you are alone. You are under constant remote surveillance.
Regarding the meter broke issue. So you'd rather have corporate price fixing. Because that’s what Waymo is doing. The fleet size is same but the costs are going up.
And when a giant tech company is a service provided and rule maker , you don't really have a choice left.
That is not what happened.
The Support Team checked in on the live internal video after being alerted, and the Support Team saw firearms, so they alerted law enforcement, who arrested the children, for possession of actual guns.
How is that wrong or bad?
- can play your own weird free jazz via Spotify.
- obeys traffic rules
Like what?
They still need a paycheck. What do you think the outcome of a bunch of unemployed taxi drivers is going to be? What other low skill career is going to absorb them?
We're really rapidly approaching a "automate too many jobs for the remainder of the job market to absorb" situation imo and It's hard for me to imagine it going very well for anyone.
Imagine what cities could do with 50% higher bus frequency or more bus routes.
There are issues though. If you remove the staff from the bus you will need to handle some particularly unruly passengers in a different way. Currently the driver just stops until that person leaves or gets police / special constables involved.
As a driver, you should want cheaper buses. More bus riders = fewer other cars on the road.
This would be interesting for my native Kansas City though. There's a severe shortage of buses and it's much simpler driving conditions. Could be a game changer.
What does that mean?
> dose it cost more than the driver ?
No. That's the whole reason the field of self-driving exists. It will become cheaper than the driver.
> One liner sounds cool but please back it up with something
I don't feel like looking for links right now. You can disagree with my opinion and move on.
And what is the cost of replacing the driver with the hardware/software and the servicing cost. and the operators in Philippines that are remotely working ?
Previous discussion on this topic on HN. I don't feel like searching for it now, you are welcome to.
I don't know what you're saying about imagination.
- Waymo vehicles don't argue about having the air conditioning on,
- They don't try and talk about local (or national) politics to you while driving,
- They don't play annoying games to try to make you cancel rides they don't want to take while collecting cancellation fees (see the /r/uberdrivers subreddit for quite how endemic this is),
- The selection of music (or not) is with the rider, not the driver,
- They smell better - an especially important point during summer when temperatures are regularly over 100 degrees. This is as much about the lack of gross air freshener trees as it is about an extra person in the car the whole day,
- The cars aren't falling apart. This has got noticeably worse for Uber and Lyft (which was always a little more flexible on the age and condition of cars) - it's not uncommon to see fault lights on human-driven ride share vehicles, or body panels duct-taped or twined in place.
There are three major disadvantages right now:
- Waymo is only available through the Uber app, and there is no preference to say you only want Waymo vehicles. This will be fixed in January 2028, which I assume is contractual rather than technical, since during the launch period the standalone app was used - but I wish they'd hurry up, or they'll likely lose my business to Zoox or similar,
- They don't use highways currently, leading to some fairly circuitous routes that take longer than they should, especially to downtown,
- They don't go to the airport. Ride sharing dynamic pricing to the airport means that for trips under a week it's often cheaper to park than to ride-share though (even from ~downtown). I have no doubt that the robotaxis will learn the tricks of late-stage capitalism once they have some market lock-in though.
One more passenger seat (once the wheel is removed); the option for privacy (once the recordings are removed); increased safety (starting now, but even more so in the future); ability to build overnight charging stations in unpopulated areas; once fully adapted you can have reduction or removal of parking spaces, eliminate commercial daytime traffic, etc. Maybe it is the ever optimist in me… I think eliminating a job that led to increased cardiovascular problems and reduced lifespan of fulltime drivers while keeping the human rate of accidents, will be seen as an obvious improvement in human civilization in the future, similar to giving up horse carriages.
I'm sure many people have had enjoyable rides with taxis. I've had many.
But I've also has rides where the drivers was obviously exhausted and driving recklessly, and I've had a few drives where the driver started going on about some insane political topics.
Some days I don't want the latter. Having that service would be a nice option.
No taxi driver union can combat the amount of money waymo is spending lobbying.
[1] https://sfstandard.com/2023/08/23/cruise-waymo-spent-million...
New York is still holding on but I dont know how long it can. https://thenextweb.com/news/waymo-new-york-city-political-ro...
Toronto is already on Lake America (approved by Google). Maybe bring out the traffic cones or get another trucker protest.
I get the idea that you no longer need a driver for a cab, but in my mind all that means is there's an unemployed former cab driver who is explicitly worse off now. The likelihood of that person having tons of great options to go do now that they aren't burdened by driving a cab is pretty low imo?
There's probably a name for this somewhere, some kind of automation paradox that makes "society" better but many individuals lives worse.
