A crowd destroyed a driverless Waymo car in San Francisco::A Waymo car was destroyed in San Francisco as a crowd began vandalizing it and ultimately set the car on fire. Nobody was in the vehicle at the time.

  • Taniwha420@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    222
    ·
    9 months ago

    The article states that there was no known motive, but it also states that automated cars in SF have been attacking people and emergency vehicles, in addition to blocking traffic for human drivers.

    It’s pretty clear that this is the beginning of the anti-robot revolution.

    • phoneymouse@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      96
      ·
      9 months ago

      Watched one of these block traffic once by putting on its blinker to turn down a street with a police barricade up. The street had been closed and the police weren’t going to lift the barricade. Nonetheless, the car put its blinker on and sat there blocking traffic indefinitely.

      • masterspace@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        9 months ago

        I saw a human driver get into a traffic accident because he was mad that the guy ahead of him gave someone space to turn out of a parking lot, they ended up arguing and their cars just sat there further blocking traffic for half an hour until the cops came.

        Why are you acting like robot drivers are the only fallible ones?

          • masterspace@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            Oh please do go ahead and tell me how my 93 year old grandmother is going to bicycle home.

              • masterspace@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                9 months ago

                So in your world, planes, trains, and buses pick you up and drop you off at your doorstop? How cute.

                • barsoap@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  17
                  ·
                  9 months ago

                  Nah. Unless you live literally at the station, which happens but is rare, doorsteps are the domain of collect taxis.

                  Which btw are the most economical option in rural areas as you don’t have to drive empty buses around all the time. In cities they should be limited to people actually needing them, also open bicycle paths for microcars for people with mobility issues, not everyone wants or needs a powered wheelchair.

      • Cloudless ☼@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        That sounds like a very difficult scenario for AI to resolve. This requires nearly AGI to understand the situation.

    • masterspace@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      42
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      Oh, well THANK GOD, no human driver has ever been known to block traffic or hold up emergency vehicles!

      What saints you all are for protecting the right of people to work thankless taxi jobs, and have the number one cause of preventable death be traffic fatalities. Nothing could be more noble than preserving the status quo!

        • masterspace@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          9 months ago

          Lol, no they don’t.

          Do you know how many cab drivers execute illegal u-turns, park illegally, cut off cyclists, speed etc.? They literally never get caught or ticketed for anything unless they actually kill someone with their car.

          • Peppycito@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            16
            ·
            9 months ago

            unless they actually kill someone with their car.

            So, which waze executive is going to prison after their car dragged a pedestrian down the street?

              • Malfeasant@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                edit-2
                9 months ago

                That percentage is non zero. The percentage of Waze executives going to prison for it is zero.

                • masterspace@lemmy.ca
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  9 months ago

                  Since their inception, Waymo vehicles have driven 5.3 million driverless miles in Phoenix, 1.8 million driverless miles in San Francisco, and a few thousand driverless miles in Los Angeles through the end of October 2023. And during all those miles, there were three crashes serious enough to cause injuries:

                  • In July, a Waymo in Tempe, Arizona, braked to avoid hitting a downed branch, leading to a three-car pileup. A Waymo passenger was not wearing a seatbelt (they were sitting on the buckled seatbelt instead) and sustained injuries that Waymo described as minor.
                  • In August, a Waymo at an intersection “began to proceed forward” but then “slowed to a stop” and was hit from behind by an SUV. The SUV left the scene without exchanging information, and a Waymo passenger reported minor injuries.
                  • In October, a Waymo vehicle in Chandler, Arizona, was traveling in the left lane when it detected another vehicle approaching from behind at high speed. The Waymo tried to accelerate to avoid a collision but got hit from behind. Again, there was an injury, but Waymo described it as minor.

                  The percentage of drivers who would be in prison with that record is precisely 0.

      • TheFriar@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        9 months ago

        Hey, I’m all for upending the status quo. But that “thankless job” is one people rely on. My dad included. This isn’t some noble act by a company to end meaningless, menial work. It’s a ploy by a company to cut those pesky “workers” out of the money. There’s no backup plan for the people who rely on driving for money—more people than ever, by the way. This is literally a profit boosting “evolution” in the continued unlivability crisis. This isn’t Star Trek. It’s seasons 3-4 of Mr. Robot.

