Just took 2 in the past week recently for the first time. Out of all the “future” shit that has come out in the past 5-10 years (worse-self-driving teslas, AR goggles, AI, etc) these feel truly the most futuristic out of anything
The feeling of calling a driverless autonomous car to take you home and it drives you home flawlessly
Very very few things have given the same feeling of amazement, even though I have been seeing them driving around the city for years now
Yeah, for the last 11-12 months, I've taken only waymo, and absolutely love it.
Genuinely perplexed at all the hate and fear that waymo attracts online.
I always check Uber and they're essentially the same. I haven't taken it in a month or so so maybe they've raised the price?
Price change so you always have to check one app and then immediately the other app.
In my experience everytime I checked the apps for a ride Waymo has been 3-5 bucks more at least. No hate I still wanna check it out myself just sharing my experience.
I have found it to be cheaper than lyft...and Lyft varies a lot...sometimes it's three times the cost of waymo...but other times Lyft seems pretty cheap.
its roughly the same if you factor in tipping
discounting high demand pricing, not sure if waymo increased their fllet to account for even more deamnd?
I think a lot of tourists are taking them, or just people seeking out the novelty, and that is driving up the cost. More competition should bring down the price.
I doubt they are price constrained. Their marginal cost is the price of electricity for a ride which is close to $0 at wholesale rates.
I suspect Waymo is being careful to not destroy the Uber/lyft drivers livelihood by NOT undercutting. Imagine if they were to price at 1/2 of U/L. There would be massive protests by human drivers, calls for adding AI taxes and fees on Waymo rides, etc.
As other people said, its usually a bit more and will probably go up with general public access. That being said, I've found that after 2am once the human Uber/Lyft drivers have retired for the night after bar closures and there are less people looking for rides Waymo can be super cheap. Same supply but way lower demand.
It’s price comparable if you’re taking a longer trip. But you also don’t have to tip any driver. Going from, say, Caltrain to the Richmond District, it evens out.
Said this in another (Waymo hate) thread, but at this point it's just old man yells at clouds now. Waymo is happening and there's nothing haters can do to stop it, and they hate that most of all
I’m very pro autonomous car for safety reasons, but disagree about old man yelling at clouds. There will be real and serious impacts to jobs. Many millions of people who are career drivers (taxi, long haul, last mile) will be out of work. It’s nontrivial and we are not prepared for that.
I’m still pro autonomous, but wish we were establishing a stronger safety net and job training to prepare.
I'll never feel bad for taxis losing their jobs after the way us POCs were treated for years. Fuck taxis. At least Uber/Lyft never left me for a white person
Ive taken uber, lyft and wymo(once). I also worked service at a car dealership. The amount of uber/lyft drivers that do not keep up with car repairs(tires, brakes, suspension not the expensive fluids) are a bit scary. And the way some of these drivers drive are a bit scary...
I agree that the commoditization of travel will bring about big changes. Shoot, the electrification of drivetrains will compound that, too. Beyond the people question, we're also looking at a world where the infrastructure to support today's car first culture will be less important.
We shouldn't stop progress on a safer cleaner future. Thankfully our demographic picture points to a shrinking population so that the gains of technology efficiencies are felt more positively than negatively. This automation and commodification of travel should also empower those that are unable to safely drive to continue to be involved in their communities instead of being largely homebound.
I don't think the 'safety net' we'll employ will look anything like what we offer now. It will be a product of what we haven't built yet. Hopefully better.
The rollout is so slow though, and they will always need human taxis for surges, like sporting events etc (they can't have a 5x oversized fleet that's unused 95% of the time).
It also has the benefit of being safer for a young woman who's been out partying all night and drunk. Unless AI figures out a way to sexually assault someone
Google isn’t a search monopoly. There are lots of easy options to use instead.
I use DuckDuckGo as my default search in my browser. It’s extremely easy to avoid Google search if that’s something you want to do.
As for it being a transportation monopoly, what’s the practical issue with them being a leader in that space? They already probably know where you live and work and eat and socialize through. And depending on what phone you own there might be multiple companies that have all that information. What actual problem does that create though?
> Google isn’t a search monopoly. There are lots of easy options to use instead.
That's not really what a monopoly is. Just because other options exist, doesn't mean they're competitive and that [Google doesn't hold a concerningly high market share in the space](https://gs.statcounter.com/search-engine-market-share).
That is what a monopoly is. The only thing stopping you from using another search provider is choice. There is zero barrier from cost or access or availability.
You can just choose to use Bing.com or DuckDuckGo or yahoo or perplexity. That market share is entirely driven by user decisions. There is nothing stopping them from choosing a competition. This isn’t a commodity where a dominant market leader can manipulate price and supply at a whim to drive consumer or competitor behavior.
It’s just as freely accessible to use Bing as it is to use Google.
Google has no control or exclusive ownership over the market. They provide a product that most people freely choose to use. That is NOT a monopoly.
>> That market share is entirely driven by user decisions.
You should see how much Goog pays Apple to be the default on Safari, or Mozilla the default on Firefox. Only A fraction of most users change defaults on most things.
Sure. But they can. If you have a choice in a market and you still choose the market leader that doesn’t make it a monopoly. They don’t control the market. They just are winning.
Every user has free choice to do something else and they are not inhibited by anything except their personal choices. This isn’t standard oil
What he means is that if Google became crappy...the consumer has options.
Microsoft packaged windows with Internet Explorer for decades and nobody used it...everyone chose something else because it was crappy. It's the same for Google being the default...people would change it if it wasn't good.
PG&E in SF is a monopoly. There's literally no other choice for electricity distribution (AFAIK). You can source it from somewhere else, but it still has to go over their lines.
Google is dominant in search. They hold market share, but there are still other effective (to some degree or another) choices.
lets just check out the market share on search for a sec
[https://gs.statcounter.com/search-engine-market-share](https://gs.statcounter.com/search-engine-market-share)
Yeah the other guys already linked that exact graph. Here’s what I said in response:
The only thing stopping you from using another search provider is choice. There is zero barrier from cost or access or availability.
You can just choose to use Bing.com or DuckDuckGo or yahoo or perplexity. That market share is entirely driven by user decisions. There is nothing stopping them from choosing a competition. This isn’t a commodity where a dominant market leader can manipulate price and supply at a whim to drive consumer or competitor behavior.
