The implication of your post is that you think it should be possible to find out everything that happens on public roads, included things like where you drove your car, what accidents you've had, and whether you've broken any traffic laws. That would be quite an extreme point of view. Roads are public in the sense that they're paid for by the public, and open to the public, but that surely shouldn't extend to the public being allowed to track everything that happens on them. There should be some limit on gathering information about public spaces.
That statement slaps of some existential philosophy that will probably need to be addressed at some point...
For this context though I agree, we as a society should have the right to inspect any algorithm that makes safety or life altering decisions (looking at you "AI" judges) about your person or in public spaces you might reasonably occupy.
I do think data used by an algorithm, or even potentially data that was used to train an algorithm should have a reasonable expectation of privacy. The trained weights do become part of the algorithm in my humble opinion, and that does potentially lead to leakage about the source data, but that doesn't justify not allowing inspection of the algorithm.
It would. And it would also require an extreme leap of logic to go from "companies developing car technology with direct effect on road safety should be as public as possible" to "do you want to expose where you drove your car"
How do you arrive at that conclusion? That it implies all your "personal" driving info would be made public? Seems to me its more like car companies would not be able to "hide behind trade secrets to avoid scrutiny".
Extreme silly example to make my point:
DMV: "What does your car do to avoid running people over"
Waymo: "Its a trade secret, sorry".
* New law gets passed
DMV: "Ok now tell us"
Waymo: "Ok well...it honks the horn automatically and gives the person 5 seconds to get out the way. We believe that should be sufficient for the majority of cases and if you're too stupid to move, well...natural selection ftw."
DMV: "..............really? that's crazy...it should really be more like...10 seconds."
DMV: "What does your car do to avoid running people over? This is a confidential process so that you can be as specific as possible in the name of public safety."
Waymo: "[REDACTED]"
Anonymous third party: FOIA request
Waymo: "WTF?"
DMV: "You can sue us to stop us from responding to this FOIA request. Please do."
The govt lying about be willing to keep this secret? Or google sharing trade secret info with the DMV and then having someone try to out it? I'm trying to track the "evil" here.
The irony on HN is that virtually every OTHER self driving car mfg / provider is taking far FAR more risks than google if you follow the space.
Why? Why keep it a secret? the part of me that likes meta gaming knows that when someone is trying to make a deception check, they have given you context enough to know they are lying...Its a bad look for a public company engaged in a high stakes deployment of new technology to want to HIDE THE RESULTS OF THE TEST.
They claim they're worried about trade secrets. It's just as likely there are some emberrasing details related to the crashes or elsewhere that Waymo is concerned will make them look bad. They are fighting to keep it secret, so by their choice all we can do is speculate.
Companies stretching the definition of "trade secrets" to hide uncomfortable information is hardly unprecedented.
It is easy to deceive with numbers. 100k miles per safety incident is not meaningful if you have mostly been driving around the same empty neighborhood streets at 2am.
One of Waymo's trade secrets is their approach to routing. I can see why they wouldn't want to divulge details about how they handle specific decisions to take or avoid certain routes based upon their safety for the system.
> According to the lawsuit, the DMV contacted Waymo and invited the company to sue the agency.
This is related to an unknown individual seeking the details of the permit application, not full censorship of what waymo does on the road or the accidents which do happen.
Surprise surprise, the headline is meant to get you all worked up
Always find it strange how much HN hates Google. It's not as society-rending as FB, not as monopolistic as Amazon, or opposed to open-source standards as Apple.
Yet it's always the anti-Google threads that do well.
Don't forget about the silent majority and that the angry yell louder, particularly online.
Happy Google fanboy here, much like a Apple user who has everything with one company. No one is perfect, but Google has done more good then most other companies on their way to success.
I'd say Google has the best ballance of monopolistic, society rending and anti open. Also, it's globally inescapable - [in Europe] I don't care about Amazon, I don't use FB services, but I can't avoid using multiple Google services and I hate all of them. If this applies to make other HNers, it's understandable why anti Google posts do well
The actual surveys that come out often show some of these big companies are trusted MORE than govt. Ie, folks (even the yellers) might not actually trust govt with their email accounts, but would put a lot of personal email through google.
But yeah, talk about a headline designed to wind folks up.
