Waymo updates 3,800 robotaxis after they 'drive into standing water'
72 points
2 hours ago
| 13 comments
| cnbc.com
| HN
Animats
1 hour ago
[-]
That's a tough problem - distinguishing wet pavement from deep water. Humans make that mistake frequently. Autonomous vehicles should probably be equipped with a water sensor. (We did that in our DARPA Grand Challenge vehicle back in 2005). Then they can enter water very cautiously and see if it's too deep. This may make them too cautious about shallow puddles on roads, though.
reply
drob518
1 hour ago
[-]
It’s a particularly hard problem in Texas. We get torrential rains and the landscape is relatively flat. Couple that with shallow soil over lots of limestone and it means flooding is really common. We also have roads that have a “low water crossing,” where a road crosses a creekbed that is normally dry but which will flood. There are often water depth signs there (basically a vertical ruler with feet marks so you can see where the water is up to). We lose people to this scenario (driving into flood waters) every year. It’s particularly problematic when it’s dark and you miss a warning sign. Before you know it, you’re in deep water and the flow can sweep the whole car downstream until it gets pinned against a tree, possibly with water forcing its way into the car.
reply
ajkjk
50 minutes ago
[-]
Pretty sure the right answer mainly involves the car knowing about the weather and other emergency events.
reply
asdff
43 minutes ago
[-]
It doesn't take much of a rainstorm to see localized flooding. Some debris over the storm drain is enough to flood a street. Hard to anticipate that happening.
reply
wombat-man
1 hour ago
[-]
If they have a laser measurement of the road from before, couldn't they see that the level of water vs the expected road surface?
reply
tintor
1 hour ago
[-]
Such detailed database of fine grained road geometry gets stale very quickly, due to road maintenance and road construction. In US highway lanes are shifted sideways frequently.
reply
dietr1ch
1 hour ago
[-]
But are they not continuously updating the road database with their fleet?
reply
nomel
1 hour ago
[-]
For common routes, yes. For getting to John's house, where the path there sometimes floods, no.
reply
kpw94
1 hour ago
[-]
That seems a very risky assumption for any car (self driving or human driver) during flash floods. "Turn around don't drown":

You think you know how deep it is under because you've taken that road many times before (or in your case you have historical laser measurement)

But you don't know:

- Maybe the road under fully collapsed

- Maybe the flow of water is extremely strong, so you need to accurately estimate that too.

reply
AnimalMuppet
1 hour ago
[-]
If they have a pre-existing database of every road, sure. And if it's kept up-to-date at all times in all vehicles.
reply
spankalee
43 minutes ago
[-]
Waymo does have a database of every today they drive, but for this they don't need one.

If the car comes to a road covered with water, and that road is in the database, and the water level appears low compared to the historical level of the road in the DB, then the car could cross. if the road is not in the DB, then a different decision might be made.

This is similar to humans: you might make different decisions depending on whether you know the road well or not.

reply
mortenjorck
1 hour ago
[-]
Isn’t that the Waymo data model, though? They extensively pre-drive every new market, building dense volumetric maps of the entire service area before they begin service, so they essentially do have that database of every road (that they drive on).
reply
filoleg
1 hour ago
[-]
Granted, I am not sure exactly how Waymo operates, but I thought that the extensive testing was mostly for legal reasons+just handling edge cases.

I am saying this, because I noticed that they typically start with a low-tier restrictive permit to operate (with a rather small number of cars in the fleet). Then they run it for a year or two, iron out edge cases particular to a given city (e.g., climate particularities, crazy spaghetti junctions in ATL, etc.), and log a lot of data. Then they take that data, go to the city/state, say "we have all this data that demonstrates we were very above the board while running the test pilot program, we are safe, and now we want to expand out of a very limited test pilot program."

And then it either goes well (Bay Area, LA, etc.) or goes off the rails for other reasons (often failing earlier for entirely unexpected reasons, like the pushback against it from taxi driver unions in NYC).

My point being, I could be entirely wrong, but I don't think that they literally map every single inch of the road before being allowed to operate. I just don't see it as being possible in any large populated city, given how often things change there. Just in 3 years living at one apartment in Seattle, I had a road directly adjacent to me changed from 2-way to 1-way, and then had 3-4 lanes that were basically highway entrances/exits (a block away from me) created and the whole area being rerouted entirely.

reply
asdff
36 minutes ago
[-]
They actually do significant mapping. Where it operates currently it is not unusual to see this. It will be a waymo with a human driver operating someplace not currently in the waymo zone and clearly not en route to any maintenance facility either. Stuff like windy canyon roads with no thru access anywhere that are currently gated away, you might see a waymo with a human today.

