Waymo robotaxis are now giving rides on freeways in LA, SF and Phoenix
Waymo has begun routing its driverless robotaxis onto freeways in Los Angeles, San Francisco and Phoenix, a milestone that shifts autonomous driving from slower city streets to higher‑speed, higher‑stakes environments. Commenters weigh how much safer these vehicles actually are than human drivers, noting that highways are more structured but leave less room for error, and that public perception will hinge on how the system handles rare edge cases and inevitable accidents. Many riders report Waymo already feels smoother and more predictable than Uber/Lyft, while others raise concerns about enforcement of speed limits, traffic dynamics, surveillance and the long‑term impact on human driving jobs.
Freeways vs. Surface Streets
- Several commenters say freeways are structurally simpler (no cross traffic, fewer pedestrians) but much harder to “fail safe” on, because you can’t just stop in lane without major risk.
- Others emphasize long‑tail edge cases at high speed: debris, animals, pedestrians, flooded sections, odd vehicles, and strange events (e.g. sea lions on the road).
- A recurring theme: freeways are “easier to get working,” but much harder to prove safe at driverless levels and to handle all rare cases at 65–75 mph.
Safety, Edge Cases & Reaction Times
- Concerns: phantom braking or over‑cautious behavior near construction, emergency lights, or odd obstacles creating pileups; sudden slowdowns in faster traffic feeling unsafe.
- Debate over reaction times: some argue AV stacks add latency vs. humans; others counter that AVs have more sensors, 360° awareness, and dedicated collision‑avoidance paths.
- Moral tradeoffs are discussed: is it acceptable to kill a few more people now if it accelerates deployment that ultimately saves many more, versus taking a slower, safer path?
Driving Behavior, Speed Limits & Traffic Flow
- Waymos are reported to obey posted limits and hug right lanes; some fear that being 10–20 mph slower than prevailing traffic is itself risky, others insist driving the limit is fine.
- Several speculate that enough AVs could smooth traffic, reduce “phantom jams,” and dampen stop‑and‑go waves.
- Some worry about how they’ll handle complex multi‑lane urban freeways, left exits, and inconsistent human norms.
Comparisons with Tesla, Cruise, and Human Drivers
- Many claim Waymo is “in another league” vs. Tesla FSD, GM/Ford systems, and Cruise—especially in city driving smoothness and rule observance.
- Others point out Tesla has long done freeway assistance (with a human), while Waymo is only now going fully driverless on highways.
User Experience & Incidents
- Frequent riders praise consistency, lack of small‑talk, and generally calm, predictable driving; some recount impressive hazard avoidance with pedestrians and cyclists.
- Negative anecdotes include over‑cautious maneuvers in congestion, occasional “weird” slowdowns, hitting a delivery robot, and one cat fatality that drew significant public ire.
- Cleanliness and maintenance are emerging issues; users report dirty interiors and emphasize the need for robust fleet upkeep.
Jobs, Regulation & Ethics
- Concerns about displacing Uber/Lyft drivers and taxi drivers, on top of prior disruptions from ride‑hailing itself.
- Some call for independent federal safety testing, not company‑sponsored stats; others note mandated crash reporting already exists in some jurisdictions.
- Underlying tension: convenience and safety gains vs. surveillance, labor impacts, and eventual “enshittification” once competition is weakened.
Technical Operations & Scaling
- Driving is done on‑board; connectivity is mainly for traffic, dispatch, and “fleet response.”
- In edge cases, remote staff can review sensor video and choose among options or sketch a short path, but the car still executes with its own safety constraints.
- Open questions remain about scaling fleets fast enough, operating in snow, handling twisty roads, and rolling out to smaller highway‑dependent cities.