I can't speak for others, but my personal distaste for Google (the company) is mainly around privacy issues. Other companies on this list have this issue as well (FB, Amazon), but Google is so dependent on advertising revenue that it's incentives trend towards privacy erosion.
To my understanding Facebook purely exists off advertisements, there is no cloud, no Business Suite nothing. And Facebook, not Google, was the company used for political microtargetting.
I trust google orders of magnitude more than Facebook.
And for Amazon I simply stopped reading the "reviews".
We’re on the same page, though I’d argue Google holds a larger share and influence in the internet advertising industry, even if that’s not their only product.
I frankly don’t trust FB, Google, or Amazon with my personal data. This becomes more frustrating when it’s difficult to avoid interacting with any of these companies given how widely used they are.
> You either die a hero, or you live long enough to see yourself become the villain
Google has lived that long, and many here were around before their inception, know what they were about (and marketed themselves as) and have seen what they've become. It's more visceral with Google as they used to really embody the "hacker spirit." It's lived long enough to morph into a corporate spirit and forsaken many of the attitudes that surrounded it during its early growth. That attitude will likely wane with time as those born with Google know no other Google.
It has kind of warped the web into it's making. It's impossible to remove its products. it's parental controls are horrible. it's into everything. It kills products that lots of people like and doesn't give it another thought. It tracks you everywhere. It's got a basic advertising monopoly which drives up prices on everything through it's auction mechanism.
Is it the worst probably not, but it certainly leaves a lot to be desired.
That is why they are hated. They are hated because they are ambiguous + successful. Ambiguity makes people uncomfortable, and its not a socially acceptable reason to hate something, so they invent reasons.
I reserve my right to not like all of them, and comment as I see fit. You seem to be implying that FB or Amazon gets a free pass here. That's just amazingly wrong.
TLDR: DMV asked for proprietary details during permit process to which Waymo complied noting they were trade secret. A third party used California's FOIA to see Waymo's application in full, so the DMV asked Waymo to provide redacted copies. The third party has challenged redactions, so DMV told Waymo the only way to prevent them from releasing it is to sue to the agency.
I saw robo-taxis tooling around Mountain View CA in 2019 so I interviewed at the company to get a safety driver job. I used to see them stopped waiting for a train to pass and became curious about how they worked. They were adding second safety drivers to keep the first safety drivers awake. They were also watching the safety drivers by remote video to make sure their eyes were on the road. I was told the Lidar doesn't work in rain or snow.
I didn't get the job despite having a perfect driving record. I probably wouldn't have taken it anyway, because I got the impression they didn't want safety drivers asking too many questions or really giving much input. I was satisfied however because my question about depending on a autonomous system to stop properly for an oncoming train was answered - that's not something I would trust yet. I ended up getting a retirement job at Uber and Lyft which was much more interesting and fun.
Yeah, the commercial ventures are all trying to do autonomous driving on a budget. The military systems work a whole lot better but that's because they pack way more sensors and way more compute power and can essentially power through issues like rain, snow, sandstorms, etc.
I didn't know this. Why the commercial cars are allowed in civilian traffic when they aren't the best systems? Is it too much to ask Waymo to have the latest and greatest when I put my kids in the robot car to take them to school? Because I learned as an Uber/Lyft driver that is something people do. I had to refuse it was against the rules to take unaccompanied minors.
The commercial systems are designed for the environments where they are supposed to work and no more. The parent said that the military vehicles can handle sand or snow. Neither of those are present in SF and the bay area in general. Waymo and the other companies are only going to deploy to climates that they have solved and in the background try to solve more operating environments.
he waymo vehicles seem to have a radar and that does operate in the rain. Also, the waymo vehicles have safety drivers, so my statement currently holds as they technically haven't released the vehicle in that environment in a full self driving mode. They will either need to figure out how to operate safely in rain or simply not deploy the fleet on those days if they cannot.
Something part time to do to get out of the house and interact with people. I also like to take road trips to random places in America. Uber and Lyft were perfect for that to earn a little mad money doing something with flexible hours. What was really cool about Uber and Lyft is that I could drive to another city to work. I delivered food in South Lake Tahoe, drove women between wineries in the Napa Valley and did some airport runs in San Luis Obispo, but mostly I stayed in the Bay Area. I got to know some roads and areas I had never been in. I also met some really interesting people. I met VC's and people going to do their pitches in Silicon Valley. One guy practiced his pitch on me while I drove him to the meet.
