Waymo Self-Driving Cars use lasers to constantly guide safe driving

Waymo, Google’s self-driving car company, is building the world’s most experienced driver, with over 10 million miles self-driven on public roads and almost 7 billion in simulation. Discover what we’ve seen and learned along the way from literal curveballs in our path, to navigating low-visibility dust storms, and more unexpected scenarios.

The car has lasers and radar to look for people, cars and road obstacles all the time.

115 thoughts on “Waymo Self-Driving Cars use lasers to constantly guide safe driving”

  1. My point, really. This technology needs to be proven across all the automobile usage cases and contexts across the globe, for really be considered a viable substitute for car drivers worldwide. In those cases, the car AI could supplement a human driver acting as caretaker of the automated car, not replace it.

    Reply
  2. My point really.This technology needs to be proven across all the automobile usage cases and contexts across the globe for really be considered a viable substitute for car drivers worldwide.In those cases the car AI could supplement a human driver acting as caretaker of the automated car not replace it.

    Reply
  3. But you don’t need to be able to substitute for car drivers world wide. There are lots of, probably most, vehicles that are intended for a particular type of market and that’s where they are sold. You don’t say that Ferraris aren’t a viable car just because you can’t drive one across Africa.

    Reply
  4. But you don’t need to be able to substitute for car drivers world wide. There are lots of probably most vehicles that are intended for a particular type of market and that’s where they are sold.You don’t say that Ferraris aren’t a viable car just because you can’t drive one across Africa.

    Reply
  5. I would expect the first application for self driving would be regular freight trips for companies like UPS, from hub parking lot, to hub, or center parking lot, and back. Now, drivers meet, swap trucks, and drive home on long trips, or swap trailers for short ones. The trucks need no refueling at truck stops, backup trucks are available, and there are mechanics available every operating day. Considering what a teamster earns, with benefits, the savings would be astronomical. Of course, you’d have to beat the union into submission.

    Reply
  6. I would expect the first application for self driving would be regular freight trips for companies like UPS from hub parking lot to hub or center parking lot and back. Now drivers meet swap trucks and drive home on long trips or swap trailers for short ones. The trucks need no refueling at truck stops backup trucks are available and there are mechanics available every operating day. Considering what a teamster earns with benefits the savings would be astronomical. Of course you’d have to beat the union into submission.

    Reply
  7. Agree. The fact many places can’t get their act together shouldn’t (and won’t) stop the progress elsewhere. My point is more against SDC triumphalism, talking about a golden future when nobody will drive ever again and people could live in modular mobile homes over the road, etc. common among futurist sites nowadays.

    Reply
  8. Agree. The fact many places can’t get their act together shouldn’t (and won’t) stop the progress elsewhere.My point is more against SDC triumphalism talking about a golden future when nobody will drive ever again and people could live in modular mobile homes over the road etc. common among futurist sites nowadays.

    Reply
  9. Is a rocket motor or space ship tech? Or is it old school refined. Refined will continue to be the motor of economies. Tech is currently over valued because it is the flavor of the day. But tech is nothing more than a road to an end. It is nothing in and of itself. A robot that is self controlled, self motivated and self powering is both the future and the end.

    Reply
  10. Is a rocket motor or space ship tech? Or is it old school refined. Refined will continue to be the motor of economies. Tech is currently over valued because it is the flavor of the day. But tech is nothing more than a road to an end. It is nothing in and of itself. A robot that is self controlled self motivated and self powering is both the future and the end.

    Reply
  11. But that’s just saying that only companies that make radical changes in the world will have a big impact on the future. It’s still not clear that this is anything other than restating the question.

    Reply
  12. The kind of “Tech” I’m referring to is Disruption. So what I’m really saying is companies with the ability to disrupt an established market is the future. That’s a Tech Company.

