Waymo One is now open to everyone in San Francisco

These cars are literally unsupervised.

Unsupervised in what sense? There's internal cameras that are periodically checked. Weight and seatbelt sensors that give alerts if a passenger is or puts objects in the drivers seat, or if too many individuals get in the car.

I'd be shocked if a similar or greater level of observability doesn't also exist outside the car.

What do you think comes next?

Public transport, hopefully.

Waymos ads are obnoxious and it keeps selling my travel data to everyone, I'll better get a car

You have ID of who was in the car and when, and a 'report' button in the app for the next passenger. Easy enough, if something is reported you have the choice to wait for the next one while the trashed car goes to be cleaned or ride anyway at a discount if you solve it yourself - e.g: put the trash in a bag in the boot of the car. After N reports attributed to you, you get banned.

Uber started as off duty black car drivers doing gig work. Those were the default right? The random guy with a car gig was rolled out as uberx later?

But I'm completely with you on the unsupervised part. People doing all sorts of things back there that an ML might not identify. Now if they hire an army remotely to monitor, I guess that could scale because of wage disparities.

Motor vehicles are gross and dirty, that's why I ride a bicycle.

Life is just a giant story we tell ourselves. This is no different. Who knows what tomorrow's story will tell!

Well it's because as Uber expanded and had to desperately fight for its margins, it started to lower its standards for UberX. Before, cars had to be fairly new and in a relatively good condition. Now it's no longer the case.

Self-driving + self-cleaning cars obviously.

Regardless of whether the Waymo is supervised, they're brand-new cars, of course they'll be cleaner.

Organic, manual, hand-driven authentic vintage driving experience (before it was cool, of course).

Might actually cut down on the contingent who leave trash or other debris because they believe a person will be cleaning after them.

I know, I know. We can dream.

I've taken 38 Waymo rides so far. Every one of them has been very clean, cleaner than the average Uber ride.

Potentially. But, with each driver exercising quality control over their own vehicles, the actual result will likely vary from hitting as good or better a standard to being worse. The Waymo standards, thus far, are pretty high, so I would expect on average Uber/Lyft/Etc. would fair worse on average.

Waymo's have cameras inside the car to make sure the vehicles are clean: https://support.google.com/waymo/answer/9190819

One of the worst parts of the Uber experience is the smell of the driver. Especially those that put on heavy cologne or perfumes.

No one but they have to return to base to recharge pretty quickly, whereupon someone can clean and tidy them.

The biggest problem with cleaning is that compared to Uber where there's a human driver, the autonomy factor will almost certainly lead to more people fucking shit up simply because they can. Look at anything else that goes unattended in the public way: ebikes, delivery bot things, scooters... nasty combo of "I want to fuck with The Man" and "haha nobody is here watching I don't need to be as careful with my messy sandwich"

I think eventually they’ll just make a car (like Zooks is) without all the messy crud (steering wheel etc) and with fixed, waterproof seats and such. It will be designed for automatic cleaned by driving into a depot and being hosed down.

Think of those self-cleaning toilets.

Let me introduce you to WayGlo. They pivot to automated car cleaners...

I wonder if they'd ever offer riders a discount for taking trash out that was left behind by other riders. They could even include a vacuum and give people a couple bucks off for cleaning it out during/after their ride.

Every rider’s identity is known. That’s going to play a huge role in how people treat them.

I imagine the cars all head to some centralized location for cleaning and whatever other maintenance. That probably makes cleaning a very economic, factory-like procedure. Beats something like Uber where drivers have to bring their cars to a car wash or whatever (although presumably the Uber drivers aren't being paid to wash the cars because they aren't employees, so the unpaid labor there gives Uber an advantage).

Presumably this requires humans to physically clean periodically.

That's a good robotics project. All the cars are the same. The cars do not have any objects inside that belong to the occupants and should stay. So robotic interior vacuuming could be quite practical, as a station in the car wash. A vision system can inspect for damage and route that car to the maintenance line.

So smooth they apparently opt to blow red lights instead of stopping abruptly.

Surprised traffic lights aren't updated to communicate with cars directly. Why not have traffic lights broadcast 'stop' message along with turning red?

I suspect traffic lights, roads and cities will have to be updated to work with driverless cars.

Competing anecdata: Yesterday I was running downtown and a Waymo stopped for me at a green light because it wasn't sure if I was gonna jaywalk (jayrun?). Only once I stood still for a few seconds did it continue to make its turn.