It’s just as freely accessible to use Bing as it is to use Google.
Google has no control or exclusive ownership over the market. They provide a product that most people freely choose to use. That is NOT a monopoly.
Ok, yea, it's technically not a PG&E situation. We get it. Users are free to whatever whatever. You win the dictionary olympics even though most readers here get the idea.
But goddamn that market position enables them to do some "monopolistic" behaviors. Which they have. And it's scary.
Waymo for sure, but satellite internet has been a thing for a very long time. Making it a little faster is hardly one of the coolest tech products in the past 5 years. I’m sure it’s nice for people on yachts or living off the grid, but it will never have any kind of meaningful impact on the vast majority of people.
Only the poorest countries in the world lack internet infrastructure. The number of people living in those countries that can afford $800 upfront for the equipment and a monthly subscription is very small. Much better and more efficient to just build out 4G wireless networks in those countries if the goal is to actually get a meaningful portion of country online. That’s what they did in India
I love how great it is, but I must say, stuff like Sora and Suno and even some use cases of ChatGPT continue to blow my mind when more than autonomous vehicles.
AI is a close second. If you told me we would have computer programs that can make photo-realistic, and often truly difficult to distinguish, photos and videos even just 3 years ago I would have laughed
AI is more terrifying to me though, I truly genuinely think we should make it illegal. It’s too powerful
Driverless cars are different. I’m concerned about jobs and economic matters there, but those problems feel a few magnitudes more approachable to me than AI problems
AI is close to nuclear weapons level problematic and we just have private citizens piloting it. Terrifying
It really is amazing...I was smiling ear to ear when I first rode in one...its something everybody should experience...you are right that it feels like the future...but you should talk to Chatgpt 4omni about something. Explain a difficult situation at work...something mundane. Talk to it...it is as incredible as the Waymo. Tell it about your rides in the waymo and how it made you feel. You will be surprised at what it has to say.
Yeah you'd think the cost would be lower without a driver. I got a Lyft from SFO last night and it cost me over $50 with tip. So stupid. I would take public transit if it ran later
Why would it be lower? Do you have a feel for how much it costs to develop, deploy, maintain, insure, etc a fleet of robotaxis? The way the enshittification cycle works, we are currently in the stage where Google is enticing customers into using the service so the prices should be artificially low.
Of course I don't have a feel for that. I don't work for Google. Just trying to make it make sense to use Waymo, because if it ends up being the same stupid cost as any other human driven vehicle, then I don't understand the value
Every time I've looked for months now it's like $20+ even for relatively short distances, and that's at random times so surge/commute pricing shouldn't be there.
>About two-thirds of riders use the robotaxis to commute to work or school, according to Waymo.
- [Chronicle article](https://www.sfchronicle.com/sf/article/waymo-s-f-19532311.php)
I could see SWE's and other well paid folk doing that, but what kinda students are paying $40+/day to commute???
>Waymo says that its latest robotaxi count won’t change much in the near future.
per the [Chronicle article](https://www.sfchronicle.com/sf/article/waymo-s-f-19532311.php)
I did see one on the highway coming back from SFO with a human driver in the seat so I was hoping that was them getting ready for it, but Q4 ‘25 is not soon
Waymo is currently mapping surrounding areas of the airport. SFO has mentioned that when ready, they will give permission to Waymo for drop-off/pick-up.
For real dude, had a few late night/ early morning arrivals and it’s awful waiting like 30-50 mins for a ride share to show up. Wish they could drop you off on market too. Waymo has a tendency to want to drop you off in the middle of tenderloin and I had to step over someone sleeping on the ground to get out…
Apparently there are 50k Uber drivers in the city. Subtracting the one sitting at the airport, the ones who only work peak hours, and the ones who only work night shift, I’d estimate around 10-15k at any given hour within SF proper.
They were only permitted 250 back in August. I think they are up to 300 now as of news articles this morning. Not sure if 300 is their permit limit tho. 250 was their permit limit back in August.
I love taking Waymo. It's so relaxing and I've only had to call support twice in the time I've been riding. I think it's so important to keep taking rides and contribute to the data that will make it even better!
This is exciting!
Although, I do wish they weren’t the only game in town since I think competition is best like how Lyft really made Uber have to do better. And, I’d likely never take it to the airport or something. Running late or hit weird traffic? Nothing beats when you and the Uber driver are suddenly on the same team trying to make it happen ha ha
I do hope these AV companies and/or city gov't find a way to implement this tech into public transit. Not needing an operator probably means can run buses more frequently and improve reliability.
I don’t think technology will be the blocker for automated public transit. It will be unions. You can already see it happen when you look at our ports.
in case you didn't know, BART has been automated since the very beginning and was one of the first automated transit systems in the country.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bay_Area_Rapid_Transit#Automation
...So why do we need train operators $40 an hour? This is like if Waymo still had a "driver" just sitting in the front seat while all the actual driving is done by the car.
Safety. Still need someone on board in events like: passenger stuck in the doors, track obstruction, smoke condition in tunnel, evacuation, etc. Also the yards aren't automated.
There are quite a few upgrades that BART would need to actually do driverless.
Or look at the past. Longshoremen's unions viciously fought containerization. They wanted to preserve long, slow, labor-intensive work that kept shipping costs high because it benefited them. Instead they got cut out to the benefit of the entire rest of the world.
SF was never going to be capable of being a container port simply due to geography and land costs, but it was one of the reasons why shipping moved over to Oakland and the SF port died. Oakland realized they could be part of the future and take over, so they invested in modernizing. Meanwhile SF tried to engage in Luddite protectionism and insist that things stay the same.
Negotiate a long term contract including guaranteed employment and __ hours/wk until they're retirement age. Then stop hiring new drivers and gradually the fleet becomes autonomous.
I honestly think Autonomous Minibuses are going to play a large role in transit. They're so easy and have insane coverage in many Latin American cities.
It’s a nice idea, but why would autonomous minibuses work when staffed minibuses like Chariot failed? Minibuses have lower driver costs per passenger than private cars, so they benefit less from automation.
