Even if the cars had a "I'm currently deciding" indicator it would be a major improvement. My only issue with these sorts of anti-socialized services is not being able to promptly and easily sue for remedy. Maybe a blood price on a few mid-level managers (or possibly higher depending on the situation) if the service ends up killing people. That would put my heart at mind in the marketplace of the future.

Maybe we can start with putting a blood price on human drivers, since they have direct culpability?

When a human driver is negligent or reckless, they don't potentially endanger millions of people at once. So there's a difference

> "I'm currently deciding" indicator

Million dollar idea right there

Isn't that constantly happening? Every millisecond it's "deciding" what to do.

> My only issue with these sorts of anti-socialized services is not being able to promptly and easily sue for remedy.

What do you mean by that? Do you think if their cars hurt someone or cause damage to property you can't sue them? What is the basis of this belief?

I don't know how aware Waymo cars are of their surroundings. Why don't they have a (or something like a) 360 degree string of LEDs (for example on the roof) that lights up a few in the direction of human obstacles if they're close enough? Bonus points if they're colored to indicate everything is ok or there's potential caution/danger.

They're still trying to do this weird universal signage when they need some way to replicate eye contact and 1-to-1 signaling. I feel safe biking or driving around other cars because I can directly communicate and negotiate with other traffic participants. I can't do that with an automated car as they're currently designed, and I feel like that's a huge flaw.

> I don't know how aware Waymo cars are of their surroundings.

Waymo cars are extremely, extremely aware of their surroundings. They have a category, distance, speed, and distribution of possible future paths for all cars, pedestrians, and bicyclists within sight over 360 degrees.

> Why don't they have a (or something like a) 360 degree string of LEDs (for example on the roof) that lights up a few in the direction of human obstacles if they're close enough?

I don't think it's so obvious this helps. What is the threshold for how far away something is before it's indicated on the ring? If I'm standing just outside that distance, how will I know it's because of distance rather than because I haven't been seen? If the distance is set long, how will I know it sees me and not something behind me?

The natural way to get around these problems is for the car to "point out" everything it see using, e.g., fake eyes. But now you have a car covered in eyes surveilling the neighborhood, and people don't like that either.

> What is the threshold for how far away something is before it's indicated on the ring? If I'm standing just outside that distance, how will I know it's because of distance rather than because I haven't been seen? If the distance is set long, how will I know it sees me and not something behind me?

I feel like this is a non-issue. The LEDs can be a certain size. They could be dimmable so their brightness can be modulated by distance.

All the things you mention are an issue with real drivers too, but we make it work because we can signal and communicate. Give these cars the same functionality and experiment. This isn't an insurmountable issue, but it is one that needs to be addressed that isn't being addressed at all. Throwing up your hands and saying it's too difficult is less than helpful. They're putting these things on the road with people. They have a responsibility to figure this stuff out. Especially if they want to go beyond a handful of cities.

Strong disagree that this is all non-issue/obvious. There are plenty of cases where it's better to not communicate rather than try and communicate in a way that is likely to be misinterpreted. Regarding your "just make the LEDs dimmable", this just adds more opportunities for confusion; humans will have no idea how the distance-brightness relationship is calibrated, it will appear different depending on the lighting conditions, etc. Just like consider how many gauges you have ever seen that communicate a continuous variable based on the brightness of the display. (Very few or none).

No one is throwing up their hands. Human-autonomous-vehicle communication is a whole research field. Waymo has every incentive here to both make the vehicles safer and to make pedestrians feel safer (holding actual safety fixed).

The ultimate test is not your first gut reaction as to whether they have done "enough", but rather it's whether the vehicles are safer than human-driven ones, and the evidence so far strongly points to that being the case.