        • masterspace@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          9 months ago

          This isn’t some noble act by a company to end meaningless, menial work. It’s a ploy by a company to cut those pesky “workers” out of the money.

          I mean, yeah. That’s why basically any corporation does anything, it’s a core function of how capitalism is supposed to work and continue to enrich society. Should we have not invented computers because it shuttered 4/5 of the paper mills in my dad’s home town?

          There’s no backup plan for the people who rely on driving for money—more people than ever, by the way.

          Yeah, but that’s a problem with government safety nets and supports, not with a company engineering a new technology.

          This is literally a profit boosting “evolution” in the continued unlivability crisis. This isn’t Star Trek. It’s seasons 3-4 of Mr. Robot.

          I would argue that it’s almost exactly Star Trek.

          • TheFriar@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            edit-2
            9 months ago

            I’d argue the opposite. Capitalism doesn’t enrich society. It enriches capitalism. Any “benefit” to society is purely for selfish reasons. Its motives being corrupt, its actions are not noble.

            [there being no safety nets] is a government problem, not a company’s

            Capitalism ruined this too. Lobbyists, special interest “donations” (read: bribes), are all done by companies just like this one. They’ll lobby for harmful laws, under the guise of “but driverless cars are for the people’s safety!” All the while, evading taxes and lobbying against closing those tax loopholes or raising taxes to help the workers who now have no job.

            These things don’t exist in a vacuum. Especially in today’s late stage of capitalism, there is no moral behavior from these companies, because they are wading into a world where their very existence offers them and seemingly implores them to do harm for their bottom line. There is no “church and state” separation between capital and governance. They are a rat king, further entangled by every new company making their way into this utterly corrupt marketplace of crookery and exploitation. We can’t ignore what’s happened over and over and over and over again because this time the benefit will surely outweigh the harm done to achieve profitability!

            • masterspace@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              9 months ago

              So you think that because the American government is corrupted by capital, destroying a Waymo car will lead to better regulation?

              Or an overthrow of capitalism to be replaced with which system of governance that isn’t also entangled with capital?

      • Taniwha420@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        I want as few cars as possible, mixed zoning, and walkable cities.I don’t believe in a technocentris utopia. I want more quality relationships, and technology in our lives to be more restrained. I am in no way an advocate for the status quo (which by all accounts is AI and robot cars). Robot cars are a step in the wrong direction.

        • masterspace@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          I want as few cars as possible, mixed zoning, and walkable cities

          agreed.

          Robot cars are a step in the wrong direction.

          You’ve made no argument as to why, or why the alternative of human drivers killing millions is better?

      • Taniwha420@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        Oh. Are you telling me the anti-robot revolution hasn’t actually begun? Well, that’s disappointing. Thanks for taking the time to straighten me out.

        Wait … That’s exactly what a ROBOT would say!

    • Furbag@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      9 months ago

      The motive was that the car drove down a crowded Chinatown street during Chinese New Year. I imagine something similar might happen if a human driver tried to do the same thing. Not saying the vandals were right to wreck the car, but you don’t just creep a car down a busy street during a festival and expect nothing bad to happen to it when crowd mentality/anonymity takes over. Especially when there’s no driver so no immediate consequences/accountability. I think it was quite fortunate that it was not transporting a passenger at the time.

      • Taniwha420@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        9 months ago

        Not unless that human driver was blindly following their navigation app like a total idiot. A person would have said, “oh shit, I want to get out of here.”

        Anyway, I believe under it all we’ve got a tension between generally two different worldviews: those who believe Star Trek is utopia, and those who would rather life was more Hobbittish.

        Personally, The Shire sounds like a nice place to live. Can we choose that please? You can still have computers, let’s just chill on the whole racing to meet our cyberpunk future.

  • circuscritic@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    166
    ·
    9 months ago

    It may be spontaneous.

    It may be destructive.

    But goddammit, it’s collective action and I’m thrilled to fucking see it.

    • masterspace@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      ·
      9 months ago

      This is dumb as fuck. Human drivers are literally the number one cause of preventable fatalities.

      • M0oP0o@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        32
        ·
        9 months ago

        Humans are literally responsible for all preventable things in society. This take is also “dumb as fuck”

        • masterspace@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          9 months ago

          Humans are literally responsible for all preventable things in society.