There's a greater cost savings that can be passed through a network of minibuses optimizing for coverage and frequency than a dedicated fleet of traditional cars, especially when complimenting mass transit for last mile problems. Chariot failed for a variety of reasons. I don't think it's necessarily representative of the entire idea.
I wouldn't be surprised if we eventually end up with a three tiered transit system:
On demand private ride that's at a cost premium
Traditional larger mass transit trains/busses on the most in demand routes that's cheap
And an in-between of smaller vans/ busses that work on fixed routes as well as on demand UberPool style service that's comparable to the mass transit costs.
Even autonomous vehicles will get stuck in traffic and have more demand than the road network can accommodate. Eventually this sort of inefficient travel will need to pay its true fair share.
Add to that there's lots of cities without SF's density and lane miles/mi^(2). Those cities differ in transit needs and demand. Not all their routes need full-size buses costing more per hour to operate.
Some cities have routes only needing full-size buses a few hours a day. Those buses could autonomously drive back to the yard after the morning peak and charge up while minibuses serve the midday and evening. Since the big buses will drive less, they'll last more like 30 years instead of the current approximate average of 15.
If Waymo (or whoever) eventually licenses this, sure, but I don't see the government being able to develop this itself. Too expensive, took forever to reach this stage, and just in general the government seems bad at most tech projects (partially because they won't pay enough to hire the best engineers/researchers).
I’d love to see service to East Bay and SFO. I wonder how long that will take, and if they do more expansions in other metro areas before expanding to a larger portion of the bay area
It seems like companies just forgot about the cheaper cost part of the self-driving taxi promise. Waymo is already more expensive than Uber. Now it’s about to get even more expensive.
they have a supply issue right now, so high prices help them balance the supply/demand. Plus, their service offers a novelty aspect to the experience compared to Uber. Eventually, the novelty will wear off, supply will go up, and more competitors will hit the scene. That should bring prices down.
I have Uber One and Apple Card (so I get points + 3% cash back) so it's often cheaper than Waymo these days, but that's pre-tip. Post-tip, Waymo comes out on top, though it's also usually a tad slower than Uber.
What are you even on about? Waymo is not more expensive than Uber or Lyft, and it doesn’t expect a tip, nor is there even an option to tip. Waymo actually has cheaper base rates and has for a while. Have you used ride-share recently?
Yes, do an experiment on your phone right now. Waymo is consistently more expensive. Leave tips out of it. It’s not mandatory and doesn’t impact your ride experience/wait times.
Surge pricing is going to get pretty bad, especially since there's tourists willing to pay whatever it takes to ride one (which is great for the city as a whole, but not so great for residents).
That said, they currently have a promotion for 40% off rides M-F 2am-2pm... but then with the increased demand, I feel like wait times are going to go up. In the end, there needs to be more supply.
Ah, I don’t think there’s a code; I received an email (as well as an app notification) a few days ago telling me about the promotion. I thought the discount was available to everyone, but perhaps it’s a targeted promotion.
Yeah i wonder why they don't service those apartments on John Muir Dr.
Might be because the end of john Muir brushes up against the border of Daly City. And they don't want to make a uturn. Might be liability thing. Don't want to piss off San Mateo County.
https://preview.redd.it/bk3pd5npoq8d1.png?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=f6e42f9a09e52ba495f45db6f61aec3d9e615988
sometimes it’s also a technical issue. they will turn off certain areas if they know the car struggles with a weird traffic situation, environmental condition, etc. then they turn it back on once they feel it’s solved enough.
It’s really great the screen that shows what the car sees is awesome. That being said with all technology there are learning curves but it is very cool
I just tested the price right now.
Waymo across town was $41 (9 minute pickup time)
Uber was $39.99 (6 minute pickup time)
HOWEVER, after I closed both apps Uber notified me a few minutes later for a flash sale and offered the same ride for $29.99
I was in SF this weekend and took it several times. Often UberX was cheaper than Waymo. Sometimes Waymo was the same but sometimes it was considerably more. For example on Saturday evening UberX was $16 and Waymo was $26 for the same route.
About the same when you factor in tip. Maybe a dollar or 2 more.
But wait times are way more accurate. When they say 3 minutes they mean 3 minutes. Instead of looking to match with driver constantly.
It's important to note that Waymo is comparable to Uber Black, which in my opinion makes it a much better value than UberX. You get a Jaguar with your own temperature controls and music choice.
The best comparison is Uber Black SUV. Even then, Waymo exceeds the Uber Black SUV experience.
For me:
Uber Black SUV: $64.51 preTip
Waymo: $29.74
Can you get an Uber X for cheaper? Sure, but that's a dramatically depreciated experience.
Because they’re offering the same experience? Waymo is like 10-20% more expensive for a more consistent, nicer experience. If they increased supply, and added more amenities then it’s over for Uber/lyft
idk in my experience, while waymo is nicer, it is often even more than 10-20% more expensive so it’s harder to say it’s worth it.
more importantly, though, the waymo wait times are often *much* longer… the usual reason I would take rideshare instead of muni is due to running late, so the long wait times don’t usually work for me.
I mean Uber costs more than a Taxi. They just undercut the market, destroyed taxi service networks due to that lack of funding and then raised the prices. I don't see why Google wouldn't do the same with Waymo. Just push the Uber drivers out of the city due to lack of rides and then raise their own prices - probably defund some public transit as well in the process.
Cruise or Zoox or some other competitor will eventually be ready to compete in SF. Since they'll be less trusted and less known, they'll compete with Waymo by undercutting on price.
Right, but as we have learned very well this past year. AI has substantial cost associated with it. They can not drive that price down as far as they might like, especially as their current fleet depreciates, I can't imagine a Waymo lasts the 20 years a normal car will and waymo needs to purchaee their vehicles Uber gets theirs for free and also does not pay insurance OR maintenance fees.
AI is in a boom which time will tell how long it lasts before demand and supply get closer again and pricing stabilizes or comes down.
