Skip to main content

sigh

A woman was stuck in a self-driving Waymo vehicle that was stopped by two men who harassed her, asked for her number, and prevented the car from moving forward by standing in its way.


This must have been terrifying.

If you are tempted to do this, men... don't!

404media.co/men-harassed-a-wom…

(Via @404media)


Men Harassed A Woman In A Driverless Waymo, Trapping Her In Traffic

Two men stood in front of the autonomous vehicle, operated by ride-hailing company Waymo, and literally tipped a fedora at her while she told them to move out of the way.
Samantha Cole (404 Media)
in reply to Neil Brown

Andrew Clews
Andrew Clews
• •

yeah, I saw that and thought that was really bad.

I don't like autonomous vehicles, because I know they're a con and not being developed in way that will work. BUT one does not put other people in fear to make a point. If indeed one has a point to make.

in reply to Neil Brown

RevK :verified_r:
RevK :verified_r:
• •

I am puzzled by the focus of the story being on “driverless”.

(A) how was she “stuck”? Surely she could have got out. And surely that is the same with a driver. Indeed if she was the driver she would be stuck as she could not abandon the car, which in this case she presumably could.

(B) how is this different to a car with a driver, with someone persistently standing in your path?

Story is “idiot stands in front of car to cause trouble”. Driverless makes no odds?

in reply to RevK :verified_r:

DamonHD
DamonHD
• •
@revk I think the bit is being on her own and not in control? But I haven't read more than the headlines so far ...
@RevK :verified_r:
in reply to DamonHD

RevK :verified_r:
RevK :verified_r:
• •
@DamonHD I tried reading it through. Not about over and above the headline. I am not sure how being in control helps if an idiot is intent on blocking your path. Surely the only extra option is running over the idiot (depending of nature of road and idiot).
@DamonHD
in reply to RevK :verified_r:

DamonHD
DamonHD
• •
@revk making sure the doors are locked and leaning on the horn would be two extra options in the driver's seat?
@RevK :verified_r:
in reply to DamonHD

Matt Seymour
Matt Seymour
• •
@DamonHD @revk someone stands in front of your car to intimidate/threaten you and, advisable or not, you can drive at them whereas the automated vehicle won’t do this so this effectively isolates a lone individual
@RevK :verified_r: @DamonHD
in reply to Matt Seymour

RevK :verified_r:
RevK :verified_r:
• •

you should never use a piece of machinery to try and harm someone.

My point is the article is all about it being driverless (which sounds like it is actually a good thing in this case), not that some idiot was intimidating someone.

She was “stuck” by the idiot and circumstances, and not unreasonable fears, not that the car was driverless.

This entry was edited (1 day ago)
in reply to RevK :verified_r:

Steve Hill 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁷󠁬󠁳󠁿🇪🇺
Steve Hill 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁷󠁬󠁳󠁿🇪🇺
• •
@revk @Wifiwits @DamonHD never say never - if a bunch of people were physically attacking my car with a baseball bat, for example, I would be pretty afraid for my life and probably would drive through them (yes, running them over if they didn't get out of the way). I would *hope* that this would be considered "reasonable force" since the alternatives would appear be to wait in the car and hope they can't break in, or to exit the car and get beaten to death.
@RevK :verified_r: @Matt Seymour @DamonHD
in reply to RevK :verified_r:

Steve Hill 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁷󠁬󠁳󠁿🇪🇺
Steve Hill 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁷󠁬󠁳󠁿🇪🇺
• •
@revk @Wifiwits @DamonHD Yep, but their actions make you realise how badly it could go when your ability to just drive through obstructions is taken away.
@RevK :verified_r: @Matt Seymour @DamonHD
in reply to RevK :verified_r:

jack is seeking a new instance
jack is seeking a new instance
• •

@revk @Wifiwits @DamonHD you should never stand in front of someone's vehicle to harass them either

I've actually been in that situation - this guy who crashed into me, refused to give his details, and expected me to wait until the police arrived. he moved his car to block me from leaving (completely blocking the left lane of the dual carriageway), and when I attempted to depart by reversing back so I could manouever around it, he tried to open the driver's door

he was lucky the only consequence for him was to be held 100% liable by his own insurers. that kind of situation, if he'd been injured in his attempt to stop me leaving, no-one would shed a tear
youtu.be/DQsBxpSUDGA?si=yes


bonk

no injuries. insurance found fault with the driver of the white car
YouTube
@RevK :verified_r: @Matt Seymour @DamonHD
in reply to jack is seeking a new instance

Martin Kimber
Martin Kimber
• •
@JackEric @revk @Wifiwits @DamonHD that’s useful to know (not expecting the police to come to a minor collision unless anybody hurt or unusual third party damage). Kind of makes sense. Not pleasant to be unreasonably trapped (or attempted)!
@RevK :verified_r: @Matt Seymour @DamonHD @jack is seeking a new instance
in reply to Ed Davies

jack is seeking a new instance
jack is seeking a new instance
• •

@edavies @drmakimber @revk @Wifiwits @DamonHD there's a bit of a problem in waiting for the police to show up to deal with the guy who wants to force you to wait for the police to show up

incidentally, folks, get a good front-and-back dashcam... mine cost 25% of what the writeoff value of my car turned out to be so it's paid for itself four times over already!

