https://www.vice.com/en/article/4a3ba3/california-dmv-suspends-cruises-self-driving-car-license-after-pedestrian-injury
The DMV said the vehicles “are not safe for the public’s operation.”
As a disabled dude, let's have both. I can't make the short trip to my nearby bus stop, this would be taxes that I would never benefit from. But personal cars or services like these, I can make it down my driveway.
It blows my mind how many people, when talking about transportation, just completely forget that not totally-capable people exist. I guess we are all supposed to stay in one place and never go anywhere due to a physical disability.
I'll happily vote for taxes to enhance public transport, if everyone votes to keep services like these also improving and growing, especially in areas where municipal services are lacking or completely unavailable. Uber and Lyft were my only access to restaurants and groceries for a time. Shit gets expensive, but it's better than literally having to beg friends to get my groceries every week.
Just don't forget about those who can't enjoy the infrastructure.
Does your city not have a service where a small bus goes to your door? Here in Seattle you book a ride to where you need to go the day before and they come and pick you up. Heck, the small town I grew up in (2500 people) in the middle of nowhere had a similar service.
My current one does, but only goes to city limits, which isn't very useful (my doctors and such, for example, are a city over). My prior one, you had to live within half a mile of a traditional bus stop. I was just out of the 'service range', at like 0.65ish miles away.
That sucks. The service here is done by the county so it's pretty easy to get where you need to go. Or if you do not feel like booking a day in advance, they also have shuttle service to the light rail although that is less geared towards people with disabilities so it might not work for everyone.
Hopefully your region gets their heads out of their asses and starts providing basic services for people who need it.
I live in Oklahoma where they give two shits for public transportation and we have that service. I see the small bus in my small town taking people to Tulsa.
During COVID lockdowns, when lots of people had to work from home, people who couldn't work from home were all talking about how much faster it was to get to work and there was hardly any traffic on the roads.
Even if public transport doesn't benefit someone directly, getting a bunch of other people off the road still will.
Yeah, definitely. But the idea that 'only if it benefits me' really irked me, like 'why can't everyone just take public transportation' like it's just easy-peasy for everyone, guaranteed.
there were legal taxis before uber, uber or self driving cars don't really change anything in that regard
Uber changed things a lot. Uber lets you easily request the ride and track the driver instead of calling for a cab then calling back 45 minutes later to find out where they are and find out they never sent anyone.
Uber changed things a lot.
technology changed things a lot, not uber. i don't really have detailed knowledge of us market, but where i am normal taxi services are using them as well, that's not really something created by uber. the only innovation uber brought to the field is that the technology allowed them to organize taxi service in really shady way (aka "the gig economy")
Taxis are expensive away from a metro area (or 'we don't go that far' etc), unfortunately, and trying to travel a short distance made them even less economical. U/L was the best way that I could get around without massively tanking my bank account, and still finances were a death sentence in that living situation (living on $600ish a month - housing, utilities, food, medications... - was a recipe for disaster; such is life).
The idea is to improve them for future use, of course they aren't a current drop-in we're-done replacement.
ok, i don't really have detailed knowledge of situation in us, so it that works for you and your budget, i am gonna believe you.
I understand you can't access it as it is now, but ideally we'd have systemic change that would allow you to access public transport. I don't know what your handicap is, but (other than immune system issues) I don't see what could be wrong that is impossible for public transport to be built to allow for. Sure, you have to get to it, but that could be made a lot easier if we weren't in a system designed for cars where everything is a million miles away.
I could be totally wrong. I have no idea of anything about you. I just would prefer a system that helps everyone, which these cars won't. In particular, impoverished people are going to be even more fucked if we start accepting this as an option for handling disabilities. It doesn't seem like a good idea.
I turn 31 next month; I'm a stroke 'survivor' (kill me) who completely lost the fine motor control of my right arm, hand, leg, foot, toes/fingers, a quarter of my vision in both eyes, ~90% of my nerve response on my right side of my entire body, as well as a few other things. Literally getting down the road to the bus stop 1/8 miles away would take 20 minutes, be immensely difficult and tiring, my pulse would be 130+ the whole time and say if I'm going to go to a store and buy something, I can't because my one operable hand is holding my cane to keep me stable. I tried, so fucking hard, to continue 'normal' life. I despise what has happened to me and the fact that I will never, ever be whole again makes me regret calling help when I realized what was occurring. I live every day in hell, in a prison created by my own stupid body, and it will be like this until my premature death.
It's the hardest thing in the world to just get to the transportation. I hate that I'm saying it, but it's absolutely true :(
I'm not saying it's the best answer - fuck, I'm trying to get back to driving, it has always been a huge part of me, my happiness, my enjoyment of life - but at least it can help people like me until something better comes along.