    Reply
  13. So, the definition of a “Tech Company” that I’m using is actually in regards to the model that Silicon Valley produces. There’s 2 main requirements for a company to be “Tech”: 1. The innovation it produces must be data driven. 2. The company must demonstrate the ability to disrupt a market using that data driven innovation. The 2nd requirement is probably more poignant as it is the true test of a tech company and I say they’re the future because disruption is the only way we can remake the market without artificial manipulation.

    Reply
  14. Didn’t we kill off SDC triumphalism the first time that an “impossible, it will never, ever happen” fatal SDC car crash occurred?

    Reply
  15. That’s true by definition. If an industry isn’t innovating, then it isn’t changing, growing and developing to lead the future. If it IS innovating, then by definition it is new technology. All you’ve said is that only industries that change and develop will be different than they are now.

    Reply
  16. But that’s just saying that only companies that make radical changes in the world will have a big impact on the future. It’s still not clear that this is anything other than restating the question.

    Reply
  17. The kind of Tech”” I’m referring to is Disruption. So what I’m really saying is companies with the ability to disrupt an established market is the future. That’s a Tech Company.”””

    Reply
  18. So the definition of a Tech Company”” that I’m using is actually in regards to the model that Silicon Valley produces. There’s 2 main requirements for a company to be “”””Tech””””:1. The innovation it produces must be data driven.2. The company must demonstrate the ability to disrupt a market using that data driven innovation.The 2nd requirement is probably more poignant as it is the true test of a tech company and I say they’re the future because disruption is the only way we can remake the market without artificial manipulation.”””

    Reply
  19. Didn’t we kill off SDC triumphalism the first time that an impossible it will never” ever happen”” fatal SDC car crash occurred?”””

    Reply
  20. That’s true by definition. If an industry isn’t innovating then it isn’t changing growing and developing to lead the future.If it IS innovating then by definition it is new technology.All you’ve said is that only industries that change and develop will be different than they are now.

    Reply
  21. At the end of the day, when you talk about oil fracking, you’re still really talking about the Energy market. So, not just oil, but all of energy. Solar, etc.

    Reply
  22. Well… actually, I take that back. Its innovation must be data driven. Fracking is certainly innovation, but I’m talking about the kind of innovation that shifts the entire paradigm of the market. Like solar to replace oil and coal, not just progressive innovation within an established industry.

    Reply
  23. At the end of the day when you talk about oil fracking you’re still really talking about the Energy market. So not just oil but all of energy. Solar etc.

    Reply
  24. Well… actually I take that back. Its innovation must be data driven. Fracking is certainly innovation but I’m talking about the kind of innovation that shifts the entire paradigm of the market. Like solar to replace oil and coal not just progressive innovation within an established industry.

    Reply
  25. Well, humans need neither radar nor lasers, but can drive well (well a fraction of humans anyway.) So there is a lot of room left for improvement.

    Reply
  26. Well humans need neither radar nor lasers but can drive well (well a fraction of humans anyway.)So there is a lot of room left for improvement.

    Reply
  27. Well, humans need neither radar nor lasers, but can drive well (well a fraction of humans anyway.) So there is a lot of room left for improvement.

    Reply
  28. Well humans need neither radar nor lasers but can drive well (well a fraction of humans anyway.)So there is a lot of room left for improvement.

    Reply
  29. At the end of the day, when you talk about oil fracking, you’re still really talking about the Energy market. So, not just oil, but all of energy. Solar, etc.

    Reply
  30. At the end of the day when you talk about oil fracking you’re still really talking about the Energy market. So not just oil but all of energy. Solar etc.

    Reply
  31. Well… actually, I take that back. Its innovation must be data driven. Fracking is certainly innovation, but I’m talking about the kind of innovation that shifts the entire paradigm of the market. Like solar to replace oil and coal, not just progressive innovation within an established industry.

    Reply
  32. Well… actually I take that back. Its innovation must be data driven. Fracking is certainly innovation but I’m talking about the kind of innovation that shifts the entire paradigm of the market. Like solar to replace oil and coal not just progressive innovation within an established industry.

    Reply
  33. But that’s just saying that only companies that make radical changes in the world will have a big impact on the future. It’s still not clear that this is anything other than restating the question.

