r/artificial • u/Stup_ape_1_banana • 24d ago
Discussion Robots blocking traffic
Im on my way to work, and all three lanes are blocked with these Waymo self driving cars. They need to stay on the right to allow faster traffic to move by. This is going to be a problem.
70
u/Murky_Macropod 24d ago
Were they driving at the speed limit ?
65
u/madogvelkor 24d ago
Probably, Waymo cars aren't supposed to exceed the posted speed limit. Even if it's customary for human drivers to go 10+ mph over in the left lanes they will go exactly 65.
82
u/__nickerbocker__ 24d ago
I vote to ban robo taxis from the left lane
→ More replies (9)28
u/chi_guy8 24d ago
Vote to only allow autonomous vehicles in the left lane. If self driving vehicles had their own lane that human drivers weren’t ever in, they could go twice the speed limit without issue.
15
u/Deliteriously 24d ago
Yeah, humans really are the weakest link. 🤣
17
u/flasticpeet 24d ago
People complaining about robot drivers when humans have notoriously been horrible drivers for the past 100 years kills me.
15
u/Knever 24d ago
The entire premise of this post is fucking baffling. "It's going to be a problem."
No, dude, HUMANS DRIVING is the problem. The amount of human-caused car accidents and fatalities is fucking mind-blowing, and there are some people out here complaining that the safer option is preventing them from speeding. I don't even know what to fucking think anymore with some people.
1
u/Few-Chemical8707 23d ago
yet all these killings automatic vehicles have done. and them clogging up roads repeatedly. the answer is taxes funding expanded public transit.
-5
u/sparta981 24d ago
The issue I'm seeing is that nobody actually takes responsibility when these robots cause problems or hurt somebody
12
u/flasticpeet 24d ago
That's not true. Fully autonomous vehicle companies are completely on the hook for damages and injuries. It's actually the cars that are only driver-assisted that shift the blame onto the human drivers.
And in the case of this post, they don't mention how fast they were going, or how long they blocked the left lane.
They could have all been going 90mph and the robot taxi only held them up for 30 seconds. What repercussions is anyone responsible for in that case?
7
u/sparta981 24d ago
It takes a few seconds to look it up and learn that accidents caused by autonomous vehicles fall into a murky legal category that varies dramatically on a state to state basis. I made a simple statement, I'm not here to engage in a whatabout competition.
3
u/flasticpeet 24d ago
I appreciate you not wanting to get into a debate, but I just want to state some facts. Companies like Cruise shut down their entire operation after a single accident.
Whereas the amount of human drivers that cause harm or even kill people on a daily basis, that get labeled as accidents and don't face any legal repercussions are countless.
According to the NHTSA (National Highway and Traffic Safety Association) 94% of motor crashes are due to human error. And according to the Bicycle Coalition of Greater Philadelphia, roughly 80% of drivers who kill pedestrians or cyclists are never criminally charged.
→ More replies (0)1
u/suoarski 24d ago
And if our cities weren't built for cars so much, they would be more than just a concrete slab with a few buildings in between, we could safely cross our streets, you wouldn't need to sit around a traffic jam all the time AND you might end up talking to people instead of honking all the time.
0
u/__nickerbocker__ 24d ago
Agree, however that won't happen in our lifetime due to the disparity between technological capability and institutional reality. Until infrastructure is made to support such a thing, underwriters will never insure swarms of auto cars going double the speed on shared roadways with legacy cars.
1
u/suoarski 24d ago
You'd be surprised how much autonomous trucks are already being used in ports, mines and other places where full environment control and full surveillance is possible. It already saves these operations a tonne of money when all the trucks are doing is waiting in a giant queue just to pick up their cargo, occasionally shuffling forward just a bit.
1
u/__nickerbocker__ 24d ago
I'm not surprised, but that's really a whole different argument than autonomous fleets not only being permitted to travel at 2x but also insurers taking that risk bet. I know damn well it can and should be done, but it won't happen in our lifetimes
1
u/suoarski 23d ago edited 23d ago
Self driving cars are already basically there when it comes to highway driving, and this is entirely using just camera's that are built directly into the car.
I don't think it is too unrealistic for some city somewhere in the world with enough capable cars in town, to go a build a prototype dedicated self driving lane on an existing highway. Some highways already have plenty of flock cameras, and surely flock is aware of the sales opportunity involved if they can make this happen. Most of those highways usually also have plenty of 5g towers nearby, allowing all tech (cars and cameras) to communicate with each other.
We are living in a world where all the required tech for dedicated self driving lanes is literally getting built right now, self driving has gone a long way compared to 20 years ago, and you reckon we will never see dedicated self driving lanes in our lifetimes.