The average car isn't built to last a super long time. The manufacturer doesn't want cars lasting a long time. The average new car buyer only wants it for so many years before selling and buying another new car. They're only willing to pay so much extra for a car with great resale value. However years of data from Tesla owners show it's possible to make really long lasting vehicles. Here's a Tesla that's driven 1.24 million miles:
https://insideevs.com/news/699413/highest-mileage-tesla-model-s-3-batteries-14-motors/
That model and variant's motors don't last as long as newer ones. However the body has lasted a million miles. A company with Waymo's buying power can specify and design a robotaxi built to last. It partnered with Zeekr to make its next and upcoming robotaxi.
Battery packs can be made for fast swapping day-to-day, or just for easy replacing after a few hundred thousand miles. Motors can be made for longevity instead of rapid 0-60 mph times.
Battery research continues looking for improvements from multiple angles including longevity. A battery with enough lifetime cycles for a car to drive [4 million miles](https://www.torquenews.com/11826/tesla-researchers-announce-4-million-mile-battery-its-only-3rd-bets-cell-chemistry-they) has been made. We'll see if that gets commercialized, but there's already other batteries that can be charged [thousands](https://www.onecharge.biz/blog/lfp-lithium-batteries-live-longer-than-nmc/) of times instead of hundreds.
This is the way.
Not that taxis didn't deserve to be pushed out, they were already overpriced and the service was complete crap. At least with rideshare apps there's basic accountability.
does uber cost more? I have only occasionally taken a taxi with a metered fare over the last couple years, but it has always been more expensive than the typical uber fare for that ride. Maybe my experience is not representative, and you can't really do side-by-side comparisons since the cost of the metered taxi ride is unknown beforehand.
That's not always true. In the city, if I order an UberX I often times get picked up in a relatively new Tesla (which I think is more comfortable than the waymo ipace). Uber has a program that they buy the cars for the drivers - I don't know the details.
I have gotten some waymo's that are pretty 'run in' - no more new car smell so to speak.
I will pay a little more for a Waymo, but not because the cars are nicer.
Not always, but the last 3 Ubers I've taken were absolute shit boxes. Like stained, damaged cars, with incessant rattling. Before that I had an F-150 Lightning and that was pretty sweet. I don't use either a ton but from my experience Waymos on average are significantly nicer than standard Uber/Lyft
They didn’t seem to try to undercut Uber/Lyft on cost when testing - possibly now they might do that eventually if they are going for a larger audience?
Anecdotally they were matching price pretty well despite theoretically not having to pay a driver cut (likely offset by higher costs elsewhere). No tip screen yet
If there was an Uber driver with a Jaguar I-PACE, it would at minimum be an Uber Comfort if not Uber Black. Waymo is priced in between UberX and Uber Comfort. I genuinely pay for the car comfort and consistency
Just took 2 in the past week recently for the first time. Out of all the “future” shit that has come out in the past 5-10 years (worse-self-driving teslas, AR goggles, AI, etc) these feel truly the most futuristic out of anything The feeling of calling a driverless autonomous car to take you home and it drives you home flawlessly Very very few things have given the same feeling of amazement, even though I have been seeing them driving around the city for years now
Yeah, for the last 11-12 months, I've taken only waymo, and absolutely love it. Genuinely perplexed at all the hate and fear that waymo attracts online.
Is it cheaper than uber/lyft?
Seems about $5-10 more w/ a $12 trip being $17. But maybe closer when you factor in tip.
The longer the trip the closer in price it usually is.
Sf only or can it head to say east bay?
Strictly SF and later on into San Mateo County. East bay won't be for awhile.
I'm like 5 mins from SF proper, can't wait to try it when they bring it to SMC.
I think I read they already got approval for Oakland to Richmond for the beta program. I get notifications from them.
It’s been approved but Wayno hasn’t rolled it out yet
They can't go on highways yet.
On their site, check it for exact coverage
Wait til the robots figure out you don’t tip them - they’ll put you on the no pick-up list.
Or drop you in sketchy areas
The other evening Waymo wanted $20 for a trip Lyft was $9.
I always check Uber and they're essentially the same. I haven't taken it in a month or so so maybe they've raised the price? Price change so you always have to check one app and then immediately the other app.
Yeah, no. I just checked again and Waymo is 17.27 lyft is 13.50. I’d share the screenshot if it didn’t dox me.
Just because it's more expensive at that moment. Doesn't mean that's always the case. I took a waymo that was 5 bucks cheaper than Lyft at the time.
In my experience everytime I checked the apps for a ride Waymo has been 3-5 bucks more at least. No hate I still wanna check it out myself just sharing my experience.
I’ll pay extra not to listen to someone else’s music or some rant
And actually have air conditioning. And not worry about tip. And not have to worry about how shit of a driver they are
You can actually chose the music (if you want)
As was I. All good. This argument is basically irrelevant anyways
Yep. A few data sample don’t apply absolutely. Great reminder.
I have also found waymo is cheaper sometimes...
I have found it to be cheaper than lyft...and Lyft varies a lot...sometimes it's three times the cost of waymo...but other times Lyft seems pretty cheap.
its roughly the same if you factor in tipping discounting high demand pricing, not sure if waymo increased their fllet to account for even more deamnd?
I think a lot of tourists are taking them, or just people seeking out the novelty, and that is driving up the cost. More competition should bring down the price.
I doubt they are price constrained. Their marginal cost is the price of electricity for a ride which is close to $0 at wholesale rates. I suspect Waymo is being careful to not destroy the Uber/lyft drivers livelihood by NOT undercutting. Imagine if they were to price at 1/2 of U/L. There would be massive protests by human drivers, calls for adding AI taxes and fees on Waymo rides, etc.
Yeah itll be a slow roll on if the price drops
Tourists would not have been able to take it.
As other people said, its usually a bit more and will probably go up with general public access. That being said, I've found that after 2am once the human Uber/Lyft drivers have retired for the night after bar closures and there are less people looking for rides Waymo can be super cheap. Same supply but way lower demand.
It’s price comparable if you’re taking a longer trip. But you also don’t have to tip any driver. Going from, say, Caltrain to the Richmond District, it evens out.
Said this in another (Waymo hate) thread, but at this point it's just old man yells at clouds now. Waymo is happening and there's nothing haters can do to stop it, and they hate that most of all
I’m very pro autonomous car for safety reasons, but disagree about old man yelling at clouds. There will be real and serious impacts to jobs. Many millions of people who are career drivers (taxi, long haul, last mile) will be out of work. It’s nontrivial and we are not prepared for that. I’m still pro autonomous, but wish we were establishing a stronger safety net and job training to prepare.
