So glad I live far away from the tech bros. Must be so annoying living in the bay area.
It’s not, but everyone has their preferences so live where you wanna live
I’ve been to San Francisco and they live like sardines.
It’s not as bad as LA, but they’re trying.
Used to go to SF for work events.
It felt like a town that once had culture that still wants to peek out, but it almost entirely covered with silicon valley monotony and misanthropic policies. It feels like a city where the people living there are the after thought, and the tablet where you order your coffee while you sit around a room where nobody makes eye contact or speaks to you is the product.
I’m sure there’s a part of the city where humanity still thrives, but it should be a cultural warning to those who are adopting silicon valley cures as anything other than snake oil.
You were probably downtown for a work event. The culture is in the neighborhoods
am i allowed to recommend my favorite SF pizzeria (it’s the Deaf pizzeria)
Seen a lot of half baked arguments.
I’ve been in the area and met this cat. First off, this cat started as a stray, and found its way to the corner store that took it in and adopted it for all intents and purposes. Its lived in the same spot for many years, and had always been an exceptionally chill cat. Painting him as a typical outdoor cat is disingenuous and uninformed.
KitKat has been safe and sound for so long without any issues. There’s gotta be literally millions of cars that have driven past in his residency on 16th in the Mission district of SF. And the only time he gets hit is by a waymo? All these human drivers, so many of them absolute shit, and never an occurrence? This cat isn’t sprinting the neighborhood, crossing streets, or hunting for prey; its docile, loves pets, and knows there’s endless food at the liquor store that provides all his needs. He wasn’t your typical outdoor cat that runs from everyone and twitches at unknown sounds; this was an urban dwelling cat that’s been prospering for years.
Waymo promotes and brags to riders how many cameras are inside and out of the car. But it so easily hit something that could fuck the car up if it wasn’t soft squishy flesh. Were animals and small children not in any of its test scenarios? Is it infeasble to install cameras where a typical driver couldn’t usually see?
Not to mention the absolutely rude response waymo has had to this event. Instead of apologizing and pledging improvements and retribution to killing a valued community member; they victim-blamed the dead cat, said they didn’t do anything wrong, and said nothing of mitigating future scenarios.
There’s more I can say about the company and its typical ownership, but I want to keep this to the slaughter at hand and their complete lack of consciousness. Waymo doesn’t care about you or anything that it kills. Once again, its about the bottom line and whatever it can do to turn profit.
Obviously accidents happen, but its the reaction that can truly matter in those cases. They’ve shown that causing great harm in a community means nothing to them. And this is in obvious and outspoken situations. What about the less obvious ways? Whether that be job loss, economic factors, environmental concerns, or blatant safety on our streets. If they’re forced, they’ll make a bullshit apology (aka recognition of events) and then focus on moving forward without addressing people’s grief and anger.
Fuck waymo, fuck their response especially, and fuck anyone saying this cat deserved it by being a lazy sidewalk-laying pillar of joy in the neighborhood.
Rest in Peace KitKat. The community will always love you and remember you for always brightening our days in this endlessly threatening world. The only thing that killed you was the ruthless drive for profit. Your memory will live on in the hearts of many. And as a focal point that citizens must stop allowing corporations from plowing down their neighbors, their voice, and their sunshine in a day’s walk to the store.
3:
What I’ve learned working at a startup in stealth mode and having larger projects in the back lot behind the building, is that those cars also do not respect ‘no trespassing’ signs and waymo will wait until it gets to the litigious point to bother to fix their routing.
I had a cat who went outside every day, never once got hit by a human driver until it happened.
nonsense, that your cat was missed by millions of drivers every day that drive down your streets, to think it would be hit by a human boggles the mind. and you don’t even seem to be broken up about the slaughter!
My neighbor has had three cats killed by cars, they even ran over their own cat in the driveway.
I had a cat that was killed three times by cars. When it died, it only had six lives left… or maybe I should say five.
Don’t want your cat to get hit by a car keep it inside.
That wasn’t anyone’s cat, though. It was a denizen of the neighborhood with no owner. The point you’re trying to make has no target.
when the LA riots happened a few months ago and they were torching waymo cars i was confused why they would do that, now im ok with thoese cars being torched. fuck waymo, RIP kitkat
Waymo/Google has aligned itself with Trump and there are a lot of cameras on those cars. I suspect that was a reason back then. Now there’s more.
reader beware.
lots of muskrats and thielologists shitting in this post.
While our vehicle was stopped to pick up passengers, a nearby cat darted under our vehicle as it was pulling away,
There are plenty of assholes who will aim for cats while driving. This, at least, can likely be remedied fleet-wide and permanently with a software fix. These people are just looking for an excuse to rail against automation— as if a human driver would have definitely seen the cat.