I'd still be doing it if it weren't for the pandemic. I never tried driving out of California because different states and cities have different rules. For example, Portland Oregon, if I remember, requires a fire extinguisher in the car. I'll probably do it again. I want to try driving in Las Vegas since I used to live there.
Hah, sounds like you get _(and want)_ more exposure to people than i do. Good on you for being proactive though. I imagine when (if? :( ) i retire i'll become a hermit. I'm already quite close to a hermit, with remote working for the last ~7 years.
If i didn't hate to drive i'd be tempted to follow in your footsteps. I'll definitely think of exposure-retirement-jobs in the future though. Thanks for the insight :)
I really like solitude but I also have a need for adventure and stories. Meeting random people and talking to them can provide both, like the Mainland Chinese trans woman who I gave a very long ride to San Francisco while she told me all about how hard it was to be trans in China, especially with the family rejection. Lots of stories I would not hear otherwise.
You could drive a bus in Las Vegas if you want to be around people in an environment you control and not have to talk to them. It's my pinned post on Twitter, which I'll copy here so you don't have to go to Twitter.
After the dot com crash in 2000, I did solitary travels around N. America by car. When my software money ran out, I got a job driving The Deuce on the Las Vegas Strip, which I did for a year before eventually returning to software. The Alan Watts quote is accurate.
Zen Philosopher Alan Watts
Imagine if you were a bus driver, a bus driver is ordinarily considered an absolutely harassed person. He’s got to watch out for the laws, the competing traffic, the cops, people coming on board giving him fares and he has to give them change, and if he has it in his head that this is work, it will be hell.
But let’s suppose he has a different thing in his head, suppose he has the idea that moving this enormous conveyance through complicated traffic, it’s a very subtle game, and he has the same feeling about it that you might have if you were playing the guitar or dancing. So he goes through that traffic, avoiding this and avoiding that, and he makes a music of the whole thing. He’s not going to be tired out at the end of the day, he’s going to be full of energy when he gets through his job. So the point is, therefor, that you can do everything you have to do in this spirit, don’t make a distinction between work and play. Regard everything that you’re doing as play and don’t imagine for one minute that you have to be serious enough.
I'm open to the possibility that actual trade secrets were divulged when the DMV asked for further information from them and maybe the DMV should be able to review that info, but not divulge.
Granted I'd also be happy to have a judge make the call.
61 comments
[ 3.8 ms ] story [ 136 ms ] threadFor this context though I agree, we as a society should have the right to inspect any algorithm that makes safety or life altering decisions (looking at you "AI" judges) about your person or in public spaces you might reasonably occupy.
I do think data used by an algorithm, or even potentially data that was used to train an algorithm should have a reasonable expectation of privacy. The trained weights do become part of the algorithm in my humble opinion, and that does potentially lead to leakage about the source data, but that doesn't justify not allowing inspection of the algorithm.
It would. And it would also require an extreme leap of logic to go from "companies developing car technology with direct effect on road safety should be as public as possible" to "do you want to expose where you drove your car"
One example that would seem more important is Pfizer et al and the vaccine trial data, but more generally applications to the FDA
Absolutely. Also the "we in EU have a secret deal with Pfizer to buy vaccines, this is not public info"
Extreme silly example to make my point:
DMV: "What does your car do to avoid running people over"
Waymo: "Its a trade secret, sorry".
* New law gets passed
DMV: "Ok now tell us"
Waymo: "Ok well...it honks the horn automatically and gives the person 5 seconds to get out the way. We believe that should be sufficient for the majority of cases and if you're too stupid to move, well...natural selection ftw."
DMV: "..............really? that's crazy...it should really be more like...10 seconds."
DMV: "What does your car do to avoid running people over? This is a confidential process so that you can be as specific as possible in the name of public safety."
Waymo: "[REDACTED]"
Anonymous third party: FOIA request
Waymo: "WTF?"
DMV: "You can sue us to stop us from responding to this FOIA request. Please do."
Waymo: "OK"
Don't understand why I'm getting downvoted. This is some pretty evil shit. Safety and secrecy don't mix.
The irony on HN is that virtually every OTHER self driving car mfg / provider is taking far FAR more risks than google if you follow the space.
Companies stretching the definition of "trade secrets" to hide uncomfortable information is hardly unprecedented.
Safety and secrecy don't mix well.