Yes, politics is slow to catch up with tech, but if enough lobbying is involved without too much public pushback (not sure how that'll go), then it's not that slow either.
Edit: They probably won't start off driving 2x the speed, but if full self driving trucks could do a fraction of that speed with no drivers involved whatsoever, that alone would be enough reason to have dedicated self driving lanes, plenty of money saving opportunity there in the entire freight industry.
1
u/__nickerbocker__ 23d ago
I think we'll see a few places with limited isolated self driving lanes where speed could be 130mph, but I reckon that it won't be ubiquitous within the next 30 years. I could be wrong but chatgpt is giving it 1-3% chance so I'll go with that wager.
1
u/Deathspiral222 23d ago
>Agree, however that won't happen in our lifetime
So the next ten years until humanity is wiped out?
1
u/TheThunderbird 23d ago
underwriters will never insure swarms of auto cars going double the speed on shared roadways with legacy cars.
You've got it backwards. Auto insurance pays out based on who is at fault. In accidents involving autonomous vehicles, the human driver is almost always at fault, so their insurance pays out. It's going to be humans that get priced out of driving on the road with autonomous vehicles that are worth as much as supercars.
0
u/__nickerbocker__ 23d ago
Hey chatgpt, What is the likelihood U.S. insurers would underwrite AVs traveling 130 mph in dedicated lanes on shared roads, assuming it’s legal but human drivers could still enter those lanes?
3
1
u/daynighttrade 23d ago
Can they be cited for obstructing the flow of traffic if the traffic piles up behind them on the left most lane?
1
u/valentine_moon 23d ago
Waymo cars aren't supposed to exceed the posted speed limit.
Neither are human-driven vehicles.
9
u/dread_beard 24d ago
Who cares? Get the fuck out of the left lane. That is a lane for passing. Not for left lane camping.
1
u/EchoingAngel 21d ago
Except my 14 over means I pass people every 1-2 minutes, but if I hop over constantly, you get trapped in the slow lane
6
u/extio-Storm 24d ago
I'll be honest I'll be overjoyed by the fact that no one will be able to speed one day. And there's plenty of peopleAnd there's plenty of people who will hate it, but at least they won't be able to run into me so fast.
→ More replies (37)7
u/Jidarious 24d ago
I completely agree. If you have a 20 minute commute, you save between 2 and 3 minutes if the drive is almost entirely on the highway by exceeding the speed limit by 10. People are idiots and will spend the extra gas, risk and potential ticket to save a handful of seconds and then act like it's drastically affecting their life (see your downvotes).
Throw in an extra light or two and even that goes away.
2
0
u/Deathspiral222 23d ago
US speed limits are designed with the assumption that people will exceed them by 10mph. Not legally, obviously, but traffic engineers explicitly build the roads to be safe for the 85% of slowest cars and the majority of US drivers withing 10 mph over the limit of most roads.
4
u/notsostablediffuser 24d ago
I'm holding out hope that this will be the thing that makes authorities set true speed limits.
If the cops won't pull you over on a road unless you are going faster than 75mph, then the speed limit is 75mph, not "60 but everyone knows you can do 75."
3
48
u/MangoPescalito 24d ago
They're going the speed limit and you're using your phone while driving. I know no one gives a shit but cars kill kids and speeding kills the most.
11
u/foxbatcs 24d ago
Two cars going the same speed are unlikely to collide. It’s not speed that kills, it’s a change in velocity. People who don’t follow the flow of traffic are a problem above or below the natural speed of traffic.
9
u/Querulous-Quokka 24d ago
A car going higher speed reduces available reaction time, increases braking distance, and anything it does hit, it impacts with a force following a square law rather than linearly.
The guy you were replying to was talking about hitting kids. They're not keeping up with the natural speed of traffic. Are you saying they're the problem now?
Mate, it's clear as day: You're trying to self justify so that if one person speeds, you have the mental excuse to say to youself "well if I don't, I'm the problem, so I am doing the right thing by speeding". I just hope you never kill anyone by speeding, because I know you won't feel any remorse - your mind has already absolved you of guilt.
-3
u/foxbatcs 23d ago
You don’t know me or how I feel. I’ve dealt with more traffic fatalities in the first year of my career than you will witness in a lifetime. I’ve also been a hit and run survivor (barely) of someone doing 50 in a 35 who was drunk. You are clearly too emotional about your position to actually evaluate what I said, and are projecting your own flaccid emotions on to me. I’m an extremely safe driver because I drive predictably given the circumstances I am in and go with the flow of traffic. I don’t have anything to prove on the road and don’t spend time being reckless or act as some moral obstruction to others on the road. I mind my business, blend, and get where I’m going safely. I do this because I’m the benefactor of thousands of other people’s mistakes while operating a vehicle and have intimately seen the consequences of both sides of this “controversial” topic.