    Reply
  34. But that’s just saying that only companies that make radical changes in the world will have a big impact on the future. It’s still not clear that this is anything other than restating the question.

    Reply
  35. The kind of “Tech” I’m referring to is Disruption. So what I’m really saying is companies with the ability to disrupt an established market is the future. That’s a Tech Company.

    Reply
  36. The kind of Tech”” I’m referring to is Disruption. So what I’m really saying is companies with the ability to disrupt an established market is the future. That’s a Tech Company.”””

    Reply
  37. So, the definition of a “Tech Company” that I’m using is actually in regards to the model that Silicon Valley produces. There’s 2 main requirements for a company to be “Tech”: 1. The innovation it produces must be data driven. 2. The company must demonstrate the ability to disrupt a market using that data driven innovation. The 2nd requirement is probably more poignant as it is the true test of a tech company and I say they’re the future because disruption is the only way we can remake the market without artificial manipulation.

    Reply
  38. So the definition of a Tech Company”” that I’m using is actually in regards to the model that Silicon Valley produces. There’s 2 main requirements for a company to be “”””Tech””””:1. The innovation it produces must be data driven.2. The company must demonstrate the ability to disrupt a market using that data driven innovation.The 2nd requirement is probably more poignant as it is the true test of a tech company and I say they’re the future because disruption is the only way we can remake the market without artificial manipulation.”””

    Reply
  39. Didn’t we kill off SDC triumphalism the first time that an “impossible, it will never, ever happen” fatal SDC car crash occurred?

    Reply
  40. Didn’t we kill off SDC triumphalism the first time that an impossible it will never” ever happen”” fatal SDC car crash occurred?”””

    Reply
  41. That’s true by definition. If an industry isn’t innovating, then it isn’t changing, growing and developing to lead the future. If it IS innovating, then by definition it is new technology. All you’ve said is that only industries that change and develop will be different than they are now.

    Reply
  42. That’s true by definition. If an industry isn’t innovating then it isn’t changing growing and developing to lead the future.If it IS innovating then by definition it is new technology.All you’ve said is that only industries that change and develop will be different than they are now.

    Reply
  43. Is a rocket motor or space ship tech? Or is it old school refined. Refined will continue to be the motor of economies. Tech is currently over valued because it is the flavor of the day. But tech is nothing more than a road to an end. It is nothing in and of itself. A robot that is self controlled, self motivated and self powering is both the future and the end.

    Reply
  44. Is a rocket motor or space ship tech? Or is it old school refined. Refined will continue to be the motor of economies. Tech is currently over valued because it is the flavor of the day. But tech is nothing more than a road to an end. It is nothing in and of itself. A robot that is self controlled self motivated and self powering is both the future and the end.

    Reply
  45. Agree. The fact many places can’t get their act together shouldn’t (and won’t) stop the progress elsewhere. My point is more against SDC triumphalism, talking about a golden future when nobody will drive ever again and people could live in modular mobile homes over the road, etc. common among futurist sites nowadays.

    Reply
  46. Agree. The fact many places can’t get their act together shouldn’t (and won’t) stop the progress elsewhere.My point is more against SDC triumphalism talking about a golden future when nobody will drive ever again and people could live in modular mobile homes over the road etc. common among futurist sites nowadays.

    Reply
  47. Well… actually, I take that back. Its innovation must be data driven. Fracking is certainly innovation, but I’m talking about the kind of innovation that shifts the entire paradigm of the market. Like solar to replace oil and coal, not just progressive innovation within an established industry.

    Reply
  48. But that’s just saying that only companies that make radical changes in the world will have a big impact on the future. It’s still not clear that this is anything other than restating the question.

    Reply
  49. The kind of “Tech” I’m referring to is Disruption. So what I’m really saying is companies with the ability to disrupt an established market is the future. That’s a Tech Company.