I still think they should be public, though.
This is related to an unknown individual seeking the details of the permit application, not full censorship of what waymo does on the road or the accidents which do happen.
Surprise surprise, the headline is meant to get you all worked up
Happy Google fanboy here, much like a Apple user who has everything with one company. No one is perfect, but Google has done more good then most other companies on their way to success.
Some topics do come up more often than others, but that depends on the article.
The actual surveys that come out often show some of these big companies are trusted MORE than govt. Ie, folks (even the yellers) might not actually trust govt with their email accounts, but would put a lot of personal email through google.
But yeah, talk about a headline designed to wind folks up.
I trust google orders of magnitude more than Facebook.
And for Amazon I simply stopped reading the "reviews".
I frankly don’t trust FB, Google, or Amazon with my personal data. This becomes more frustrating when it’s difficult to avoid interacting with any of these companies given how widely used they are.
Google has lived that long, and many here were around before their inception, know what they were about (and marketed themselves as) and have seen what they've become. It's more visceral with Google as they used to really embody the "hacker spirit." It's lived long enough to morph into a corporate spirit and forsaken many of the attitudes that surrounded it during its early growth. That attitude will likely wane with time as those born with Google know no other Google.
Is it the worst probably not, but it certainly leaves a lot to be desired.
Google tries its hands at everything from, well, autonomous vehicles to web browsers.
That gives them both more opportunities to piss off diverse groups of people and more opportunities to be in the news.
It just happens to be that Google search is much better, and having tried the alternatives, I've stayed with Google.
They want it secret for competitors, not for the governement.
TLDR: DMV asked for proprietary details during permit process to which Waymo complied noting they were trade secret. A third party used California's FOIA to see Waymo's application in full, so the DMV asked Waymo to provide redacted copies. The third party has challenged redactions, so DMV told Waymo the only way to prevent them from releasing it is to sue to the agency.
I didn't get the job despite having a perfect driving record. I probably wouldn't have taken it anyway, because I got the impression they didn't want safety drivers asking too many questions or really giving much input. I was satisfied however because my question about depending on a autonomous system to stop properly for an oncoming train was answered - that's not something I would trust yet. I ended up getting a retirement job at Uber and Lyft which was much more interesting and fun.
does "job" in this context mean programming or driving?
I'd still be doing it if it weren't for the pandemic. I never tried driving out of California because different states and cities have different rules. For example, Portland Oregon, if I remember, requires a fire extinguisher in the car. I'll probably do it again. I want to try driving in Las Vegas since I used to live there.
If i didn't hate to drive i'd be tempted to follow in your footsteps. I'll definitely think of exposure-retirement-jobs in the future though. Thanks for the insight :)
You could drive a bus in Las Vegas if you want to be around people in an environment you control and not have to talk to them. It's my pinned post on Twitter, which I'll copy here so you don't have to go to Twitter.
After the dot com crash in 2000, I did solitary travels around N. America by car. When my software money ran out, I got a job driving The Deuce on the Las Vegas Strip, which I did for a year before eventually returning to software. The Alan Watts quote is accurate.
Zen Philosopher Alan Watts
Imagine if you were a bus driver, a bus driver is ordinarily considered an absolutely harassed person. He’s got to watch out for the laws, the competing traffic, the cops, people coming on board giving him fares and he has to give them change, and if he has it in his head that this is work, it will be hell.
But let’s suppose he has a different thing in his head, suppose he has the idea that moving this enormous conveyance through complicated traffic, it’s a very subtle game, and he has the same feeling about it that you might have if you were playing the guitar or dancing. So he goes through that traffic, avoiding this and avoiding that, and he makes a music of the whole thing. He’s not going to be tired out at the end of the day, he’s going to be full of energy when he gets through his job. So the point is, therefor, that you can do everything you have to do in this spirit, don’t make a distinction between work and play. Regard everything that you’re doing as play and don’t imagine for one minute that you have to be serious enough.
Granted I'd also be happy to have a judge make the call.
DMV asked for non-required proprietary info. Google said, sure, but emphasized this would include trade secret info. Govt agreed.
Of course, somehow the fact that you can't trust what govt tells you is google's fault. Hey, how about just keeping things simple.
This leads to that joke about the scariest things someone can here: "I'm the government and I'm here to help".
https://www.latimes.com./business/story/2022-01-28/waymo-rob...