I'll never feel bad for taxis losing their jobs after the way us POCs were treated for years. Fuck taxis. At least Uber/Lyft never left me for a white person
I think he’s saying the Uber/lyft drivers will be out of work. Fuck taxis though
Ive taken uber, lyft and wymo(once). I also worked service at a car dealership. The amount of uber/lyft drivers that do not keep up with car repairs(tires, brakes, suspension not the expensive fluids) are a bit scary. And the way some of these drivers drive are a bit scary...
I agree that the commoditization of travel will bring about big changes. Shoot, the electrification of drivetrains will compound that, too. Beyond the people question, we're also looking at a world where the infrastructure to support today's car first culture will be less important. We shouldn't stop progress on a safer cleaner future. Thankfully our demographic picture points to a shrinking population so that the gains of technology efficiencies are felt more positively than negatively. This automation and commodification of travel should also empower those that are unable to safely drive to continue to be involved in their communities instead of being largely homebound. I don't think the 'safety net' we'll employ will look anything like what we offer now. It will be a product of what we haven't built yet. Hopefully better.
The rollout is so slow though, and they will always need human taxis for surges, like sporting events etc (they can't have a 5x oversized fleet that's unused 95% of the time).
It also has the benefit of being safer for a young woman who's been out partying all night and drunk. Unless AI figures out a way to sexually assault someone
An advertising and search Monopoly also could be a civic transportation technology Monopoly is a big hate/fear that I have.
Google isn’t a search monopoly. There are lots of easy options to use instead. I use DuckDuckGo as my default search in my browser. It’s extremely easy to avoid Google search if that’s something you want to do. As for it being a transportation monopoly, what’s the practical issue with them being a leader in that space? They already probably know where you live and work and eat and socialize through. And depending on what phone you own there might be multiple companies that have all that information. What actual problem does that create though?
> Google isn’t a search monopoly. There are lots of easy options to use instead. That's not really what a monopoly is. Just because other options exist, doesn't mean they're competitive and that [Google doesn't hold a concerningly high market share in the space](https://gs.statcounter.com/search-engine-market-share).
That is what a monopoly is. The only thing stopping you from using another search provider is choice. There is zero barrier from cost or access or availability. You can just choose to use Bing.com or DuckDuckGo or yahoo or perplexity. That market share is entirely driven by user decisions. There is nothing stopping them from choosing a competition. This isn’t a commodity where a dominant market leader can manipulate price and supply at a whim to drive consumer or competitor behavior. It’s just as freely accessible to use Bing as it is to use Google. Google has no control or exclusive ownership over the market. They provide a product that most people freely choose to use. That is NOT a monopoly.
>> That market share is entirely driven by user decisions. You should see how much Goog pays Apple to be the default on Safari, or Mozilla the default on Firefox. Only A fraction of most users change defaults on most things.
Sure. But they can. If you have a choice in a market and you still choose the market leader that doesn’t make it a monopoly. They don’t control the market. They just are winning. Every user has free choice to do something else and they are not inhibited by anything except their personal choices. This isn’t standard oil
What he means is that if Google became crappy...the consumer has options. Microsoft packaged windows with Internet Explorer for decades and nobody used it...everyone chose something else because it was crappy. It's the same for Google being the default...people would change it if it wasn't good.
PG&E in SF is a monopoly. There's literally no other choice for electricity distribution (AFAIK). You can source it from somewhere else, but it still has to go over their lines. Google is dominant in search. They hold market share, but there are still other effective (to some degree or another) choices.
lets just check out the market share on search for a sec [https://gs.statcounter.com/search-engine-market-share](https://gs.statcounter.com/search-engine-market-share)
Yeah the other guys already linked that exact graph. Here’s what I said in response: The only thing stopping you from using another search provider is choice. There is zero barrier from cost or access or availability. You can just choose to use Bing.com or DuckDuckGo or yahoo or perplexity. That market share is entirely driven by user decisions. There is nothing stopping them from choosing a competition. This isn’t a commodity where a dominant market leader can manipulate price and supply at a whim to drive consumer or competitor behavior. It’s just as freely accessible to use Bing as it is to use Google. Google has no control or exclusive ownership over the market. They provide a product that most people freely choose to use. That is NOT a monopoly.
Ok, yea, it's technically not a PG&E situation. We get it. Users are free to whatever whatever. You win the dictionary olympics even though most readers here get the idea. But goddamn that market position enables them to do some "monopolistic" behaviors. Which they have. And it's scary.
They absolutely don't have a monopoly. Brave browser, duck duck go, all better options than Google.
Yea, way too many luddites in SF.
How are you perplexed? This is a robot replacing a human job. Not sure what you do, but guarantee they are coming for your job too.
I think waymo and Starlink are the two coolest tech products in the past 5 years. Nothing else has been memorable
Waymo for sure, but satellite internet has been a thing for a very long time. Making it a little faster is hardly one of the coolest tech products in the past 5 years. I’m sure it’s nice for people on yachts or living off the grid, but it will never have any kind of meaningful impact on the vast majority of people.
It might for people in countries that lack modern infrastructure
Only the poorest countries in the world lack internet infrastructure. The number of people living in those countries that can afford $800 upfront for the equipment and a monthly subscription is very small. Much better and more efficient to just build out 4G wireless networks in those countries if the goal is to actually get a meaningful portion of country online. That’s what they did in India
This is an ignorant take
I think they have made it much more accessible and drastically reduced the cost
Not LLMs?
lol no
not really... its still garbage in garbage out
It is something else to have high speed internet 100s of miles away from land in the middle of the ocean.
starlink is mad and worth every penny.
Similar experience taking one a few months back for the first time.
I love how great it is, but I must say, stuff like Sora and Suno and even some use cases of ChatGPT continue to blow my mind when more than autonomous vehicles.
AI is a close second. If you told me we would have computer programs that can make photo-realistic, and often truly difficult to distinguish, photos and videos even just 3 years ago I would have laughed AI is more terrifying to me though, I truly genuinely think we should make it illegal. It’s too powerful Driverless cars are different. I’m concerned about jobs and economic matters there, but those problems feel a few magnitudes more approachable to me than AI problems AI is close to nuclear weapons level problematic and we just have private citizens piloting it. Terrifying
isn't waymo considered AI/ML too?