Also, keep cats inside.
This, at least, can likely be remedied fleet-wide and permanently with a software fix.
Oh? That seems like a pretty big assumption. Even if the company themselves said that a software update could fix running over a living creature, I would be skeptical.
These people are just looking for an excuse to rail against automation
Excuse or valid criticism from a negatively affected community? I personally don’t like the idea of driverless cars. I don’t think they are at all necessary to society. I don’t see them as inevitable infrastructure or even a good path forward. I don’t think my stance is unreasonable.
as if a human driver would have definitely seen the cat.
There are plenty of cats in my neighborhood and I’ve never hit one. I’d expect an automated vehicle to drive better than a human, not worse.
You talk about people “railing against automation” but is it more productive to make reflexive excuses for its failures? The fact of the matter (IMO) is that we shouldn’t be beta test subjects for these companies and this new technology.
Also, keep cats inside.
This I can agree with.
Holy shit, its logical fallacy over and over with you.
I didn’t make any assumptions. If they can avoid animals now (which they can, and do), they can improve that detection and/or logic for cats that have disappeared under the car and not reappeared. That’s not even an assumption, much less a “big” one.
And you’ve never hit a cat that was hiding under your car? Are you sure? How can you prove it? Have you gotten out each time you drove away to make sure there wasn’t a cat left behind?
And you’ve driven 93m miles, so you can compare your extensive history and record of driving with waymo’s?
I personally don’t like the idea of driverless cars.
And there is your bias.
No one argues self-driving cars are “needed.” The point is, they are a significant improvement over humans when developed correctly.
And you’ve never hit a cat that was hiding under your car? Are you sure? How can you prove it? Have you gotten out each time you drove away to make sure there wasn’t a cat left behind?
I don’t find this convincing. Have you asked the Waymo Taxi the same thing? I can check if I’ve run over a cat, and I’m naturally Inclined to care. I can’t say the same about a robot. Especially one that isn’t open source.
If they can avoid animals now (which they can, and do), they can improve that detection and/or logic for cats that have disappeared under the car and not reappeared. That’s not even an assumption, much less a “big” one.
I develop software for a living. It is a big assumption to think that this will be fixed with a software update. I don’t know why you act as if it’s a sure thing.
I personally don’t like the idea of driverless cars.
And there is your bias.
Yes I am biased against driverless cars. They are a new technology that is being tested without our consent, and they are dependent on corporations rather than humans being held accountable when things go wrong (something that we currently struggle with as a society). The fact that you think I should default to the contrary is strange to me.
No one argues self-driving cars are “needed.” The point is, they are a significant improvement over humans when developed correctly.
I’d rather gravitate towards a driverless society where we invest in public transit and infrastructure rather than further ingraining cars into our society and adopting private companies (who use us as unwitting beta testers) as the solution to our problems.
How are people this fucking stupid? Really? I don’t want you to answer that. I would need some rational and intelligent discussion on the subject.
You need to calm down. Attacking my intelligence isn’t helping your argument. I think I’m done engaging with you now.
i have been in a car that hit a cat (it was an accident) and there was a bump. it’s not like we flattened him completely. a human could probably determine there shouldn’t have been a bump based on the state of the surface they’re driving on. i’m not terribly familiar with the limitations of their software, but i’d think it lacks the “experience” to tell that kind of thing.
I can’t wait to see your take when automation takes the largest blue collar workforce in the country and renders them as relics of a bygone era. Truckers are going to be displaced when long-haul truck shipping is fully replaced by automated vehicles. After that, they’ll be making huge trouble - rightfully so.
Perhaps we should force cars out so wagon makers can have their jobs back?
Perhaps we should force out wagons and horses to bring in a new age of rickshaws?
My take is, your take is pretty simple-minded.
We shall see. My take is that you’re blindly following along with the masses because convenience and “progress” are more important to you. It won’t affect you directly, I’m sure. Enjoy your weird bubble.
Yup, blindly following. Clearly that is my way. No independent thought whatsoever.
MORE TRAINS
This, at least, can likely be remedied fleet-wide and permanently with a software fix.
You have so much misplaced faith in these massive corporations…
I have faith that if they keep making errors like this, people won’t give them business. I have faith that they will fix socially unacceptable issues in the name of money.
Kindly fuck off with your misplaced judgement.
IDK they’ve been pretty on top of this. I remember earlier this year there was a story about them honking all night at there depot and they released a patch to fix it in a couple days. They are trying to get approval to drive to the airport so they’re very sensitive to public opinion and the politicians in charge of approving that.