I'm sorry you ended up in a situation that no one should have to deal with.
You say you liked driving. Do you or any friends have access to VR equipment? I bet you could do some driving in that and at least get part of the experience you miss. It won't be the same, but it'll at least be a part of it.
A couple, but they aren't local; I've used a Google Daydream that I own, hooked to my computer via a program (name escapes me atm, icon was a cat I think). Though the daydream with glasses on is, uh, undesirable you could say.
I play games on pc/kb+mouse like Forza, BeamNG, older NFS games (nostalgia), etc and I've also been able to mostly play games like Halo or Payday by using a mouse with additional side buttons, making the mouse the primary input (wasd via mouse is interesting). I plan on picking up a wheel/pedals soon, just financial obligations has me waiting on that.
Between getting my license and the stroke, I put an average of 30k miles on vehicles per year. Driving is an escape for me (more life bs I won't bore you with) and it's just so freeing. Plus I love to explore, so they go hand in hand.
Yes, this is an underappreciated angle. Ridesharing bridges the gap for many people excluded by other forms of transit. My mom has limited mobility and ridesharing has really helped her.
No shit. If you need to move people just look at where the most people are moved... airports. Every major airport has buses and rail in and out. There's no reason for cities to be built around individual transport when individuals are rarely transporting more than themselves.
Oh, you think that's bad? Check the Texrail map. It's the light rail line for Fort Worth, Texas.
It's literally one line that goes from downtown to DFW airport. There's a planned expansion that will push it slightly further further west to the medical district... in downtown.
And don't even get me started on the bus line intervals. The one that's closest to me runs HOURLY. It may as well not even fucking exist, and I think that's the idea.
After going to Denver and seeing the rail system and having so much potential squandered was upsetting. Just extend that thing down to Colorado Springs at least. It'd do so much good ans almost certainly pay for itself quickly. They built it up for absolutely nothing.
Except for Detroit. That's because putting in light rail down the middle of the highway that could support it between the airport and Detroit city proper would actually make sense and we don't like that around here. Also, the Motor City hates bus services. Am I salty? Perhaps.
Detroit will never rise above "COMPLETE HOLE" status until they unfuck public transportation. I'd like to visit but I don't drive so what's the point? See a five block area around downtown?
It cost nearly $350 million to install a 2-mile-long rapid bus lane on Van Ness Maybe future expansions will be cheaper based on lessons learned, but it's clear that any infrastructure in SF is tremendously complicated and expensive. Doesn't mean it's not worth pursuing!
Creating new public infrastructure in the US can be extremely expensive, but it’s definitely still worth pursuing.
Nearly every in-depth study shows that for every $1 invested, the economic return is somewhere around $4-$5. And on top of that, failing to have adequate public infrastructure can cause serious economic consequences, which are compounded in areas with a lack of affordable housing.
Even though this article is a little old and sponsored by a party with a vested interest on the topic, I think it’s worth a read:
https://www.politico.com/sponsor-content/2018/06/when-public-transit
In my opinion, the problem for the US is convincing people/businesses that it’s worth it. Shifting away from cars and increasing investments in public infrastructure are two fairly unpopular measures right now, despite the actual economic evidence being overwhelming positive.
To me, it’s a solid example of where great leaders are needed to do something temporarily unpopular for the long term benefit of the constituents.
For sure, totally agree. In other countries where I've lived, I've noticed less selfish blocking of local infrastructure. There are just a lot of selfish people in America, and more pain points they can exploit to throw up roadblocks (both politically and literally)
For sure. The US was once a leader with its public infrastructure and programs, from education to the highway system. Paying BIG money to provide these incredible public services.
Now it seems like a lot of people in the US want to live in a place with zero public projects, crumbling roads, and unregulated utilities. Even wealthy people who waste money on the dumbest stuff don’t want to pay for top-notch public services. I truly don’t understand how you’d want to be so wealthy but live in a place that’s not well cared for. Drive your insanely expensive car on a road filled with potholes. But selfishness and greed are definitely part of the picture.
Yeah public engineering projects are crazy expensive. Roads included. I’m not saying this stuff will be cheap, just that not doing it is causing pretty awful problems
Troll account that purposefully takes the losing side of debates: https://alexandrite.app/lemmy.world/u/Guru_Insights99@lemm.ee
While I respect your right to express your opinion, I must state that your opinion is just as valid or void as the previous. I couldn't know which. How would I?
It is like a bunch of the self-driving companies are trying to kill the tech by making the public turn against them.
I was stoked for them to get here. My entire life between my house and my kid's school is inundated in self driving cars. I live it. I fucking hate them. And elderly people in Teslas.