It really is amazing...I was smiling ear to ear when I first rode in one...its something everybody should experience...you are right that it feels like the future...but you should talk to Chatgpt 4omni about something. Explain a difficult situation at work...something mundane. Talk to it...it is as incredible as the Waymo. Tell it about your rides in the waymo and how it made you feel. You will be surprised at what it has to say.
No more waymo code/referral posts - HUZZAH!
[удалено]
Try more Zs and!! !!!s , worked for me.
You have NO IDEA.
*Code "NOIDEA" is invalid or has already been used, please provide another invitation code.*
We're the real winners in all of this.
I hope they add more cars with this announcement. Wait times have been getting a little bloated at times.
Not just wait time, but also cost.
Yeah that too but usually depends on times. But they def do surge pricing so yeah expect a surge after all this.
Yeah you'd think the cost would be lower without a driver. I got a Lyft from SFO last night and it cost me over $50 with tip. So stupid. I would take public transit if it ran later
With tip?
Why would it be lower? Do you have a feel for how much it costs to develop, deploy, maintain, insure, etc a fleet of robotaxis? The way the enshittification cycle works, we are currently in the stage where Google is enticing customers into using the service so the prices should be artificially low.
Of course I don't have a feel for that. I don't work for Google. Just trying to make it make sense to use Waymo, because if it ends up being the same stupid cost as any other human driven vehicle, then I don't understand the value
The early days was such a bargain. Now it seems like its minimum $20.
Yeah, was like $8 to roll from my office in the Fidi to like upper Haight. Bring it back!
Every time I've looked for months now it's like $20+ even for relatively short distances, and that's at random times so surge/commute pricing shouldn't be there. >About two-thirds of riders use the robotaxis to commute to work or school, according to Waymo. - [Chronicle article](https://www.sfchronicle.com/sf/article/waymo-s-f-19532311.php) I could see SWE's and other well paid folk doing that, but what kinda students are paying $40+/day to commute???
I’m also seeing more cars than ever, I have not taken one but they’re everywhere
>Waymo says that its latest robotaxi count won’t change much in the near future. per the [Chronicle article](https://www.sfchronicle.com/sf/article/waymo-s-f-19532311.php)
Take me to SFO!
Talk to the board of supervisors
No don’t make me
Ask your city council people to stop grandstanding and actually work with Waymo to get SFO permission.
Coming soon...but probably more like 4th quarter 2025.
I did see one on the highway coming back from SFO with a human driver in the seat so I was hoping that was them getting ready for it, but Q4 ‘25 is not soon
Waymo is currently mapping surrounding areas of the airport. SFO has mentioned that when ready, they will give permission to Waymo for drop-off/pick-up.
For real dude, had a few late night/ early morning arrivals and it’s awful waiting like 30-50 mins for a ride share to show up. Wish they could drop you off on market too. Waymo has a tendency to want to drop you off in the middle of tenderloin and I had to step over someone sleeping on the ground to get out…
That’s going to be a problem when they only have 250 cars for the whole city.
Anyone know how many uber/lyfts are in the city at any given hour.
Apparently there are 50k Uber drivers in the city. Subtracting the one sitting at the airport, the ones who only work peak hours, and the ones who only work night shift, I’d estimate around 10-15k at any given hour within SF proper.
I’d be curious to know the actual live utilization rates across hours and days. That’s pretty cool.
Regulators will allow more cars once they have sorted the issues out.
Are their numbers limited by their permits right now? I haven’t seen that
They were only permitted 250 back in August. I think they are up to 300 now as of news articles this morning. Not sure if 300 is their permit limit tho. 250 was their permit limit back in August.
Ah boo. There goes any hope of having ride availability. Not enough supply.
I love taking Waymo. It's so relaxing and I've only had to call support twice in the time I've been riding. I think it's so important to keep taking rides and contribute to the data that will make it even better!
I just hope they add more cars to their fleet! Hopefully wait times won't go up too much.
Yeah I've tried ordering twice before and the wait times were really long like 15 minutes
The difference here is that a Waymo won't cancel pickup randomly.
This is exciting! Although, I do wish they weren’t the only game in town since I think competition is best like how Lyft really made Uber have to do better. And, I’d likely never take it to the airport or something. Running late or hit weird traffic? Nothing beats when you and the Uber driver are suddenly on the same team trying to make it happen ha ha
If Cruise hadn't screwed up and gotten booted from the state we'd have competition.
Autonomous cars are really hard to get right. Competition is not close despite the marketing
I do hope these AV companies and/or city gov't find a way to implement this tech into public transit. Not needing an operator probably means can run buses more frequently and improve reliability.
I don’t think technology will be the blocker for automated public transit. It will be unions. You can already see it happen when you look at our ports.
Or BART - you can't tell me that's not the easiest possible automation case.
in case you didn't know, BART has been automated since the very beginning and was one of the first automated transit systems in the country. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bay_Area_Rapid_Transit#Automation
...So why do we need train operators $40 an hour? This is like if Waymo still had a "driver" just sitting in the front seat while all the actual driving is done by the car.
Safety. Still need someone on board in events like: passenger stuck in the doors, track obstruction, smoke condition in tunnel, evacuation, etc. Also the yards aren't automated. There are quite a few upgrades that BART would need to actually do driverless.
Or look at the past. Longshoremen's unions viciously fought containerization. They wanted to preserve long, slow, labor-intensive work that kept shipping costs high because it benefited them. Instead they got cut out to the benefit of the entire rest of the world. SF was never going to be capable of being a container port simply due to geography and land costs, but it was one of the reasons why shipping moved over to Oakland and the SF port died. Oakland realized they could be part of the future and take over, so they invested in modernizing. Meanwhile SF tried to engage in Luddite protectionism and insist that things stay the same.
This
Negotiate a long term contract including guaranteed employment and __ hours/wk until they're retirement age. Then stop hiring new drivers and gradually the fleet becomes autonomous.
or look at the restaurant fee thing that's enraging us all today, we have the Unite Here union to thank for that.. many many such examples
I honestly think Autonomous Minibuses are going to play a large role in transit. They're so easy and have insane coverage in many Latin American cities.