Waymo is not the only company making lidar maps right now either. I've seen UPS deliver trucks with retrofitted lidar scanners on the roof now. I've even seen this on a police car already, looked like a black rooftop industrial ventilator on a 2ft mast installed directly on the crown victoria roof.

reply
flutas
50 minutes ago
[-]
Waymo explicitly lidar scans and "HD maps" the area:

https://waymo.com/blog/2020/09/the-waymo-driver-handbook-map...

Tesla is less "HD", they have standard maps like we all think of, and a lane level "see-ahead" system where they basically just grab a satellite image tile, and align it with what the car sees for "FSD".

reply
amluto
1 hour ago
[-]
By a water sensor do you mean a sensor to detect the water level relative to the chassis? It seems like a very inexpensive downward-facing ultrasound sensor could work.
reply
computomatic
1 hour ago
[-]
Is ultrasound less expensive than a moisture sensor?

The problem with both is they effectively require the vehicle to be in the water already. They need something that can tell depth before the vehicle has to slow down.

reply
tempaccount5050
27 minutes ago
[-]
When you're going 35 mph and suddenly hit a 2 ft deep puddle (I've done this), that sensor isn't going to help at all.
reply
OptionOfT
1 hour ago
[-]
Doesn't Land Rover historically have like a wading sensor?
reply
mmooss
1 hour ago
[-]
> frequently

I've never made that mistake; I'm not aware of anyone I know doing it. I very rarely see it myself, except on news footage. Of course it happens some time somewhere but that says nothing about frequency.

> That's a tough problem

Not really. Don't drive where you don't know it's safe. Definitely don't drive into moving water - puddles only, and only if not too deep: I can usually figure it out based on the rest of the road - unless it's a sinkhole, the geometry is somewhat consistent - and especially by looking at objects in the water such as other cars driving through it. Sorry your friend isn't competent to figure it out.

People here are always quick to defend the autonomous cars, like a close friend. How often will we fall in love with a technology or company? It always distorts the truth.

reply
hawaiianbrah
23 minutes ago
[-]
It’s definitely a thing humans do a lot in certain places. Perhaps where you live, it isn’t as much of an issue, so naturally you and nobody you know has encountered it.
reply
robrain
1 hour ago
[-]
Article's current (possibly original), less ambiguous title: "Waymo recalls 3,800 robotaxis after glitch allowed some vehicles to ‘drive into standing water’"

IOW 3,800 Waymo vehicles aren't currently sat spinning their wheels in water.

reply
Zigurd
1 hour ago
[-]
It's an interesting case of whether it's possible to infer the condition of wading and avoid having to install a sensor specific to a one in a million trips circumstance.

The inference would come from standing water slowing down the vehicle and likely require steering correction, in combination with some machine vision for identifying standing water.

Then there's the advantage of being Google and having hundreds of thousands of people in the same area using Google maps and navigation. Accelerometers in phones can detect crashes pretty reliably. There's a good chance they can reliably detect deceleration from standing water and report the location of the hazard.

reply
moribvndvs
1 hour ago
[-]
Waymo: *locks doors, chorus to Floods by Pantera starts playing, guns it into the water*

“Wash away maaaaan, take him with the floooood”

reply
sunrunner
1 hour ago
[-]
How about a Mastodon, Lamb of God take with Floods of Triton:

  Heap data upon this modern age
  All human drivers now phased away
  A lidar's glow, the soft wheel's echo
  Autonomous force of code remains
  