As an individual it's hard for me to understand why anyone is excited about it though
This is why our standard of living is much better now than it was 150 years ago. Even though we have autoamted pretty much all of the jobs since then, except teacher and lawyer (there is another term in economics for what happens here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baumol_effect)
Personally I think it's fine, even as my own profession undergoes the same transition. We now have new jobs in running the waymo fleet in various capacities - the cars still need to be serviced, cleaned, supported, scheduled, etc - and the highly compensated jobs designing what are essentially real-world robots that can safely coexist with humans on the road. This is how technology has always worked and it's always made us better off on the whole.
Also, the new product is just better. When a human is not in the car, it's ok for to leave them waiting for a few minutes to pick me up if it's not a busy street, and I don't have to deal with the risk of an unsafe or unsavory person hosting me in their personal vehicle. I can control the music and the AC, and tap a button to have the car pull over. I can and do still take Lyfts and Ubers when I need to - it's cheaper for anything involving the highway, still, and better when I need to get somewhere in a hurry.
Never as good pay and many end up on the system.
My grandparents performed jobs that now are rarely performed in the US due to there being better jobs for those qualified to perform them.
I am much happier working with AI and distributed systems than as a carpenter or steel mill foreman like my grandfathers. Everybody on my father's side of the family had these white marks all over their forearms from molten metal splashing on them and burning them as they worked.
This is only possible because of technological progress. It creates new jobs.
My grandfather was a sailor, then cook. Father drives a taxi. Mom is a seamstress. Stepdad worked at the same factory for 65 years. As I was coming of age in the 90s, they chastised me for spending all my time in front of the computer. Yet here I am still sitting in front of one, making more money than they could've ever imagined.
Society progresses whether or not you want it.
It's entirely rational to worry we're in the midst of a bad time for many, possibly even most as the median slips into the lower class.
My grandfather lived in a golden era. Worked as a cookie salesmen/stocker to earn a pension and got the GI bill even though he was never deployed. He retired in his mid 60s with two homes, motor boat and dock (used every summer weekend), two cars, a healthy stock portfolio, and had raised four kids.
My father needed a college degree but otherwise did nearly as well.
I had to go to college and will likely never afford two homes, much less a boat, no defined benefit pension, taxable social security with higher age threshold and reduced benefit, little retirement savings, have been laid off, had to change jobs repeatedly to get raises, trying to raise half as many kids, and have already begun supporting extended family members. It's also very possible my career will cease to exist, or become a niche role with crushing oversupply of labor for many years to come.
Modern work may be more interesting for those who can get it. Increasing specialization does leave behind folks of below average ability. Underemployment is also a thing when labor is disorganized and demand is low.
Take the gig economy for example. There has been a rapid uptick of it taking a slice of the labor pie. If the majority of labor shifted to that, you’ll have plenty of new jobs but your quality of life will be substantially worse.
Living standards would be a lot worse today if we still had to pick crops in the field by hand.
They still have to pay the Waymo though, it didn't become free. :/
You're kidding yourself if you think autonomous taxis will be cheaper in the long run just because they don't pay a driver.
They will outcompete human drivers on cost and once they are dominant they will raise prices. This has happened every other time human labor was replaced too. It is practically the Silicon Valley playbook.
The cost to watch a movie today through streaming is not more than it was when you had to go to a movie theater to see one.
The cost to buy and sell financial instruments today through Robinhood or similar products is not more than when you had to have a broker to place orders for you.
The cost to find vast amounts of information through search engines is negligible today. To do so previously would take immense amounts of time, effort, and money parsing through encyclopedias is the information even existed at the time.
The cost to print a few drafts of a memo today requires a single session typing into Microsoft word and then printing to your office printer. Previously you had to pay a typist to put together multiple drafts for you.
On autonomous vehicles:
Yes they will absolutely be cheaper, as long as a complete monopoly is avoided. It's not just that you don't have to pay the driver. You also will have vastly lower insurance rates due to how safe they are. Maintenance costs will be lower due to economies of scale when fleet operators can have the car deliver itself to a dedicated massive maintenance facility.
Now you just have to maintain multiple subscriptions to streaming services so you can watch the movie you want. $22/month for Hulu, $27/month for Netflix, Amazon Prime where you pay for the privilege of paying to rent some movies.
So you might be able to watch more with your subscription, but the nexus isn't quite that simple.
I mean, every complex large-scale change to society has upsides and downsides. Very few things are purely good. So it makes very little sense just to name the upsides and pretend it's all good, or just to name the downsides and pretend it's all bad. You need to do the actual cost-benefit analysis.
And when you do, net-net, generally speaking, technological progress does does much more good for humanity than bad, even though there is some bad.
We tend to get things that make our lives easier, more efficient, safer, and more comfortable at ever cheaper prices.