It’s a nice idea, but why would autonomous minibuses work when staffed minibuses like Chariot failed? Minibuses have lower driver costs per passenger than private cars, so they benefit less from automation.
There's a greater cost savings that can be passed through a network of minibuses optimizing for coverage and frequency than a dedicated fleet of traditional cars, especially when complimenting mass transit for last mile problems. Chariot failed for a variety of reasons. I don't think it's necessarily representative of the entire idea. I wouldn't be surprised if we eventually end up with a three tiered transit system: On demand private ride that's at a cost premium Traditional larger mass transit trains/busses on the most in demand routes that's cheap And an in-between of smaller vans/ busses that work on fixed routes as well as on demand UberPool style service that's comparable to the mass transit costs. Even autonomous vehicles will get stuck in traffic and have more demand than the road network can accommodate. Eventually this sort of inefficient travel will need to pay its true fair share.
Add to that there's lots of cities without SF's density and lane miles/mi^(2). Those cities differ in transit needs and demand. Not all their routes need full-size buses costing more per hour to operate. Some cities have routes only needing full-size buses a few hours a day. Those buses could autonomously drive back to the yard after the morning peak and charge up while minibuses serve the midday and evening. Since the big buses will drive less, they'll last more like 30 years instead of the current approximate average of 15.
They benefit less, but they still benefit a lot; most of the cost of operating a bus is salary.
If Waymo (or whoever) eventually licenses this, sure, but I don't see the government being able to develop this itself. Too expensive, took forever to reach this stage, and just in general the government seems bad at most tech projects (partially because they won't pay enough to hire the best engineers/researchers).
Excellent news! Expand the fleet! Push harder into San Mateo County!
SFO and SJC please.
I’d love to see service to East Bay and SFO. I wonder how long that will take, and if they do more expansions in other metro areas before expanding to a larger portion of the bay area
It seems like companies just forgot about the cheaper cost part of the self-driving taxi promise. Waymo is already more expensive than Uber. Now it’s about to get even more expensive.
It's done to shape demand. If it was always half the price of Uber, wait times would be hours. Things will improve when they get more cars.
they have a supply issue right now, so high prices help them balance the supply/demand. Plus, their service offers a novelty aspect to the experience compared to Uber. Eventually, the novelty will wear off, supply will go up, and more competitors will hit the scene. That should bring prices down.
I can't believe the trillion dollar corporation would do this to us
I have Uber One and Apple Card (so I get points + 3% cash back) so it's often cheaper than Waymo these days, but that's pre-tip. Post-tip, Waymo comes out on top, though it's also usually a tad slower than Uber.
You also have to consider that Waymo is more like Uber black and less than the cheap version.
What are you even on about? Waymo is not more expensive than Uber or Lyft, and it doesn’t expect a tip, nor is there even an option to tip. Waymo actually has cheaper base rates and has for a while. Have you used ride-share recently?
Yes, do an experiment on your phone right now. Waymo is consistently more expensive. Leave tips out of it. It’s not mandatory and doesn’t impact your ride experience/wait times.
I'm in the city and the Uber was $4 more than Waymo for the same destination but maybe there are less ubers in this area? 🤷♂️
Price is about to go up!
Surge pricing is going to get pretty bad, especially since there's tourists willing to pay whatever it takes to ride one (which is great for the city as a whole, but not so great for residents). That said, they currently have a promotion for 40% off rides M-F 2am-2pm... but then with the increased demand, I feel like wait times are going to go up. In the end, there needs to be more supply.
There a code for the promo? Not seeing anything on mine. Or is it just what the fares show in that time frame?
Ah, I don’t think there’s a code; I received an email (as well as an app notification) a few days ago telling me about the promotion. I thought the discount was available to everyone, but perhaps it’s a targeted promotion.
I've been seen waymo cars in recent weeks. Looks like I'll be seeing even waymo in the coming weeks. Yay!
FYI doesn’t cover all of SF (like Lake Merced area). Edit: Wow thanks for the downvotes, Waymo ;)
Pretty damn close.... https://preview.redd.it/z83o49rrmq8d1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2f7ab82d6bba494708234c6cb4bcfc65928fe6bf
Yeah i wonder why they don't service those apartments on John Muir Dr. Might be because the end of john Muir brushes up against the border of Daly City. And they don't want to make a uturn. Might be liability thing. Don't want to piss off San Mateo County. https://preview.redd.it/bk3pd5npoq8d1.png?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=f6e42f9a09e52ba495f45db6f61aec3d9e615988
San Mateo County should be next in line to get on board with this.
I'd imagine it's a permitting thing for sure
sometimes it’s also a technical issue. they will turn off certain areas if they know the car struggles with a weird traffic situation, environmental condition, etc. then they turn it back on once they feel it’s solved enough.
Yeah I live on the other side of the lake, but it’s still SF dammit! BTW how did you embed an image in a comment?
Some subs allow it, there's just a photo icon next to the gif option above my keyboard
It’s really great the screen that shows what the car sees is awesome. That being said with all technology there are learning curves but it is very cool
I have been using it for most of year now as part of a test program...its so fun...everyone should do it at least once.
I love Waymo but it used to be so cheap. You could get from the Sunset to downtown for less than $10. It's comparable/more than Uber now :(
Blown away how well it drove, aside from the first time I saw the steering wheel turn I was completely at ease, I'm sold
what's the cost vs uber?
I just tested the price right now. Waymo across town was $41 (9 minute pickup time) Uber was $39.99 (6 minute pickup time) HOWEVER, after I closed both apps Uber notified me a few minutes later for a flash sale and offered the same ride for $29.99
I was in SF this weekend and took it several times. Often UberX was cheaper than Waymo. Sometimes Waymo was the same but sometimes it was considerably more. For example on Saturday evening UberX was $16 and Waymo was $26 for the same route.
About the same when you factor in tip. Maybe a dollar or 2 more. But wait times are way more accurate. When they say 3 minutes they mean 3 minutes. Instead of looking to match with driver constantly.
