• yamanii@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    edit-2
    3 hours ago

    The fedora tipping is too funny, seeing it from outside the situation, but she certainly was very scared because it’s such a bizarre event.

  • TheObviousSolution@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 hours ago

    I can see criminals easily exploiting this default behavior to stop the car and steal from those inside.

    Where’s a Johnny cab when you need it, it knows how to deal with criminals.

  • Fiona@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    4 hours ago

    Okay, this really seems more like a case of sexual harassment, rather than harassment of Waymo customers, which was my first suspicion. Had it been the latter as part of a politically motivated action against the company I might have had a lot more sympathy, but this is disgusting…

    • The Liver@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      27 minutes ago

      You saw the fedora and thought it was anything but sexual harassment? LMAO

  • Snapz@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 hours ago

    The victim’s statement here ends with an oddly volunteered tangent and specific praise of driverless vehicles, before it finally takes an eerie turn in the last sentence…

    "…With that said, I think the Human Factor in this issue is going to be a lot harder to solve than anything else.” …FREEZE CITIZEN!

    I do hope she’s okay, and those two folks seem to be clowns, but this thing also all reads as likely guerilla marketing for Waymo - who the article informs me, in a very capitalism-friendly turn of events, that they now have their service open to the public in 3 cities, cars have a safety feature that checked in with her multiple times and they “rewarded” her with an extra ride. It’s a light enough “crime”, with a very engineered feeling and enough to feel “real” while providing ready fodder for morning radio talk shows, Jimmy Fallon and good morning America talking heads to drone on about this morning across America as time filler that quietly advertises waymo “saving” a person from the scary outside world.

    Note: Also, was very funny that throughout drafting my comment here “waymo” was constantly being autocorrected to “say no” :)

  • Destide@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    4 hours ago

    Give it a couple of years they’ll legalise running down pedestrians for self drive cars. Can’t have these jackalopes affecting the bottom line

  • CondensedPossum@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    13
    ·
    2 hours ago

    Some guys were annoying/sexist to her while she participated in a public menace and I guess this is supposed to mean something to me beyond “stay away from California”

  • FuzzyRedPanda@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 hours ago

    This made me wonder though…the car obviously has cameras on the outside, and there’s also a way to communicate with the support team from inside…so is it a stretch to think that these cars could be auto-recording everything that’s happening inside the car?

    Should we - as riders - have any expectation of privacy in a car with no driver?

    • buddascrayon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      3 hours ago

      No, but then the same is true of taxis and Ubers. They all have some kind of recording equipment in them for ensuring safety and cover in case someone claims something.

  • Tanka@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    4 hours ago

    That’s gotta be the cyberpunkiest thing I’ve read in a while.

  • DeadNinja@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    6 hours ago

    In an instance like this, our riders have 24/7 access to Rider Support agents who will help them navigate the situation in real time

    Clearly that’s what a human driver would do, but I guess those Rider Support Agents work for free, so why not fire the driver? /s

    • IphtashuFitz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      4 hours ago

      And then when you have an emergency the response is along the lines of:

      “Thank you for requesting to speak with a rider support agent. All agents are currently busy assisting other Waymo customers, but the next available agent will assist you as soon as possible. There are currently 32 other customers in front of you. Thank you for your patience.”

      • buddascrayon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 hours ago

        True. The instant response that exists now is only because this is a pilot program and they want to prove that it works. Once it’s normalized they will lay off most of the rider support and fuck you if you have to wait on the line.

  • celsiustimeline@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    edit-2
    2 hours ago

    In the past, autonomous vehicle development dwelled on the ethical hypothetical situations like “do you hit an old lady crossing the road in order to avoid crashing into a schoolbus full of children?”, but what about safety hypotheticals? Like, if you were actually driving your vehicle, there are moments when it’s in your best interest to not be at a stop, such as when people are physically surrounding your car and potentially mean to cause you harm, which is extremely common in America. When does the driverless car get you out of a tight spot and run over some carjackers if need be?