@RevK :verified_r: @Martin Kimber @Ed Davies @Matt Seymour @DamonHD
in reply to RevK :verified_r:

Steve Hill 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁷󠁬󠁳󠁿🇪🇺
Steve Hill 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁷󠁬󠁳󠁿🇪🇺
• •
@revk @JackEric @edavies @drmakimber @Wifiwits @DamonHD my car (and presumably every other modern car) has cameras it uses for lane assist and stuff. I have no idea why we need a separate dashcam when the video streams from those cameras could (but aren't) be made available.
@RevK :verified_r: @Martin Kimber @Ed Davies @Matt Seymour @DamonHD @jack is seeking a new instance
in reply to RevK :verified_r:

Steven Reed
Steven Reed
• •
@revk getting out when you're (presumably) afraid of physical or sexual assault would seem like a bad idea. I'm guessing a car with a driver might have attempted to manouevre around the harassers? At the very least would have been someone else hopefully on the woman's side in the case of an escalation. In reality I'm guessing the arseholes would not have attempted this had anyone else been in the car. This does feel like a newly discovered specific problem with driverless taxis.
@RevK :verified_r:
in reply to Steven Reed

RevK :verified_r:
RevK :verified_r:
• •
@srtcd424 I appreciate that, but presumably the same concerns if she was alone and driving.
@Steven Reed
in reply to RevK :verified_r:

DamonHD
DamonHD
• •
@revk @srtcd424 no, I don't think so. In the back she has far less control. Maybe you have not experienced a situation where your agency is drastically reduced and bad actors enjoy their power. I have been reduced to tears as a white bloke in my pomp more than once in analogous situations.
@RevK :verified_r: @Steven Reed
in reply to RevK :verified_r:

ScaredyCat
ScaredyCat
• •
A driveless car just wont force its way past them. A human driving could. I suspect they did it because they knew the car wouldn't try and run them over.
in reply to ScaredyCat

RevK :verified_r:
RevK :verified_r:
• •
@ScaredyCat Ok but the “try and run them over” should never be an option for a “real” driver either, surely?
@ScaredyCat
in reply to RevK :verified_r:

ScaredyCat
ScaredyCat
• •
A driverless car will *never* do it, a human might if they were frightened.
in reply to RevK :verified_r:

OpticalNail 🇵🇸
OpticalNail 🇵🇸
• •

Because a driverless car is not programmed to, fx, escape dangerous situations. As a driver you can reverse, slowly push forward, etc.

And about getting out, I do not understand. It's more dangerous outside than inside.

This entry was edited (23 hours ago)
in reply to RevK :verified_r:

Sarah Brown
Sarah Brown
•
@RevK :verified_r: @Neil Brown Speaking as someone who has been accosted by men on occasion like this, she likely didn't get out because she was terrified of what they might do to her.
@Neil Brown @RevK :verified_r:

reshared this

in reply to Sarah Brown

Colman Reilly
Colman Reilly
• •
@goatsarah @revk she can’t get out and they don’t have to fear her just hitting the accelerator anyway.
@Sarah Brown @RevK :verified_r:
in reply to Neil Brown

Tony Hoyle
Tony Hoyle
• •

It's probably something that needs a specific law, maliciously impeding the progress of a self driving car.

There's even mention of how it could go in the comments, with people demanding extortion money to allow the car to continue.

Is it too much to hope we get ahead of the tech by stopping this behaviour now when it's in its infancy..

RevK :verified_r: reshared this.

in reply to Tony Hoyle

Neil Brown
Neil Brown
• •

@tony Something like s137 Highways Act 1980?:

If a person, without lawful authority or excuse, in any way wilfully obstructs the free passage along a highway he is guilty of an offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 51 weeks or a fine or both.


legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/…

Highways Act 1980

An Act to consolidate the Highways Acts 1959 to 1971 and related enactments, with amendments to give effect to recommendations of the Law Commission.
www.legislation.gov.uk
@Tony Hoyle
⇧