DE version is available. Content is displayed in original English for accuracy.
Advertisement
Advertisement
⚡ Community Insights
Discussion Sentiment
45% Positive
Analyzed from 1703 words in the discussion.
Trending Topics
#water#road#waymo#recall#car#driving#drive#cars#update#vehicles

Discussion (79 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews
You think you know how deep it is under because you've taken that road many times before (or in your case you have historical laser measurement)
But you don't know:
- Maybe the road under fully collapsed
- Maybe the flow of water is extremely strong, so you need to accurately estimate that too.
If the car comes to a road covered with water, and that road is in the database, and the water level appears low compared to the historical level of the road in the DB, then the car could cross. if the road is not in the DB, then a different decision might be made.
This is similar to humans: you might make different decisions depending on whether you know the road well or not.
The problem with both is they effectively require the vehicle to be in the water already. They need something that can tell depth before the vehicle has to slow down.
I've never made that mistake; I'm not aware of anyone I know doing it. I very rarely see it myself, except on news footage. Of course it happens some time somewhere but that says nothing about frequency.
> That's a tough problem
Not really. Don't drive where you don't know it's safe. Definitely don't drive into moving water - puddles only, and only if not too deep: I can usually figure it out based on the rest of the road - unless it's a sinkhole, the geometry is somewhat consistent - and especially by looking at objects in the water such as other cars driving through it. Sorry your friend isn't competent to figure it out.
People here are always quick to defend the autonomous cars, like a close friend. How often will we fall in love with a technology or company? It always distorts the truth.
IOW 3,800 Waymo vehicles aren't currently sat spinning their wheels in water.
The inference would come from standing water slowing down the vehicle and likely require steering correction, in combination with some machine vision for identifying standing water.
Then there's the advantage of being Google and having hundreds of thousands of people in the same area using Google maps and navigation. Accelerometers in phones can detect crashes pretty reliably. There's a good chance they can reliably detect deceleration from standing water and report the location of the hazard.
“Wash away maaaaan, take him with the floooood”
https://abc7news.com/post/san-francisco-leaders-press-waymo-...
Look, you can't make progress without getting your feet wet and then diving straight into the deep end.
We're still in the early days of self driving cars, and as much simulation and miles as they have, they're still constantly getting exposed to real world conditions that are new to them. The world is dynamic, so this will always remain true.
It remains to be seen where we'll converge on capability, incident rate, and acceptance.
It just creates alarmist headlines for what's really an over the air update, although "recall" is still currently a regulatory accurate term in the vehicle space
Cars, especially EVs, have many similarities to being phones. Imagine if a routine software update from Apple was called a "recall", that functionally describes what's happening here
NHTSA should at least distinguish between "omg we have to get these cars off the road and bring them to the shop immediately!" versus "over the air software update"
He posts on an internet message board
https://waymo.com/blog/2026/02/the-waymo-world-model-a-new-f...
Or did you mean strictly in operation?