          Did I says “humans” or did I say “human drivers”? We’re not talking about liquidating all humans, we’re talking about replacing them at the task of driving.

          Totally no other spots in society where machines have replaced formerly human done tasks to make work safer, what a crazy idea that is right! /s

          • M0oP0o@mander.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            9 months ago

            Yes and saying “human drivers” are often at fault when talking about smashing up motor vehicles is just as silly.

            As you can also say; Hey, did you know that 100% of deaths related with driverless cars involved software?

                • masterspace@lemmy.ca
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  9 months ago

                  While I agree that data should be public, them not wanting every crash to be reported on publicly probably has something to do with the fact that mobs are burning their cars down at the present moment, even though they’re statistically safer than normal drivers.

      • barsoap@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        9 months ago

        Individual transportation is the number one cause of preventable road fatalities, human or machine doesn’t matter.

        • masterspace@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          Individual transportation is the number one cause of preventable road fatalities,

          Even in an ideally car-free society, you will literally never be able to get rid of taxis, deliveries, moving large furniture / household items, etc. without some form of enclosed motorized transportation (a car for the purposes of this discussion).

          human or machine doesn’t matter

          If we make machines that are safer than humans than yeah, it will.

          • barsoap@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            9 months ago

            Even in an ideally car-free society, you will literally never be able to get rid of taxis, deliveries, moving large furniture / household items, etc. without some form of enclosed motorized transportation (a car for the purposes of this discussion).

            That’s not individual transportation. None of it. And do imagine how your city would look like if those were the only vehicles on the roads. Go to the next intersection, count cars, see how many of them would be gone, how much road surface could be converted into a tram lane, comfortable bike lanes, greenery, also, a hot dog stand.

            If we make machines that are safer than humans than yeah, it will.

            Malaria might be less severe than the bubonic plague still doesn’t mean I want to catch it.

            • masterspace@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              9 months ago

              Well the don’t shift goal posts to “individual transportation” when we’re talking about people thrashing a self driving car.

              They didn’t trash a normal individual transporter.

              • barsoap@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                9 months ago

                You can do automated taxis, deliveries and moving services, not so much.

                • masterspace@lemmy.ca
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  9 months ago

                  You can still automate the driving part of moving and delivery services, which is the dangerous part.

      • CommanderCloon@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        9 months ago

        The fact that a thing most people do and some for hours daily has a large effect shouldn’t be surprising

        • masterspace@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          The fact that a thing most people do and some for hours daily has a large effect shouldn’t be surprising

          Oh wow, what good reasoning!

          Let’s all take up smoking cigarettes indoors all day, it’s incredibly dangerous and is killing mass numbers of people on a literal daily basis, but that’s fine because everyone’s doing it, so the effect shouldn’t be surprising, so that makes it ok and not worth addressing!

          /s

          • CommanderCloon@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            9 months ago

            That’s not the argument I’m making. What I’m saying is that if you only take the raw numbers for a given event into account, and don’t consider the population of the event, then you can make any event affecting a large population look like an urgent affair when it’s not so urgent

            Human driven cars should be replaced with automation (or even better, automated public transportation) as soon as it’s viable. It’s not yet, so we should not rush corporations to put their unsafe vehicles on the street. Because then the only thing you’ll rush is transforming human driver fatalities into robotic driver fatalities, and you never know how worse things can get

            Edit: Wording

            • masterspace@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              9 months ago

              and don’t consider the population of the event, then you can make any event affecting a large population look like an urgent affair when it’s not so urgent

              How is this different from my cigarettes analogy? You’re just arguing it’s not a big deal that hundreds of people are dying on a daily basis, because a lot of people drive.

              rushing for corporations to put their unsafe vehicles on the street should not be rushed

              Fully agreed.

              Human driven cars should be replaced with automation (or even better, automated public transportation) as soon as it’s viable. It’s not yet

              Except that it is. Waymo already has a safer per mile rating than human drivers.

      • circuscritic@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        9 months ago

        Great, so anything that humans do that can potentially harm another human, should be given to the algorithms instead?

        Sure, they’re private for-profit blackbox algorithms, but it’s obviously better then letting humans do things.

        Don’t worry, I’m sure once the tech oligarchs have secured just another 25% control over our daily lives, they’ll start the giving back and bettering humanity parts of their business plans.

        • masterspace@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          Great, so anything that humans do that can potentially harm another human, should be given to the algorithms instead?

