Comment by s1mon

It's hilarious to see people in LA buying sports cars. Like even if you're willing to risk a speeding ticket you won't be able to drive faster than the traffic in front of you. Just a status symbol, I guess.

Have you driven in LA? Traffic speed is generally bimodal: either stuck in traffic jam or easily 15 mph above the limit. (Source: live in LA, drive regularly.)

While young and stupid, I did 100 mph on the 710 once. Driving home from work at 12:30 am on Monday gives opportunity for lots of speed. There's no traffic at that time of day. It was many years ago, and traffic grows with population, but still, I can't imagine there's much traffic then; I visit the area at least once a year for about a week and there's always some opportunities during the trip to travel above the speed limit, even though I'm not out very late anymore.

I remember my buddy telling me it would sometimes take him 2 hours to go a few miles in LA traffic and sometimes he would just walk to work instead because he'd get there faster.

The slow lane and passing lane dichotomy makes sense in a rural highway with two lanes in your direction.

It makes less sense in an urban environment with 5 or more lanes in your direction. Vehicles will be traveling at varying speeds in all lanes, ideally with a monotonic gradient, but it just doesn't happen, and it's unlikely to.

In California, large trucks generally have a lower speed limit (however many trucks are not speed governed and do exceed the truck limit and sometimes the car limit) and lane restrictions on large highways. Waymo may do well if it tends toward staying in the lanes where trucks are allowed as those tend to flow closer to posted car speed limits. But sometimes there's left exits, and sometimes traffic flow is really poor on many right lanes because of upcoming exits. And during commute time, I think the HOV lane would be preferred; taxis are generally eligible for the HOV lane even when only the driver is present, but I don't know about self-driving with a single or no occupant.

You're framing the problem space in a way that doesn't match major freeways in the US at all. There's a bunch of lanes, and you need drivers spread out across all of them, otherwise traffic would slow to a standstill.

If there are vehicles going slow due to capability, you are pretty likely to be in an area where traffic density means that there's lots of vehicles in all the available lanes.

Plenty of people do not follow the rules about staying to the right.

You’re correct. There are people in the US who drive in the passing lane without passing, but most consider that a bad practice, as it makes roads both less efficient and less safe.

In Ontario we have lots of 3 lane highways (we'll ignore Toronto area, where speed is limited by traffic anyways). What happens is that trucks & people getting on/off exits are in right most lane. Middle lane is everyone else, going 10-20 km/h over speed limit. Leftmost lane is people passing, or the maniacs going over 150 km/h while relying on their map system to alert them of highway patrol

Yes. People do in fact safely drive the speed limit.

If "we'll have too many cars on the freeway following the speed limit" ranks as a serious concern, I think we've really lost the plot.

I recently drove by a fatal accident that had just happened on the freeway. A man on the street had been ripped in half, and his body was lying on the road. I can't imagine the scene is all that unlike the 40 thousand other US road deaths that happen every year.

As a driver I'm willing to accept some minor inconvenience to improve the situation. As a rider I trust Waymo's more than human drivers.

> In fact I think CHP should just contract with them to pace 101 in waves.

"Waves" are really what we would want them to prevent: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traffic_wave

The autonomous cars can prevent these waves from forming, which would get people to their destinations faster than speeding.

I was on 101 during evening rush hour, speeding along like everyone. Then I saw brake lights from a Waymo. Later followed by all the surrounding cars. Interesting that it was the first to detect a slowdown.

The omnipresent threat of being splattered by someone who's weaving lanes or distracted by their phone and not expecting to see a vehicle doing 20mph (!!!!) below traffic speed is exactly what I want when I'm in a taxi. /s

If you actually thought adoption would benefit us on it's own rather than seeing it a roundabout way to enforce rules that you want to see enforced without buy in from the public you'd want these cars to behave in a way that makes it easier for them to exist in typical traffic.

That's a great way to make them targets for vandalism. I'm in a city they're about to get in to (Nashville), and if the snitch-mobile tattled on everyone (the highways here that are officially 55 are "really" 75 with some exceptions, and going the speed limit can end up being more dangerous), sensors would start getting bullet holes.

Of course, unlike the normal car break-ins here, the cops might do something about them.

Indeed, and I'm guessing the Waymos have forward facing cameras + know their own speed? Feels like a natural jump to begin automatically reporting cars that are speeding past them to the police, with a camera snapshot of the plate, with everything else censored.

Why is that the problem for above the legal speed limit drivers?

A slow fleet of Waymo’s will impact your average 5-10 over same as your 20 over, and that’ll collectively impact traffic.

The implicit assumption you and many other in tech share is humans must adapt to the tech protocol, and not the other way around.

After 20 years of growing negative externalities from this general approach, which I see baked into your comment - are we seriously about to let this occur all over again with a new version of tech?

Fool me once, fool me twice… I think we’re at fool me 10 times and do it again in terms of civic trust of tech in its spaces.

No, it is not only a problem for "'well above the legal limit' speeding drivers"; it is a problem for you, and the solution requires more thought than the "just follow the rules" that you put into your post.

There are many instances where the entire mass of traffic across three or four lanes is 10-20mph above the stated limit, e.g., going 75-85mph in a 66mph posted area.

It may not be legal, but it is reality. And when it is everyone, it is not only "aggressive" drivers. It is everyone. And one driver thinking they will change the situation only makes it worse.

If you are going 20-30mph below the speed of traffic you are at least as much a hazard to yourself and everyone around you as going 20-30mph above the speed of traffic, and the stated speed limit has nothing to do with it.

Going substantially slower than traffic, even in the slow lane with flashers on, nearly all of the threats and actions are overtaking you and coming from behind you, meaning to see and react to most of the developing situations, you must be driving through your rear-view mirrors.

And the situation you create can be very deadly, as one car can change lanes to avoid you, revealing you late to the next car, which barely changes lanes, and further reduces time for the next, who hits you and starts the pile-up.

It is not only their problem, it is yours too. Sure, you may be legally in the right, but you have still caused yourself to get hit.

What my grandfather explained to me is still correct:

"You never want to be dead right."

Sounds like you’ve never driven on a highway. Taking some imaginary moral high ground doesn’t make one any less dangerous.