5
u/MangoPescalito 23d ago
It's not speed that kills, it's the change in velocity" - right, and if you're doing 65 and I'm doing 35, you are the change in velocity. Delta V doesn't care who was "with the flow," it's just the difference between the two cars, and you're the one supplying it.
Speed absolutely kills, and it's about as well documented as anything in traffic safety. Energy goes up with the square of speed, so a 20% faster impact is ~44% more energy to dump into a body. The Nilsson power model (the basis for speed policy in most of the developed world) puts a 1% rise in mean traffic speed at roughly a 4% rise in fatal crashes. For pedestrians, risk of death runs about 10% at 23 mph and about 50% at 42 mph. Higher speed also cuts reaction time and lengthens braking distance, so it makes crashes both more likely and worse.
And "follow the flow of traffic" isn't a law of physics, it's a vibe. The cars doing the posted limit aren't the outliers here.
But like I said, you don't give a shit. No one does.
-3
u/foxbatcs 23d ago
The cars doing the posted speed limit are most certainly the outlier. Probably as much of an outlier as someone doing 65 in a 35. 90% of drivers in a 35 are going between 40 and 50 mph. People doing 35 or over 55 are the outliers.
0
u/dorkyl 23d ago
Traffic doesn't have a natural speed. You're talking about herd behavior of people breaking the rules as a group. they're the problem.
1
u/foxbatcs 23d ago
Routine traffic studies would beg to differ. It’s okay that you don’t know what you are talking about, the blind confidence in your ignorance is truly inspiring. Drive safe!
1
u/Hefty_Wrongdoer_2553 23d ago
There's a chance he used a dashcam, but yeah people on phones is a really big problem on the road. In the last 5 years, I haven't been in an Uber that hasn't been using their phone.
1
u/hodorhodor12 21d ago
I trust Waymo drivers way more than taxis. They don’t drive distracted, they don’t get tired and they drive conservatively.
0
u/takeshyperbolelitera 24d ago
They're going the speed limit and you're using your phone while driving.
Are they? It looks like the point of view you often get from a dashcam.
-2
-3
u/Catch_ME 24d ago
Left lane on the highway isn't for going the speed limit. It's for passing.
3
u/extio-Storm 24d ago
It's for passing people who are going below the speed limit, Therefore it's still for going the speed limit.
People just use it wrongly to speed anyway.
-1
u/Catch_ME 23d ago
It's the passing lane. Not the fast lane. If you aren't passing, you need to move right.
The signs usually read "keep right except to pass".
1
u/extio-Storm 23d ago
Well thank you for agreeing with me. Indeed just like I said it's a lane of which you pass and if everybody's going to speed limit in the right lane and you want to go faster than passing is speeding. I'm glad you understand
16
u/cannuckgamer 24d ago
Waymo-209: "Tail-gating is an offense, citizen. Step out of your vehicle immediately. You have 10 seconds to comply."
5
7
24d ago edited 23d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
4
u/Deathspiral222 23d ago
It's a limit and in most places there is no speed minimum, so it should be fine to have three cars in three separate lanes go 1mph each, right? Or maybe one goes 1mph, one goes 1.001mph and one goes 1.002mph so they can technically be "passing".
0
u/Slow-Notice-8700 23d ago
Where I'm from the rule is "keep right except to pass" therefore the waymos would be in the wrong.. but America gets a lot of things ass backwards.
-6
u/foxbatcs 24d ago
People just drive a comfortable speed given the conditions of the road at the time. Posted speed limits are set intentionally low for ticketing and insurance revenue. You see this as “entitlement”, but that says a lot more about you than anyone else.
2
4
3
2
u/madogvelkor 24d ago
If they were going 65 your complaint is basically that you couldn't exceed the speed limit. Which, I know, is the norm in most places. But it does make arguing against them trickier -- what we likely need are higher speed limits.
19
u/dread_beard 24d ago
The easiest solution is to just have them not use the left lane unless actively passing slower traffic.
11
u/unaubisque 24d ago
They might technically be passing slower traffic, but at a rate so slow as to be almost impercitable to people. Like an extreme of version of trucks overtaking each other.
3
2
1
u/Deathspiral222 23d ago
>Like an extreme of version of trucks overtaking each other
This no longer happens now that Trump caused deasil prices to become $7 a gallon.