          Uh yeah, once it’s proven safer why wouldn’t you?

          Because you’re scared of the word algorithm?

          Don’t worry, I’m sure once the tech oligarchs have secured just another 25% control over our daily lives, they’ll start the giving back and bettering humanity parts of their business plans.

          You seem to have an issue with wealth distribution, not autonomous vehicles.

          • M0oP0o@mander.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            9 months ago

            You seem to have an issue with wealth distribution, not autonomous vehicles.

            How much could an autonomous car cost Michael, $10?

            • masterspace@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              9 months ago

              We’re talking about a taxi service, not an individual’s car. Waymo is not example of wealth inequality, unless the brush you use is as broad as "requires technology to run = tech bro devilry’.

              • M0oP0o@mander.xyz
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                9 months ago

                Happen to know the cost of one Waymo taxi vs one taxi plus a person making a living from driving that taxi? I do know that Waymo charges more and almost all info is hidden.

                • masterspace@lemmy.ca
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  9 months ago

                  In 2021 it cost Waymo ~$180k for a brand new Jaguar i-pace with all their sensors and computers outfitted. Given that 2021 i-paces started at $70k, we’re looking at ~$100k for the sensors and computers necessary.

      • Melllvar@startrek.website
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        9 months ago

        I wouldn’t hang my hat on that statistic until after autonomous cars make up a significant portion of cars on the road.

        • masterspace@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          Fair point, but the difference is that human drivers are already at roughly their limit for how good they can drive, but self driving cars have the potential to exceed us.

          It’s similar to one of the biggest arguments in electric vs gas cars. Even if electric cars today are just as environmentally unfriendly as gas cars (they’re not) the difference is that gas technology is super mature and there’s very little improvements to be made by spending more money on it, electric battery technology on the other hand, is still in it’s relative infancy and has huge potential to improve in numerous ways, but that can only happen if more people buy electric so more R&D money can be spent on it.

      • circuscritic@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        43
        ·
        9 months ago

        If you’re going to reply wishing for my death at the hands of a mob, don’t be such a pussy and delete it after a few downvotes.

        • deafboy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          9 months ago

          Yeah, sorry. It was a bit too much. You’re comment still pisses me off, but I’ve crossed the line.

            • deafboy@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              9 months ago

              Not especially. Maybe it’s the war happening next door, but I’ve became increasingly sensitive to people condoning a physical violence for a greater good. (And yes, I realize the irony). Having the ability to just walk the street without getting hurt is an incredible privilege that people often disregard.

              • circuscritic@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                7
                ·
                edit-2
                9 months ago

                It’s a robot car, made by tech oligarchs who are currently eating the world alive.

                Fuck them.

                • deafboy@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  ·
                  9 months ago

                  I don’t give a shit who owns the car. The car is inconsequential. Might as well be a trashcan, or a coffee shop. Lighting shit on fire on the street sets a dangerous precedent. The subsequent rioters won’t stop and check who’s property they’re about to vandalize. It might as well belong to you, or your family. That was my entire point.

  • extant@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    9 months ago

    If Californians can destroy a car blocking traffic New Jersey wants this privilege too.

  • iconherder@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    9 months ago

    Who considers vandalism and defacement a “time-honored” part of the human experience?

    Definitely a part, but time-honored???

  • DudeDudenson@lemmings.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    9 months ago

    This is exactly the kind of stuff I think about when people talk about autonomous cars being the future or the idea of your Tesla doing rideshare while you’re not using it.

      • Tja@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        9 months ago

        The people riding are not anonymous so you know who did it, and the rideshare company will have insurance for those cases.

        I’d be much more worried about drunk people barfing all over the interior, BTW.

        • KevonLooney@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          9 months ago

          The real issue that no one mentions is that it will be dark at night and cameras will not work very well. You will be able to identify every person who gets in, but not who spilled something all over the seat / floor. So you can’t charge anyone for cleaning.

          The next passengers will grind it into the fabric. When you get the car back it will be stained, and no insurance covers stains. If you think Uber will cover that with no proof of which customer did it, you are dreaming. This is one of the many things an Uber driver does (telling people “no smoking, drinking, eating, sitting on laps, etc.”) that a self driving car won’t do.

          A self driving taxi will be like the back of the bus, where no one is watching. You don’t want to know what’s going on there.