This was in a turn-left-only intersection with a separate pedestrian light. Maybe the Waymo got confused and thought I also had green.

Have also nearly been hit as a pedestrian by a Waymo. I also last week saw a Waymo blow through a yellow-red very aggressively, so I think the downvotes on above comment are intensely biased.

I think it’s legal to enter an intersection on yellow and exit on red in CA. Thats why.

Human drivers speed up to avoid red, and yay you avoided red but the suddenly higher speed is far more dangerous for everyone around.

I would like to see video of an equivalent incident.

Anecdata to say I've been in a Waymo and had it run a red.

No. Yes. Yes. Waymo's have been taught to handle construction and emergency signals. Waymo's can follow hand directions from a cop in the street.

They are starting to obstruct bike lanes just like Ubers, I’ve seen this happen 3-4 times and it’s documented here: https://sfba.social/@SafeStreetRebel/112634004752866771

Years ago they were very respectful and conservative of basic road markings but clearly they have now ‘expanded capabilities’

While they pick up in almost every location the drop off is sometimes "close by" like 3min walk to final destination (the app tells you in advance tho so you can decide to order or not). This is quite annoying sometimes and I picked uber instead.

https://waymo.com/blog/2022/02/utilizing-key-point-and-pose-....

Not so difficult to add this feature with the help of human like voice and LLM backend.

Just saying that there’s magic out there that’s not technological.

Dark magic too, I've been on one too many rides where the driver insists on monologuing on topics that range from detestable (politics) to alarming (the driver was armed, and had picked me up from the airport)

Yeah, I've ridden with two cool drivers with history degrees, one jazz musician from Ethiopia, and one who I'd already met elsewhere. Zero interest in riding in a Waymo. (Disclaimer: Alphabet shareholder)

I'll hazard a guess: because Uber drivers are sometimes willing to stop for a minute in an illegal spot to park to do a quick pick up or drop off, and Waymos are never willing to do that (presumably).

Human taxi drivers are okay parking illegally to do pick-ups/drop-offs, and we as a society usually tolerate that, as long as they're quick about it.

But Waymo probably isn't comfortable telling its cars to park in many illegal parts of streets, even if it's going to be quick. Partially because determining which illegal parking jobs are socially acceptable vs unacceptable is a hard determination for a robot to make.

Fwiw there is a checkbox if you want to absolutely minimize walking. It'll often do things like drive around the block so you don't have to cross the street yourself.

One thing I actually think is really cool about the Waymo ux (full disclosure, I work for Google but not Waymo) is how it elevates the pickup/dropoff locations to feel like more of a first class feature (compared to just typing in an address and your Uber driver dropping you off in the general area).

I don't think I've ever had to walk more than 30 feet to a pickup location, but I have had it drop me off at the nearest cross street (usually on streets where it would've had to double park in front of my exact drop-off location)

When I rode in one, admittedly a long time ago when cruise was still operating in sf too, the waymo car pulled over for a firetruck. However, the firetruck was merely crossing the road we were on and it was 3 streets away. And the waymo pulled into a bus stop to do this. The safety driver had to nudge it back into traffic.

My AIs have no character, I demand my Roomba show a little passion when cleaning.

From my (hopefully) neutral point of view I think Waymo running a red traffic light is the worst of all and most likely will end up in a disaster.

For huge metropolitan cities for examples London, Istanbul, Delhi, Tokyo, Jakarta or Sao Paulo running a red traffic with a car can most probably cause fatal accidents. I am now more than convinced that level 5 autonomous driving cannot be achieved in my lifetime, and much better efforts should be better directed toward non-invasive highly accurate early detection of high mortality diseases like CVDs and efforts for properly mitigating climate changes.

This self driving car ride brought to you in part by: your local Christian church

The possibility of "character" is always my biggest dread when getting into a taxi or an Uber.

I just want to get from point A to point B without having to make small talk or delicately navigate a political discussion with a stranger. A stranger who both controls the vehicle and, in the case of Uber/Lyft, will be giving me a rating at the end of the ride.

Because of safety concerns or because you like the idea that in principle humans should be driving?

In other words, what kind of safety metrics do you think would be necessary to change your mind?

If in N years 90% of your peers use self-driving cars, and the only accidents you hear about are in the news about people you don't know, would that change your feelings about safety?