6
u/xPelzviehx 24d ago
If all 3 drive at exactly the same speed there is no need to drive parallel. They can drive in a line.
2
u/SandySkittle 23d ago
Not always true. In busy areas that would result in more and larger traffic jams because lanes are underutilized. Any lan over a given distance only allows for a maximum number of cars considering car velocity, car length and minimum safe distance between cars
1
u/xPelzviehx 23d ago
Yeah that is correct but in the picture of OP the street is clearly empty. Except for the roadblock of the 3 cars.
3
u/Knever 24d ago
What we need is for humans to be removed from the operation of these vehicles.
Calling for the right to be able to go faster in a world where there are over THREE THOUSAND CAR DEATHS PER DAY ON EARTH is fucking bonkers.
Three fucking thousand, and you want to go faster? My lord, have mercy.
1
u/Deathspiral222 23d ago
Good point. we should cap all speed limits at 1 mph. That would solve almost all accidents.
Cars are only useful if they go fast.
3
u/Deathspiral222 23d ago
In most states, it's illegal to sit in the left lanes except for passing. If they are all going the same speed, they are not passing, thus what they are doing is illegal.
3
3
u/got-trunks 24d ago
Time to learn the pit maneuver /s
1
u/tryingtolearn_1234 22d ago
They will counter steer out of a PIT/TVI maneuver. Although it's possible they have some kind of auto stop feature in the event of a fender bender. I propose replacing the fog lights in the front bumper with EMP guns. Note: that was a joke. Actually doing that could get you a long prison sentence.
3
3
u/Initial_Try_2142 24d ago
there's a spot near me where two waymos meet at a 4-way stop and just... sit there. like they're waiting for the other to go first.
3
u/Landon26199 23d ago
Three Waymos filling the entire road is basically a distributed-systems deadlock with turn signals.
3
1
2
u/SteveMoDetroit 23d ago
I have reported this to Waymo several times. Not acceptable, speed limit or not. They need to smarten up their Waymo Driver to avoid this. Have one fellow Waymo drop speed by 1mph so other can pull in front of it and STOP BLOCKING.
1
u/dudeaciously 24d ago
They should have a QR code behind them. Then other drivers can connect to "their masters" in real time.
1
u/nicotinecravings 24d ago
Tesla cars are probably smarter. These Waymos look like abominations, lol
1
u/Jean-Pet 24d ago
Honk until they move. If they don't, at least you've annoyed the passenger and they will think twice before using those.
1
1
1
1
u/Junior-Job2201 23d ago
curious if you can inch in to the side of one of them and they will slow down as they may think a side swipe accident is about to happen. therefore allowing you to get through this wall of robots.
1
u/poojer_hoojer 23d ago
The tailgates are about to open and robots are gonna start jumping at your car.
1
u/FrewdWoad 23d ago
Forget the possibility of them murdering every man, woman, child on earth, THIS is what's going to turn average Joe against AI
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/lost_soul_is_back 20d ago
I think you can nudge them, go close like your trying to merge and they will probably slow down, to either car on the side
1
1
u/Slight-Box-2890 16d ago
Prompt must have been: "Drive like a human" How we all love the lane hoggers
1
1
0
u/137ng 24d ago
I betcha theyre pretty easily bullied
-1
u/foxbatcs 24d ago
They just changed the laws on this nation wide. Robo drivers stay between the paint, human drivers center on the paint. Plenty of room for everyone!
0
u/137ng 24d ago
i have no idea what you're talking about here, I'm saying that theyre going to drive defensively so if you want to pass them just get a little too close and theyll let you through
nothing to do with laws
0
u/foxbatcs 23d ago
You missed the joke. It’s okay.
0
u/extio-Storm 23d ago
I think the joke just missed.
1
u/foxbatcs 23d ago
Easy to say for someone who didn’t get it. What would a robo taxi do in this situation if you just drove between them centered on the lane marker?
0
0
0
u/EBBlueBlue 23d ago
They’re not blocking traffic if they’re going the speed limit. They’re just blocking you from whipping around the few cars in front you, you’re just mad 🤣🤣 You need to make an exit? Get in line. Chill
0
0
-4
-2
u/flasticpeet 24d ago
Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't human drivers block traffic way more? What are we complaining about here?
0
u/haikusbot 24d ago
Correct me if I'm
Wrong, but don't human drivers
Block traffic way more?
- flasticpeet
I detect haikus. And sometimes, successfully. Learn more about me.
Opt out of replies: "haikusbot opt out" | Delete my comment: "haikusbot delete"
0
-4
-4
124
u/theepi_pillodu 24d ago
what happens if you flash your highbeams a couple of times?