Some of us are old enough to remember how cats and other creatures would get killed by old car engine designs with the large open fan driven by a belt. They would sleep on that fan housing and not realize the danger when the car was started. So there have been improvements that have helped, maybe not necessarily for that reason. For what it’s worth, I’m on the side of minimizing cars for so many reasons, but it has been worse for animals in the past.
i miss having cars with roomy enough engine compartments i can work on them myself without a cherry picker, just a jack and some stands. if keeping more cats alive is the tradeoff, i’d say it’s more than fair.
Rest in peace kitkat
If a waymo killed my cat I would slash the tires of every single one I saw
“While our vehicle was stopped to pick up passengers, a nearby cat darted under our vehicle as it was pulling away,” a company spokesperson said.
I’m not super keen on robo-cars, because they’re being rushed out by corporations that want to start raking in the money while using the public to beta test their platform. but let’s be honest here, if the car was driven by a human, they almost certainly would have run over that cat too.
I would have stopped, because I’m not full of shit.
Mmmm. You’re taking “company spokesperson” at face value there.
Let’s be real though, a meeting of highly paid, highly skilled people came up with that response then it was sanitised through three more filters before reaching our eyes.
Cripty is a classic bootlicker.
listen, it doesn’t matter how obsessed you are with me, I’m not going to sleep with you. I’m out of your league.
Says the guy who is here to defend corporations again.
The only league you are in is the bootlicker competition.
the irony of a liberal calling anyone a bootlicker. since you love landlords so much, you should start charging me rent for all the space I take up in your mind.
A bootlicking Anarchist!? You should be ashamed to be on that instance.
Go defend some more corps simp.
lol says the .worlder. you fit right into that instance. now go hide in the corner and obsess about me some more, you weirdo.
maybe, but I’m also thinking about myself here. if it were me, would I have noticed the cat?
I don’t like admitting it, but the answer is almost certainly no, unless I happened to catch a glimpse of it in my mirror, which is what I would be looking at while pulling away from the curb. I think a robot-driven car should be able to watch all of its surroundings constantly, but I’m just a human and I can only watch one direction at a time.
And for all that it doesn’t even make sense. Was the car stopped or was it pulling away?
Ohh no. Anyways.
People who keep their kids inside but let their pets play in traffic are psychopaths.
I know what I said.
Who told you that cat was someone’s pet?
The linked article…
Did you ask some AI to summarise the article? Because there’s no mention of it being a pet cat.
Did you read it? Or did you just ctrl+f “pet”? Because it specifically mentions the cat having an owner.
Nowhere in the article does it mention the cat having an owner, besides the statement released by Waymo.
So it doesn’t besides the point where it does.
The article is relaying information from an authoritative group of people who are informing the article, (those who know the cat and are being interviewed for the purpose of this article) and Waymo (Who is unfamiliar with the cat besides the point that they’ve confirmed they ran it over, and did not speak to the Guardian for this article).
There is no mention of an owner from that authoritative group of people.
The letter sent out by Waymo is not an authoritative source of information for this cat, nor is it asserting that the cat does in fact have an owner. It’s just an uninformed assumption by a third party with no first hand knowledge of this cat in order to cover a base because it’s boilerplate. An owner is mentioned in it for the same purpose as the phrase “To whom it may concern”
You have got to work on your media literacy.
There are no pets mentioned in the linked article.
“We send our deepest sympathies to the cat’s owner”
Did you even read it?
Yes I read that. That’s the boilerplate statement from the company that is obviously factually incorrect.
Work on your comprehension skills, it will help you in life.
Yes I read it, there is no owner mentioned in that article, and it was very obviously a stray cat.
Your quote is just an example of the fact that Waymo has a canned, boilerplate template ready to go for when they run over an animal.
The linked article, like the person claimed.
“We send our deepest sympathies to the cat’s owner and the community who knew and loved him"
Picture of cat shows a collar, tag, and bell. It’s a pet.
The linked Article doesn’t say anything about any pets. The quote you used is from Waymo, who didn’t know anything about the cat besides the fact that their robot car ran it over.
The tag in the picture is a rabies tag, not an ownership tag. The collar is to hold the rabies tag, and the bell is attached to the collar.
The article has quotes from several community members grieving the loss of the cat, yet not from any supposed owner and doesn’t even mention any owner. The cat is very obviously a local stray.
My quote is from the linked article.
Doubling down and re-stating your claims again as fact won’t make reality change.