    Edit: To respond to everyone saying I’m full of shit, and that carjackings aren’t common, there were more than 500 carjackings in NYC alone in 2021. New Orleans had 281 in 2021. 800 carjackings in Philly in 2021. 1800 carjackings in Chicago in 2021. Tell me, is that not enough carjackings to warrant asking my question?

        • yeehaw@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          2 hours ago

          The only thing I’d be curious about with these numbers is car jackings vs the amount of cars/drivers on the road. That would give a percentage and let us know how common it is.

    • AbsoluteChicagoDog@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      29
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      5 hours ago

      How the fuck do you figure that’s “extremely common”? You need to spend less time on the Internet my dude …

      • michaelmrose@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 hour ago

        You guys are talking past one another. It’s extremely common at a population level insofar as its happening literally many times per day at the population level. It is not extremely likely at the individual level because the vehicle miles driven per carjacking is massive with most people never getting car jacked.

    • Blackmist@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      6 hours ago

      If an AI car ever has to make a decision on who dies, the answer should always be “whoever agreed to the terms and conditions before they got in the vehicle”.

      • Skates@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 hours ago

        This will never be the case. Because nobody will buy an overpriced “yo, if there’s ever any doubt about, like, anything - just put a bullet in my head” machine. So nobody will sell it.

        Face it - you have the same thousands of pounds of metal today, and you’re the only one making decisions. You (drivers, as a community) have killed before, for selfish reasons: because you don’t want to die is the least selfish of them. Other hits include “didn’t wanna not get drunk with the homies”, “I really needed to answer that text” and “I have 10 minutes till home but the game starts in 5, it’s my favorite team, I can make it”. And you somehow seem to want non-drivers (passengers of AI cars) to have the same expectation that they will be a victim even when they get a car?

        Drivers are so self-centered it’s goddamn ridiculous.

        • Blackmist@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          3 hours ago

          I’m talking about pedestrians, not other drivers.

          If autonomous vehicles can’t be trusted not to run people over, then they shouldn’t be allowed to go above like 20mph in a built up area where there’s likely to be people walking about. And frankly neither should human drivers, but good luck not getting them to call it a “war on motorists” if you try.

        • Revan343@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 hours ago

          Ah yes, drivers are self-centered for checks notes not wanting pedestrians to be hit by self-driving cars

          • Skates@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 hours ago

            Nah man. I’ll rephrase:

            Drivers are self-centered because:

            • they are one of the leading causes of death, and they convinced the world their convenience is worth it
            • they believe that they literally know better than AI and are better suited to have power over life and death
            • they’re out here tryna say passengers of AI cars should sign up to die automatically, when drivers are actually the ones who are today responsible for all deaths by car

            I made it easier to understand, hope it helps.

    • BluesF@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      6 hours ago

      Surely you can just take over? You can’t expect the car to run people over for you lol

    • Pyr_Pressure@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 hours ago

      They should have little nozzles to disperse a cloud of pepper spray around the vehicle in emergencies.

    • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 hours ago

      SAAB tried to corner the US market in the '80s and '90s by giving away a shoulder mounted anti tank rocket with each purchase of a car, but their legal team said “that’s not an appropriate way to deal with road rage.”

    • Akasazh@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      10 hours ago

      Maybe that could spark a nice tradition of the one sitting besides the drivers seat calling ‘shotgun’.

      … O wait

  • Kusimulkku@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    12 hours ago

    I have to admit, I expected a lot worse from the style of writing. This was written like some true crime stuff lol

  • Uriel238 [all pronouns]@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    40
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    14 hours ago

    I’d expect the Waymo video to have captured footage of these guys. It might not be that difficult to track them, and street harassment might well qualify as assault if the DA of San Francisco were interested in prosecuting.

    That said, it’s telling that they freely and openly harassed a strange woman on the street once the threat of being run over was not a factor.

    ETA: One short-term workaround is to tint the windows so that passengers cannot be seen from the outside, but there might be causes to harass occupied Waymo vehicles regardless of the passenger (say, to mug them). I’m curious if this is going to lead to equipping autonomous vehicles with anti-riot ordnance.