Talk:Waymo/Archives/2016

Not comparable to cruise control!

The statement that "an override ...allows a human driver to take control of the car ... similar to cruise control systems already found in many cars today" is wrong. Cruise control only maintain speed, and in some cases distance. It is in no way a self-drive system, nor is overriding cruise control in any way comparable to intervening when a self-drive car needs correction.Royalcourtier (talk) 04:28, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

Are drivers required?

Billed as "self-driving" cars, these autonomous cars always have a human being at the controls when on public roads. I sometimes see newspaper articles calling such cars are driverless; one article even implied that the car itself was given a ticket because it was driving itself (i.e., with no human in the driver's seat). That sells newspapers - or generates web page hits.

I'd like to see a more precise terminology. Perhaps we could use America's NHTSA classification scheme), unless some would object on internationalization grounds. --Uncle Ed (talk) 15:41, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Waymo

Waymo is now a division of Alphabet, solely centred around the subject of this article. Should this page be moved and modified to become an article about Waymo, or should a new page be started? Opinions? --Natural R_X 19:14, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

I believe, moving forward, that it makes the most sense to describe it as "Waymo, formerly the Google Self-Driving Car Project" or something of the like. However, I'm confused about whether the project and company share the same name. Is this the Waymo Self-Driving Car by Waymo, Inc. ? Does Waymo, Inc. get their own Wikipedia page to talk about the operations of the company aside from the project? Do we have any precedent for articles about projects that evolve into companies? --Metropantograph (talk) 19:24, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

It appears that the company page goes on about the project history, implying it is one and the same. --Natural R_X 19:58, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

From what I've read it is not described as a division but rather as a separate company that is currently owned by alphabet. Daniel.Cardenas (talk) 20:31, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Legislation in the intro

The paragraph is very poor. It doesn't take into accounts States that do no forbid driverless cars, like Arizona and Texas, as shown by Google currently operating in those regions. I suggestion moving that contact from intro to a legislation section. What do you think?   Daniel.Cardenas (talk) 00:13, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Technology equipment out of date

The technology section is out of date. The newer cars can be seen with black domes on top, under which is, according to this source, at least two lasers and several cameras: http://www.recode.net/2016/10/3/13154350/google-self-driving-car-fb-live-dmitry-dolgov The lasers do not appear to be the Velodyne 64 unit that was originally used. If nobody takes this when I get some time, I'll try to fill in the article with as much as has been publicly released about the technology their cars are equipped with, but if someone wants to take it before me, please do so. The current information in the article is at least two years old. -Metropantograph (talk) 01:37, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Much of the article is out of date. Everything should have a date, or deleted, and or moved to a history section. Daniel.Cardenas (talk) 18:01, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Level 5 of SAE automated vehicle classification

businessinsider.de reports in Here's the biggest thing Google got wrong about self-driving cars that "Waymo is still committed to Level 5 autonomy". Therefore I think there should be mentioning of Autonomous_car#Classification in the article. I wouldn't know in which section to add because this is not my field of expertise. --Manorainjan (talk) 18:21, 25 December 2016 (UTC)