Nowhere in that article does it say anything about the cat being a pet, nor does it state that the cat has an owner. It references an outside statement from Waymo where they, like you, appear to assume the cat has an owner without anything to indicate that, but nobody who spoke to The Guardian for that article said a single thing about the cat being a pet or having an owner.
The cat was very obviously a local stray. Doubling down and insisting there’s an owner without any proof of an owner existing in that article will not make reality change. Unless you can find in that article where it says the cat was a pet, or identifies an owner, you’re just making things up.
It references Waymo’s public statement in the article. The article is the webpage that is linked by OP. You can read it if you click the link, and you can see the quote for yourself.
Ah yes, local strays get tagged and collared and have bells. They also have their ‘family’ members who run the bodega they live out of get upset when other people start memecoins to exploit the situation when they are not family. Stray is mentioned nowhere in the article - and yet if fits your narrative so you try to jam the square peg in the round hole.
I’m done talking to this particular brick wall. 🚫
Lmao bringing up what Waymo said in their public statement a third time will not help your case like it’s a magical incantation. Nowhere does it say Waymo was able to identify or reach out to an owner, nor does the article speak of an owner who was reached out to by Waymo. Some canned text on a public statement is not an authoritative source of information on an individual animal you donut.
Unless you can find the part in this article where somebody calls the cat a pet, or identifies literally anybody as an owner, you’re just hallucinating what isn’t there. Are you an AI? It would explain the emoji.
Ah yes, local strays get tagged and collared and have bells.
Correct. Neighborhoods cats with no owner often have people take them to vets and get vaccinated/spayed. This keeps the cat from having its ears clipped, being dumped in a different neighborhood, or even being put down. They would want any animal control to know they’ve done this, so they need to display the tag. For this they buy a collar, as tags can’t be suspend in midair by magic. The fact that the collar they bought has a bell on it is unremarkable, many cat collars have little bells in them.
They also have their ‘family’ members who run the bodega they live out of get upset when other people start memecoins to exploit the situation when they are not family
The cat doesn’t live out of the bodega, it lives on the street. It visits the bodega. More hallucinations from you. Did you even read the article? Or just Waymo’s public statement. Do you work for Waymo?
I’m very glad you’re done trying to pin the fault of this tragedy on innocent people. We can revisit it if any information comes out that supports your assertion.
I wish people were as outraged about people getting killed by human drivers. The safety record of these cars has been no less than stellar until now.
Im gonna be real with you. In the lords year 2025 I dont give a flying fuck about more than most people but I do care about every cat. I’d imagine this is a common sentiment.
not every human is down with kissing the homies, but every cat i’ve met is
The safety record of these cars has been no less than stellar until now.
Typo?
Parent is saying self driving cars have had a stellar record up until now.
You fuck with cats, you fuck with us.
There is probably an elevated risk of killing cats in any electric vehicle because there are fewer signs that the car is “on” and about to drive.
Idk, I find that at low speeds electric cars are louder than modern internal combustion. They have that SciFi drone sound.
Depending on the year model of the car, it might not make that sound. It wasn’t required on some of the earlier EVs, which could be eerily quiet. I believe it’s required by law on newer models. Pre-2016 Volts has a “pedestrian horn button”; 2016 and newer Volts play a noise continuously as lower speeds. (My Uncle says it sounds like the warp drive hum on the original Star Trek Enterprise.)
not all of them. there’s a couple in my city that make no noise when driving slowly. they’re so quiet, you can hear their tires popping as they run over small pebbles on the road.
At that speed, the risk of running over anyone is pretty low.
Not when parked. A cat would thi k it was a parked car.
there are those newfangled ICE cars that turn off instead of idle. i don’t quite know how i feel.
It’s not really all that newfangled. It was part of the eurozone’s requirements for cars and was put in other places as well. I think that it’s approaching a decade now. My neighbor’s 2017 has it.
the pandemic really fucked with my sense of time. the last week has taken a decade and the last decade feels present.
Cat
“While our vehicle was stopped to pick up passengers, a nearby cat darted under our vehicle as it was pulling away”
I mean, it sucks, but it could’ve happened with a human driver as well… and likely has happened.
I have rode in a Waymo and it shows you all the things it detects on a screen… which includes humans and small animals. It’s not a perfect machine, but it probably is a better driver than a lot of people already and it’s learning every day.
I suppose this incident could get Waymo to put cameras/sensors beneath the car… something that regular car makers won’t think about.
But yeah, it should’ve detected the cat beforehand and waited for it to leave before driving off. Then again, the human passengers didn’t see it either.
Under- car sensors is a great idea and the kind of innovation required for this tech to reach universal adoption. Waymo is already safer than human drivers IMO but let’s keep going until it’s significantly safer with verifiable data and capabilities humans cannot have. And we have to address its connection to big tech for “safety under fascism” purposes.