There's a good solution here: walkable, mixed use neighborhoods.
Self driving cars are just going to make traffic worse, by increasing people's tolerance to traffic.
Nah, it's just that the "fail fast" process doesn't work or more accurately isn't acceptable for critical life-or-death systems.
I was in SF recently and got stuck behind a self driving car that was trying to turn down a closed street. The street had a police barrier up and it just sat there with its blinker on waiting for the street to open up. Meanwhile, everyone behind it is stuck there waiting for it to make a turn that it would never be able to make.
Eventually, after sitting in traffic for ten minutes, not knowing what was up, cars in front of me started to move around it and then I realized what was going on. I understand why people hate these things.
To be fair, I had a similar thing happen a human driver the other day. Except there was no barricade...they just wouldn't turn. They finally made the left turn on the fourth yellow lol.
I keep looking but can't find it. I keep just finding people saying the pedestrian was hit by a vehicle with a driver and thrown under a driverless car which spokepeople are saying tried to stop as fast as possible to minimize damages.
If the autonomous car reacted correctly then why wouldn't they release the video which corroborates this?
They did, I'm sorry that isn't what the article wanted to show. That is what we call propaganda.
If you find facts thay differ from that let me know.
They did [release the video]
Source or link? If you mean provided to the DMV, I wouldn't call that released.
It's the DMV claiming that the footage was withheld, the article was amended to include Cruise's denial. The facts are in dispute. But what is beyond doubt is that it is the DMV making the claim, not a random journalist. The article includes the Order of Suspension from the DMV citing the reason:
On October 3, 2023. representatives ofthe Department of Motor Vehicles and the California Highway Patrol met with representatives from Cruise to discuss the accident. During the meeting. the department was shown video footage of the accident captured by the AV’s onboard cameras. The video footage presented to the department ended with the AV initial stop following the hard-braking ‘maneuver. Footage ofthe subsequent movement ofthe AV to perform a pullover maneuver was not shown to the department and Cruise did not disclose that any additional movement of the vehicle had occurred after the initial stop ofthe vehicle. The department only learnedof the AV's subsequent movement via discussion with another government agency. The department requested Cruise provide a copy of the video with the additional footage, which was received by the department on October 13. 2023.
I know that boots are real tasty and all but you're spending your free time lying to defend a corporation and that is just fucking weird behaviour.
Something tells me they would get shit on for privacy reasons if they did something like that.
I live in the Bay Area and mostly ignored these developments because I primarily stick to East Bay. But as my new job has me going to SF on a semi-regular basis, I can’t help but be mildly afraid of getting taken out by an AV. Gdi.
Yesterday I saw a couple, including a Waymo that passed a few feet away as I got in my car. It proceeded without incident but I couldn't help feeling nervous to trust that its lidar saw me and it interpreted me as a human.
It proceeded without incident but I couldn’t help feeling nervous to trust that its lidar saw me and it interpreted me as a human.
I can't say I view an average driver with any more trust though.
Yes, if anything it helps expose that we rely too much on cars as a society. That being said, I can make eye contact with a driver, judge their attention more effectively. I do hope driverless tech eventually improves but am concerned about the responsibility of some of the companies currently in the lead of developing the technology.
Ofc, you can still make eye contact with someone and have them then say "oh my god, I didn't see you there!" because there were spacing out/wandering in their mind.
I would guess the autonomous vehicle is safer then the hit & run driver who threw the pedestrian under that AV.
because a human driver would have handed that dash cam footage right over voluntarily.
I agree this is terrible and DMV did the right thing. Context helps.
Perhaps, but withholding footage is not a good look. Good thing the police never withholds foota… oh
When DMV asked for footage of that part of the incident, Cruise provided it.
So they were a little sneaky in not presenting all the evidence up front, but they didn't really withhold it in as bad a way as the title implies.
Yes but for that to stick there has to be a clear obligation to present everything. Frankly, I don't think they lost their licence because of the omission, but because of what happened - this article is just trying to make the story more dramatic. Even the title subtly implies this, the licence wasn't revoked "because" it withheld footage, but "after".
Yes but for that to stick there has to be a clear obligation to present everything
Anybody reasonable reading the article understands the obligation is there.
Yeah a reasonable person would decide that on the balance of probabilities here, but we're talking about the process through which a licence is revoked, which needs to be more concrete.
The actual document from the DMV lists the omission as one of the reasons.
During the meeting on October 3. 2023. Cruise failed to disclose that the AV executed a pullover maneuver that increased the risk of, and may have caused, further injury to a pedestrian. Cruise's omission hinders the ability of the department to effectively and timely evaluate the safe operation of Cruise's vehicles and puts the safety of the public at risk