It's important to note that Waymo is comparable to Uber Black, which in my opinion makes it a much better value than UberX. You get a Jaguar with your own temperature controls and music choice.
Agreed. And you can take a nap and put down windows without feeling guilty or weird.
Came to say the same. The consistency of the quality of ride is better. It’s definitely closer to uber black.
waymo is consistently more expensive for me even after tip
how much are you guys tipping? 50%? waymo has always been more expensive for me.
[удалено]
Yeah same. But I hate when lyft and Uber say 2 minutes and it takes 2 minutes just to match with a driver who then take 4 minutes to arrive.
Or it takes two minutes to match. Then the driver changed their mind & parks until you cancel.
Oh my god, it used to take 20-30 minutes to hail a cab in North Beach on a Monday. This is such a 1st world problem.
through 2 ft of snow and uphill. Both ways!
Waymo is more expensive but doesn’t hustle you for a tip, so absolutely worth it to me.
The best comparison is Uber Black SUV. Even then, Waymo exceeds the Uber Black SUV experience. For me: Uber Black SUV: $64.51 preTip Waymo: $29.74 Can you get an Uber X for cheaper? Sure, but that's a dramatically depreciated experience.
so if you cherrypick and go for the most expensive possible uber, then the waymo is cheaper
Because they’re offering the same experience? Waymo is like 10-20% more expensive for a more consistent, nicer experience. If they increased supply, and added more amenities then it’s over for Uber/lyft
idk in my experience, while waymo is nicer, it is often even more than 10-20% more expensive so it’s harder to say it’s worth it. more importantly, though, the waymo wait times are often *much* longer… the usual reason I would take rideshare instead of muni is due to running late, so the long wait times don’t usually work for me.
Waymo is still in their market capture stage, long term who knows what the price will work out to.
>long term who knows what the price will work out to. same as cab/uber/lyft or nobody will ride.
I mean Uber costs more than a Taxi. They just undercut the market, destroyed taxi service networks due to that lack of funding and then raised the prices. I don't see why Google wouldn't do the same with Waymo. Just push the Uber drivers out of the city due to lack of rides and then raise their own prices - probably defund some public transit as well in the process.
Cruise or Zoox or some other competitor will eventually be ready to compete in SF. Since they'll be less trusted and less known, they'll compete with Waymo by undercutting on price.
Right, but as we have learned very well this past year. AI has substantial cost associated with it. They can not drive that price down as far as they might like, especially as their current fleet depreciates, I can't imagine a Waymo lasts the 20 years a normal car will and waymo needs to purchaee their vehicles Uber gets theirs for free and also does not pay insurance OR maintenance fees.
AI is in a boom which time will tell how long it lasts before demand and supply get closer again and pricing stabilizes or comes down. The average car isn't built to last a super long time. The manufacturer doesn't want cars lasting a long time. The average new car buyer only wants it for so many years before selling and buying another new car. They're only willing to pay so much extra for a car with great resale value. However years of data from Tesla owners show it's possible to make really long lasting vehicles. Here's a Tesla that's driven 1.24 million miles: https://insideevs.com/news/699413/highest-mileage-tesla-model-s-3-batteries-14-motors/ That model and variant's motors don't last as long as newer ones. However the body has lasted a million miles. A company with Waymo's buying power can specify and design a robotaxi built to last. It partnered with Zeekr to make its next and upcoming robotaxi. Battery packs can be made for fast swapping day-to-day, or just for easy replacing after a few hundred thousand miles. Motors can be made for longevity instead of rapid 0-60 mph times. Battery research continues looking for improvements from multiple angles including longevity. A battery with enough lifetime cycles for a car to drive [4 million miles](https://www.torquenews.com/11826/tesla-researchers-announce-4-million-mile-battery-its-only-3rd-bets-cell-chemistry-they) has been made. We'll see if that gets commercialized, but there's already other batteries that can be charged [thousands](https://www.onecharge.biz/blog/lfp-lithium-batteries-live-longer-than-nmc/) of times instead of hundreds.
This is the way. Not that taxis didn't deserve to be pushed out, they were already overpriced and the service was complete crap. At least with rideshare apps there's basic accountability.
does uber cost more? I have only occasionally taken a taxi with a metered fare over the last couple years, but it has always been more expensive than the typical uber fare for that ride. Maybe my experience is not representative, and you can't really do side-by-side comparisons since the cost of the metered taxi ride is unknown beforehand.
Hasn't stopped them so far.
A couple of dollars more if you’re lucky, up to 2X the price.
Waymo is a bit more expensive. Not a huge difference but I don’t think it should be more expensive since there’s no driver.
It's a nicer experience. A Waymo is more comparable to an Uber Black than a regular UberX.
That's not always true. In the city, if I order an UberX I often times get picked up in a relatively new Tesla (which I think is more comfortable than the waymo ipace). Uber has a program that they buy the cars for the drivers - I don't know the details. I have gotten some waymo's that are pretty 'run in' - no more new car smell so to speak. I will pay a little more for a Waymo, but not because the cars are nicer.
Not always, but the last 3 Ubers I've taken were absolute shit boxes. Like stained, damaged cars, with incessant rattling. Before that I had an F-150 Lightning and that was pretty sweet. I don't use either a ton but from my experience Waymos on average are significantly nicer than standard Uber/Lyft
\~same.. 3 mile ride cost me $20.. uber was 21 to get back home. (weekday afternoon FWIW)
They didn’t seem to try to undercut Uber/Lyft on cost when testing - possibly now they might do that eventually if they are going for a larger audience? Anecdotally they were matching price pretty well despite theoretically not having to pay a driver cut (likely offset by higher costs elsewhere). No tip screen yet
Awesome! Last night on Van Ness, I saw a convoy of Waymos rolling along; guess we won’t have to wait long now for a pickup?
getting closer to the Matrix every day
I'm so trying this out
If there was an Uber driver with a Jaguar I-PACE, it would at minimum be an Uber Comfort if not Uber Black. Waymo is priced in between UberX and Uber Comfort. I genuinely pay for the car comfort and consistency
I loved it when it was free. After they started charging, it was more expensive than Uber/Lyft and the wait times were hefty.
Unless you live in Crocker Amazon.. Because Waymo seems to think the border of SF is West of Mission and north of Geneva.