> Never
Yes yes I'm aware of the fallacy
It's obviously not the whole picture though. When Number of Jobs automated approaches 100% then what?
Large scale automation is only a problem if society allows it to become a problem.
When I look around me I see a society that I think would happily have jackboots round up excess labor and execute us rather than redistribute money fairly
So I wish I had your optimism
If you gave everyone $10k a month UBI, who is going to change your tire? How much you have to pay them to go to work if they get $10k while sitting at home?
If a town has a lack of apartments, how much will an apartment cost if a young couple has $20k a month to spend?
Currently, people need money to pay for necessities like food and shelter. Therefore either money is redistributed somehow or people have jobs to earn money, or we change the paradigm entirely to something else
We cannot have both no wealth redistribution AND replace all labour with automation without really messing this system up
This seems pretty obvious to me?
Do you have anything to say about the actual point I was trying to make?
Its this part:
"We cannot have both no wealth redistribution AND replace all labour with automation without really messing this system up"
When was that? Or hypothetical? Why would that be and not that new jobs being created?
IMHO jobs were far less specialized in the past. Working in a factory is not that different from working in a kitchen or laying tile.
Take Muhammad, a fresh arrival from Syria, who drives a taxi. What will his next job be that is that easy and he already knows how to do?
But actually, what I've commonly heard from immigrants from developing countries is not having their certifications recognised. What was once a surgeon/lawyer/accountant is now forced to do menial labour. So maybe that's one problem to consider solving.
> not having their certifications recognised.
But if you are going against 200 years (some say even 10,000 years) civilization trends, you better have extremely strong data points to prove this time is different
Remotely operating a taxi (or some other semi-autonomous robot) from Syria?
The trolley problem is just messy emotionally, not actually complicated. You only have two choices, you pick the one that saves the most lives and that’s the best you can do.
Weirdly, this has parallels with soldiers in military conflicts. For generations, we only focused on their physical health. Today's modern militaries are much more concerned about the mental health of their soldiers during and after combat.
Let's put it this way. Consider a trolly problem where there are two tracks and one person on each track . There's a trolly coming to hit one person. Is it ethical to change the track so it kills the other person instead?
In this case you're only weighing one life against one life. So clearly it's never ethical to pull that lever right?
Now make it two people on the trolly track. Saving two lives instead of one. Is it now ethical to pull the lever just because there is one extra person there? If not, then how many people would it have to be before it would be ethical?
Idk. The trolley problem is anything but simple in my mind
Maybe other people put a lot of emotional weight on the choice itself but as long as I tried to save the most people I’d sleep soundly at night.
Minus the horror of watching people get run over by a trolley of course.
> I can and do still take Lyfts and Ubers when I need to - it's cheaper for anything involving the highway
With driving specifically - human-driven cars are perhaps the greatest danger to my life. I very much would prefer to live in a future where human beings are not in charge of piloting multi-ton vehicles at life threatening speeds in the same areas I walk around.
You don't have to be "productive" all the time. As you put it, driving the car is not just a chore - things happen along the way. It can be a chore - I just contest the most unproductive label here.
By this token, sleeping is the most unproductive thing in the world. Except you recharge.
Turns out, spend a couple hours on the road everyday and you'll quickly get sick of podcasts or ebooks. You can't stop to look up details or check out the code/math/design because you're driving. You can't really do anything else too because you really should be focusing your attention on the road.
Agreed. So lets build dense cities and efficient mass public transit, right? ...Right?
Personally, I work hard to minimize my car usage in general but they're something society is absolutely enamored with, so if we need to have cars around we could at least get rid of the drivers.
I live in a location that has won the top spot on "worst drivers in the country" and "worst roads in the nation" lists multiple times. By all means, put the robots in the driver's seat. Can't be any worse.
I understand the issue of technical power, mind you, but I don't really see how US companies expanding into Canada is a good idea as long as a hostile orange individual keeps on potty-mouthing Canadians.
"I will show that America first President who wants to fracture global trade...by arguing for fracturing global trade."
That gen pops tune changed with the political climate just like big corp previously going on about left wing shit is stunning
Ya'll are just LARPing what you watch on TV and read online
They’re encouraging their leaders to route around 300 million Muricans as they see no collective action in response to threats to global trade they rely on.
And argue ok if US institutions and zeitgeist are "fuck yall we're America" well again 300 million are really at the whim of 8 billion.
Not sure the typical Mr Rogers naive optimism "we're America!" is gonna get the US through after 10 years of this (Biden admin effort was binned just months after Trump 2.0 took off so it effectively didn't matter; Jimmy Carter 2.0). That's just copium, blind faith in what Adam Smith called "the invisible hand" he later came to realize was a mistake to believe existed
Orange guy may make news, but Canada has greater problems from within.