  We are last of the before rides
  Now hear the robot cars rise
  Hum into eternity
  Remember this, all roadways lead to the fleet
reply
srameshc
1 hour ago
[-]
Does anyone with a better understanding about LIDAR vs camera approach to autonomous drivng explain how would Tesla handle such situation ?
reply
xnx
1 hour ago
[-]
Waymo has LIDAR and cameras, so it is better equipped for every situation.
reply
lizardking
1 hour ago
[-]
reply
xnx
1 hour ago
[-]
Kind of unrelated. That issue was due to a misguided effort to be cautious by having vehicles requesting human-review when they didn't really need it. Waymo fixed the issue by allowing the vehicles to operate in their normal, independent, mode.
reply
tintor
1 hour ago
[-]
LIDAR isn't helpful for water. Standing water behaves like a mirror on LIDAR.
reply
stevekemp
42 minutes ago
[-]
This is one of the reasons why I'm suspicious of camera-only systems, here in Finland. Half the year there's a lot of snow and ice around. Which I imagine means most of the view is "white" and "shiny". Coupled with the dark winters it's gotta be a nightmare to deal with.
reply
throwway120385
1 hour ago
[-]
Could you use a different spectrum of EM radiation to detect water? There are parts of the microwave band that attenuate the signal by absorption and I wonder if you could use that. The only clue a human driver has in that situation is in the visible spectrum. The lines of the road disappear from view, which can be challenging to see at night.
reply
amluto
1 hour ago
[-]
If the LIDAR can sense the road close enough to the front of the car, then it could estimate how far underwater the car is.
reply
blueskies1029
1 hour ago
[-]
They are rolling these out in New Orleans soon. Standing water is everywhere, and sometimes you have big hidden potholes. You just need to know the roads. Should be fun.
reply
yieldcrv
44 minutes ago
[-]
Since recall on cars no longer means doing anything to the car's physical location I think the regulator NHSTA should update this term

It just creates alarmist headlines for what's really an over the air update, although "recall" is still currently a regulatory accurate term in the vehicle space

Cars, especially EVs, have many similarities to being phones. Imagine if a routine software update from Apple was called a "recall", that functionally describes what's happening here

NHTSA should at least distinguish between "omg we have to get these cars off the road and bring them to the shop immediately!" versus "over the air software update"

reply
gib444
1 hour ago
[-]
This is ok though because humans drive into flood waters too.

Look, you can't make progress without getting your feet wet and then diving straight into the deep end.

reply
foobazgt
1 hour ago
[-]
Maybe you drive into flood waters, but I don't. That's not a difficult skill to pull off.

We're still in the early days of self driving cars, and as much simulation and miles as they have, they're still constantly getting exposed to real world conditions that are new to them. The world is dynamic, so this will always remain true.

It remains to be seen where we'll converge on capability, incident rate, and acceptance.

reply
hawaiianbrah
20 minutes ago
[-]
The world is dynamic, so sure, it will always be true in some technical sense. But I am confident that eventually we’ll have trained them on enough scenarios that novelty will have a smaller and smaller effect on their ability to safely navigate through the world.
reply
steele
1 hour ago
[-]
Go fish
reply
bethekidyouwant
1 hour ago
[-]
What is a recall in this case? Is them getting a software update a recall now?
reply
superfrank
1 hour ago
[-]
They suspended service areas they deem high risk until the software update can be applied. So while, yes, it's just a software update, it's a recall in the sense that they've temporarily pulled all the cars off the road in certain areas
reply
svachalek
1 hour ago
[-]
I think so. For some kind of legalese reasons that's generally what a Tesla "recall" amounts to these days.
reply
SpicyLemonZest
1 hour ago
[-]
Yes, this is a common terminology issue. "Recall" is legally defined in terms of the kind of problems that require one, not the solution to those problems, because the relevant regulations were written when there was no way to fix consumer products other than physically delivering them to the manufacturer or an authorized repair person.
reply
xnx
1 hour ago
[-]
"recall" = applies software update
reply
dang
2 minutes ago
[-]
We've updated the title above. Thanks!
reply
fudged71
1 hour ago
[-]
Also I think it's wrong to call something a recall if it's not owned by customers. Waymo is a service.
reply
asdff
34 minutes ago
[-]
The difference between that and usual software updates I'm guessing is the cars are pulled from service until the update takes place.
reply
dawnerd
1 hour ago
[-]
Recall makes for better headlines.
reply
rogerrogerr
31 minutes ago
[-]
I really want car companies to just automate publishing “recalls” for every commit pushed to any car ever. Flood this broken term and force a distinction between “the airbags will literally explode and destroy your face” and “the radio volume is too quiet sometimes”
reply
nickthegreek
26 minutes ago
[-]
A "recall" is a specific regulated action. It is announced as a recall because that is what is legally required according to the NHTSA. There is no wiggle room here.
reply
rogerrogerr
16 minutes ago
[-]
Yes, we need to change the rules to create a distinction. The meaning of “recall” in common understanding vs. industry has diverged, and it’s almost certainly causing car manufacturers to do suboptimal things to avoid having “recall” tied to their name in the press.
reply
nickthegreek
3 minutes ago
[-]
There is no issue in understanding unless you are talking about only reading the headline that a media outlet decides to use. How about we all just use our brains and understand that things can be fixed in different ways, but it is important that they get fixed.