I mean, it sucks for the cat and the neighborhood, I’m glad that where I live there are a few very friendly outdoor cats and I’ve always seen people nail the brakes to avoid them the few times they cross the road.
I also understand that autonomous cars kind of need more work, but real drivers also really suck at driving. I wonder if the ire here is more at “who do we blame if no driver”
Also also, I wonder if electric cars are going to cause a lot more issues for outdoor animals who to some extend get trained to listen for a Hrududu which the electric motors don’t make.
Then again, the human passengers didn’t see it either.
The human passengers weren’t responsible for driving the vehicle, their lack of awareness is a feature of getting a taxi ride?
I meant that the Waymo didn’t see it, neither did the passengers, so the cat could’ve been difficult to detect.
Not an excuse.
Removed by mod
Hard to keep cars indoors
Garage?
How about you keep your mice and birds inside? Vermin
and let the birds, mice, etc… live without fear.
LOL, that’s not really how mice and small birds work.
He’s just posting reddit cat hate talking points.
i remember when i was out smoking pork butts with the stupid cat. i think she was inbred and had some issues. so i’m in a hammock and she was sitting there on the ground by me, almost loafing but her front paws out in front of her. a small rat ran right up on her paws, right below her mouth. she was all “wait, fuck!” and picked the rat up in her mouth, and she ran up to me so proud, but then she did not know what to do with it.
only time she caught anything larger than a cold. the doofus.
Oh? Exactly how do you know? Are you Dr.Doolittle?
I’d say, we cannot determine definitively.
Doesn’t take a lot of observation to see that small rodents are in fear of just about every encounter, largely because that’s what keeps them alive.
I mean ok we can keep cats indoor, what about making techbros indoor only too though? They kill a lot of innocent people with the tools they make.
No they cause problems when indoors. We need them touching grass.
A small animal not being visible to a human or robotic driver is absolutely a viable excuse. It’s sad that the cat died, but it’s first an foremost the fault of the owners for letting their cat out.
I don’t like the tech bro world and I’m not a fan of driverless vehicles, but this didn’t happen because it was driverless and the outcome would be the same if their were a person behind the wheel.
You can definitely argue against cars being on the road in general, but I was on a bike ride with a buddy the other day, and he hit a squirrel that ran between us and then under his bike. Sometimes bad things happen especially when dealing with animals, and blaming a computer blindly is dumb AF.
I lost a beloved cat a few months ago that ran into the road. My security camera caught the whole thing.
“What if?” Is its own torment for us, but analytically, she simply wasn’t visible and there was nothing the driver could/should have done to prevent the horrible outcome.
There are in life no-win situations. It hurts, but it’s an adult realization. Cats go under cars to hide - to avoid being seen - and can’t grasp danger the same as humans.
I feel for the cat but this would happen with a human driver too. No one is going to check under their car after picking up passengers. It’d add minutes to each stop and these people are paid by the mile and stop. Adding minutes or hours each day is money lost. So no one will do this.
Removed by mod
Yeah this is the kind of thing where you really need statistics. This sticks out because it’s a prominent example of something new, an autonomous vehicle, doing something notable - killing an animal for the first time (or at least one of the very first well-publicized times on record).
For people’s reaction to this to be that this is because it’s an autonomous vehicle is the same sort of cognitive bias that causes things like, " The first person to get a math problem wrong in class was a girl so it seems like girls are bad at math". When of course it could be that the probability of boys and girls getting problems wrong is equal, and that the girl was simply the first one to get a unlucky roll on the dice of the universe. It could even be that boys are more likely to get problems wrong, and the girl was especially unlucky. It could in fact be that girls are more likely to get problems wrong, too, but this single instance doesn’t give us enough evidence for that. It could be that boys actually have gotten more problems wrong, but we only hear about the girl getting the problem wrong due to sociological biases, or vice versa. Etc.
I get that we shouldn’t trust corporations, and it’s not fun to defend a corporation, but it is important to defend rational thinking. And the rational way to approach this is to employ statistical methods to judge whether a vehicle being autonomous truly makes it a bigger risk to animals in the road or not. Any other line of reasoning is not right for this kind of problem.
Not exactly the first time, given the incident a few years ago where a dog ran into the street and was struck by a Waymo. It got some publicity at the time but was forgotten relatively quickly, presumably since it was quite clear there wasn’t much any driver could have done in that situation. I expect this case will go over similarly, although maybe it will generate a bit more discussion since there are at least some imaginable ways this could have been prevented.