            • KevonLooney@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              9 months ago

              You don’t understand. There’s no camera on the floor of the car. There are so many times that someone can drop something without even realizing it. You won’t know which paying customer did it.

              Someone can have a pen in their back pocket and be scribbling all over the seat without even knowing it. How will any camera catch small dark ink marks on a dark seat in the dark? Your eyes are so much better than that and even they won’t catch everything.

        • MashedTech@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          Sure but damage is damage and you probably need your car to do something so who wants to deal with that instead of doing whatever is important and they’re supposed to. In the US a car isn’t optional and parking isn’t free and readily available everywhere for long periods of time.

  • frank@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    9 months ago

    When the AI revolts, this will be an example of provocation in its manifesto.

  • GladiusB@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    9 months ago

    Waymo’s base is in China Basin. It’s worth noting that the area of the city is rampant with homeless people. I’m talking so many damn RVs that there are shanty villages that catch fire. Problems galore. The police will go out to clean it up and they just move to another are a few blocks away. I can totally see this happening where it is because the area sucks and no one would ever know until it was done and over with.

      • Dra@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        26
        ·
        9 months ago

        This question is such a depressing example of Bay-Area inhumanity. God Bless America

      • tocopherol@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        9 months ago

        Often the RVs in places like OP is referring to are dilapidated and don’t run, with tarps on them, not connected to water or power. Essentially a small shanty house in a slum so I guess it depends on your definition

      • GladiusB@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        9 months ago

        The RVs are usually not drivable. The last time they moved them in front of my old job, none of them ran. They had to tow away more than they drove away. I guess you can argue that doesn’t make them totally homeless, but they are definitely creative.

      • laurelraven
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        9 months ago

        Last I checked, RVs are not permanent or semi permanent structures, nor do they have addresses, so… Yes. It’s living in your car, just a bigger car with amenities

        • RGB3x3@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          9 months ago

          Which should absolutely NOT be made illegal. Give these people places to actually park their RVs that have facilities to use, instead of pushing more people to end up on the streets.

          Someone should be allowed the freedom to live in an RV if they so choose or can’t afford anything else.

          Just help give them a decent place to do it.

      • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        9 months ago

        Homeless doesn’t necessarily mean sleeping under a bridge. You can be crashing at a friend’s place and still be homeless if you don’t have a home of your own to go back to. An illegally parked RV with no mailing address doesn’t count as a home for most purposes.

        • EdibleFriend@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          But how many of those people would consider themselves homeless? RV shit is a total fucking lifestyle for a lot of people.

          • Misconduct@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            ·
            edit-2
            9 months ago

            It’s not a lifestyle if it’s not by choice. Try finding a job without an address. The people that do it as a “lifestyle” are usually just wealthy turds or social media dweebs larping as happy families on the road despite their kids being obviously miserable

            • EdibleFriend@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              9 months ago

              Well… Yeah. That’s why I asked how many of them consider themselves homeless? Obviously some are forced to but then there’s some people who just really fucking like RVs?

              • Misconduct@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                9 months ago

                I would guess that most of them consider themselves homeless. Especially if they’re living in those makeshift tent cities. Either way, they are homeless if they don’t have an address.

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    9 months ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    A person jumped on the hood of a Waymo driverless taxi and smashed its windshield in San Francisco’s Chinatown last night around 9PM PT, generating applause before a crowd formed around the car and covered it in spray paint, breaking its windows, and ultimately set it on fire.

    The fire department arrived minutes later, according to a report in The Autopian, but by then flames had already fully engulfed the car.

    A video posted by the FriscoLive415 YouTube channel shows the burnt-out husk of the electric Waymo Jaguar.

    Another set of videos posted by software developer Michael Vendi gives a view into the scene as it played out and the fire grew.

    The fire takes place against the backdrop of simmering tension between San Francisco residents and automated vehicle operators.

    The California DMV suspended Waymo rival Cruise’s robotaxi operations after one of its cars struck and dragged a pedestrian last year, and prior to that, automated taxis had caused chaos in the city, blocking traffic or crashing into a fire truck.


    The original article contains 396 words, the summary contains 171 words. Saved 57%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

  • Blackmist@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    9 months ago

    I wonder how long it will be before people realise they can shoot down delivery drones. Prize every time. Everyone’s a winner.