Suboptimal behavior from companies is what leads to recalls. I cant even understand an example of what you are talking about there. And now you want to carry water for the industry by creating some diluted term. Does the car have a safety issue that is should not? Then its a recall. The manufacture can now decide how to resolve it. Sometimes that can be done via an OTA update.

I think its is in the interest of consumers to know ALL the ways these corps are putting your life at risk through their engineering efforts or lack there of. If your car manufacture is doing weekly OTA bug fixes on the vehicle that you drive you kids in everyday, you should sure as well know. Then you can make an informed decision.

reply
paconbork
1 hour ago
[-]
Gah, thanks for this. Thought I was used to that slight-of-hand but this one got me
reply
jagged-chisel
1 hour ago
[-]
aw, I was having fun imagining 3,800 Johnny cabs just immediately changing route to go to headquarters.
reply
Desafinado
1 hour ago
[-]
FFS, can we just go back to talking to each other in person and driving our own vehicles? Where'd the 90s go?
reply
vachina
1 hour ago
[-]
If the car drives itself we will have more time to talk to each other in person.
reply
cryo32
1 hour ago
[-]
Or invest in public transport instead
reply
Analemma_
1 hour ago
[-]
Just this morning I was almost killed twice on my bike ride to work by two separate drivers, one of whom looked to be 80 and could barely see over the dashboard, and one who was on their phone. I didn’t even bother trying to remember the plate numbers, knowing that the odds of any kind of consequences are absolute zero. No, we can’t go back to driving our own vehicles. Waymo everywhere and human driving outlawed, ASAP.
reply
qwerpy
1 hour ago
[-]
Agree. Multiple people I know have bought Teslas because they don’t trust themselves or their spouses to drive safely, and want them to use FSD. There should be incentives to get people onto self driving.
reply
flextheruler
1 hour ago
[-]
Tesla cars are not capable of driving autonomously according to the company and regulators.
reply
qwerpy
57 minutes ago
[-]
My dad doesn't care what the regulatory definition is, he just presses "Start Self-Driving" and off he goes.
reply
flextheruler
23 minutes ago
[-]
https://www.tesla.com/ownersmanual/models/en_us/GUID-59736DF...

"Failure to follow all warnings and instructions can result in property damage, serious injury or death."

"Driver intervention may be required in certain situations, such as on narrow roads with oncoming cars, in construction zones, or while going through complex intersections."

"Always remember that Full Self-Driving (Supervised) (also known as Autosteer on City Streets) does not make Model S autonomous and requires a fully attentive driver who is ready to take immediate action at all times."

reply
mikem170
1 hour ago
[-]
If self-driving is better, then presumably cheaper insurance costs would be an incentive.
reply
ggreer
52 minutes ago
[-]
Different states have different rules about what sort of things insurers are allowed to charge different rates for. In the states that allow it, Tesla does offer insurance discounts for FSD usage.[1] Lemonade also offers discounts for FSD usage.[2]

1. https://www.tesla.com/support/insurance/fsd-discount

2. https://www.lemonade.com/fsd

reply
superfrank
1 hour ago
[-]
> can we just go back to talking to each other in person

He posts on an internet message board

reply
giacomoforte
1 hour ago
[-]
LeCun is right.
reply
alex1138
1 hour ago
[-]
About what
reply
giacomoforte
51 minutes ago
[-]
That you need world models to sensibly deploy "thinking" machines in the real world. Else they do stupid shit like drive straight into water. You can bruteforce some semblance of thinking by training on literally all knowledge that can be digitized but even that is proving to not be quite enough.
reply
jfyi
34 minutes ago
[-]
Like this?

https://waymo.com/blog/2026/02/the-waymo-world-model-a-new-f...

Or did you mean strictly in operation?

reply