    Reply
  50. So, the definition of a “Tech Company” that I’m using is actually in regards to the model that Silicon Valley produces. There’s 2 main requirements for a company to be “Tech”:

    1. The innovation it produces must be data driven.

    2. The company must demonstrate the ability to disrupt a market using that data driven innovation.

    The 2nd requirement is probably more poignant as it is the true test of a tech company and I say they’re the future because disruption is the only way we can remake the market without artificial manipulation.

    Reply
  51. That’s true by definition. If an industry isn’t innovating, then it isn’t changing, growing and developing to lead the future.
    If it IS innovating, then by definition it is new technology.

    All you’ve said is that only industries that change and develop will be different than they are now.

    Reply
  52. Is a rocket motor or space ship tech? Or is it old school refined. Refined will continue to be the motor of economies. Tech is currently over valued because it is the flavor of the day. But tech is nothing more than a road to an end. It is nothing in and of itself. A robot that is self controlled, self motivated and self powering is both the future and the end.

    Reply
  53. I would expect the first application for self driving would be regular freight trips for companies like UPS, from hub parking lot, to hub, or center parking lot, and back. Now, drivers meet, swap trucks, and drive home on long trips, or swap trailers for short ones. The trucks need no refueling at truck stops, backup trucks are available, and there are mechanics available every operating day. Considering what a teamster earns, with benefits, the savings would be astronomical. Of course, you’d have to beat the union into submission.

    Reply
  54. I would expect the first application for self driving would be regular freight trips for companies like UPS from hub parking lot to hub or center parking lot and back. Now drivers meet swap trucks and drive home on long trips or swap trailers for short ones. The trucks need no refueling at truck stops backup trucks are available and there are mechanics available every operating day. Considering what a teamster earns with benefits the savings would be astronomical. Of course you’d have to beat the union into submission.

    Reply
  55. Agree. The fact many places can’t get their act together shouldn’t (and won’t) stop the progress elsewhere.

    My point is more against SDC triumphalism, talking about a golden future when nobody will drive ever again and people could live in modular mobile homes over the road, etc. common among futurist sites nowadays.

    Reply
  56. But you don’t need to be able to substitute for car drivers world wide. There are lots of, probably most, vehicles that are intended for a particular type of market and that’s where they are sold. You don’t say that Ferraris aren’t a viable car just because you can’t drive one across Africa.

    Reply
  57. But you don’t need to be able to substitute for car drivers world wide. There are lots of probably most vehicles that are intended for a particular type of market and that’s where they are sold.You don’t say that Ferraris aren’t a viable car just because you can’t drive one across Africa.

    Reply
  58. My point, really. This technology needs to be proven across all the automobile usage cases and contexts across the globe, for really be considered a viable substitute for car drivers worldwide. In those cases, the car AI could supplement a human driver acting as caretaker of the automated car, not replace it.

    Reply
  59. My point really.This technology needs to be proven across all the automobile usage cases and contexts across the globe for really be considered a viable substitute for car drivers worldwide.In those cases the car AI could supplement a human driver acting as caretaker of the automated car not replace it.

    Reply
  60. I would expect the first application for self driving would be regular freight trips for companies like UPS, from hub parking lot, to hub, or center parking lot, and back. Now, drivers meet, swap trucks, and drive home on long trips, or swap trailers for short ones. The trucks need no refueling at truck stops, backup trucks are available, and there are mechanics available every operating day. Considering what a teamster earns, with benefits, the savings would be astronomical. Of course, you’d have to beat the union into submission.

    Reply
  61. But you don’t need to be able to substitute for car drivers world wide. There are lots of, probably most, vehicles that are intended for a particular type of market and that’s where they are sold.
    You don’t say that Ferraris aren’t a viable car just because you can’t drive one across Africa.

    Reply
  62. My point, really.

    This technology needs to be proven across all the automobile usage cases and contexts across the globe, for really be considered a viable substitute for car drivers worldwide.

    In those cases, the car AI could supplement a human driver acting as caretaker of the automated car, not replace it.

    Reply

Leave a Comment