> Cruise in March submitted the applications for driverless operations, whereas Waymo in January applied for autonomous vehicle deployment with safety drivers behind the wheel.
Wow, driverless actually means no driver here. But how does that work? What if it makes a mistake? Is there some fallback pilot somewhere that can take over and control it remotely?
Waymo has a similar approach in Phoenix. Passengers can't directly intervene but can call tech support and they'll dispatch roadside assistance to override the car and drive it to safety. Will be interesting to see if Cruise copies this same model.
Didn't they have "chase" cars in the beginning? Maybe I'm thinking of a different company. Cars that would follow around the driverless cars and could respond immediately if something happened.
Right, it's eerily similar. People say this about automated railways too. And as with the elevator on your hundredth trip you are not thinking "Oh no, this is automated, it might kill me", because of course it's automated, you're thinking about whether Jim meant to complement you or it was intended as an insult last night, and did you bolt the back door?
I’ve tried to find the original source of that claim and come up missing. All of the online articles either don’t reference a source or they eventually link to an out of print book.[1]
At this point I’m pretty sure it’s not true. If past public sentiment was so against automatic elevators, there would be at least one newspaper clipping or digitized article.
According to the DMV press release (submitted elsewhere on HN), this is incorrect:
>Waymo is authorized to use a fleet of light-duty autonomous vehicles for commercial services within parts of San Francisco and San Mateo counties. The vehicles are approved to operate on public roads with a speed limit of no more than 65 mph and can also operate in rain and light fog. Waymo has had state authority to test autonomous vehicles on public roads with a safety driver since 2014 and received a driverless testing permit in October 2018.
Wow, driverless actually means no driver here. But how does that work? What if it makes a mistake? Is there some fallback pilot somewhere that can take over and control it remotely?