Reliance on HD Mapping gets you to "robotaxis" quicker and easier, but it doesn't and likely cannot scale.

If you can make the unit economics work for a large quantity of individual cars, mapping is a small fixed cost.

I agree that it's not economical to map every city and road in the US, since you need to generate revenue from every mapped road and city. So you can think of HD maps as amounting to building roads. They will be built in lucrative places. Cruise and Waymo won't make money from putting taxis in nowhere Arkansas, so they don't need to map it.

the current limiting factor is not what the car sees or knows but what it does with that information. It is unclear how or why HD mapping would help them at that point.

That's simply untrue. All the hard stuff continues to be reliability and sensor gated. Cruise and Waymo have amazing sensors and even they struggle with sensor range, sensor reliability, model performance on tail cases, etc. For example, at night these cars typically do not have IR or Thermal sensing. They are relying on the limited dynamic range of their cameras + active illumination + hoping laser gets enough points / your object is reflective enough. Laser perception also hits limits when lasers shine on small objects (think: skinny railroad arm). Cars also have limits with regard to interpreting written signs, which is a big part of driving.

Occlusions are still public enemy #1. Waymo killed a dog. Cruise crashed into a fire truck coming out of a blind intersection even though their sensors saw the truck within 100ms.

LiDAR and HD mapping together are supremely useful, even if you don't drive with it, for enabling you to simulate accurately. You cannot simulate reliably while guessing at distances and locations. HD maps let you use visual odometry to localize, and distance measurements grounded in physics backstop the realism of your simulation at least in terms of the world's shape.

Tesla lacks the ability to resim counterfactuals with confidence since they don't have HD ground truth. There are believers at the company that maybe you could make "good enough" ground truth from imagery alone but that in and of itself is a huge risk, and it's what skipping steps looks like. Most in the industry agree that barring a major change in strategy they just have no way to regression test their software to the level of reliability required for L4 / no human supervision.

HD Mapping is great when it's accurate and available. But it requires a ton of data and constant updating, or the car will get "lost," and realistically will never be implemented in general, at best in certain cities.

Waymo have said time and again they don’t rely on maps being 100% accurate to be able to drive. It's one of the key assumptions of the system. They use it as prior knowledge to aid in decision making. If they got "lost" whenever there was a road change, they wouldn't be successfully navigating construction zones in San Francisco as we've seen in many videos.

They can also do constant updates because the cars themselves are able to detect road changes, self update maps and rollout changes to the entire fleet. See https://waymo.com/blog/2020/09/the-waymo-driver-handbook-map...

At this point, the whole “HD maps are not practical” is just a trope perpetuated by the Tesla community for years.

The only selling point of FSD (Supervised) is that it (can) work "everywhere."

I seem to recall Musk saying in the last couple years that "full self driving will basically require AGI." This appeared to me to be extremely honest and accurate, though I believe that in the moment he was trying to promote the idea that Tesla was an AGI company.

Does anyone happen to remember when he said that?

The obvious question here is "why not both". Use mapping data where you can, LIDAR and other sensors where you can, and visual cameras when you must. There's no reason to limit yourself to just one input type. Elon claims that, sure, but it doesn't seem like a given at all.

I’ve watched Waymos navigate the Tenderloin. It doesn’t get any more random than that.

requires a ton of data

Not a problem for Google, right?

constant updating

I guess the cars can and will update the mapping in real time ?

at best in certain cities

If mapping a city is possible, so it's mapping a highway, even easier.

If cars do update the maps themselves, they require might just a couple of human-driven passes of the standard WWaymo cars on a highway to generate the maps.

Tesla seem stuck-ish to me. They do have some incremental improvements each year, but even after several years of development, their cars want to randomly run into parked cars and other stationary obstacles on a frequent basis. We're not talking about edge cases, your cars shouldn't be regularly trying to hit a concrete wall after this much engineering effort.

Waymos do occasionally screw up, but if they did it as much as Tesla's FSD, it'd be chaos in the streets in SF, so it seems like it must be fairly infrequent.

Tesla is willing to sell to people who will pay $$$ for a self driving car. Waymo isn't. That's probably more important for now. Taxi drivers don't earn that much, and have some advantages AI can't easily replace (able to help with luggage, use petrol stations etc). Replacing them requires undercutting them which in turn means you can't generate a ton of revenue from that. Yet Waymo's business model, such that it is, has put them many billions into the red already. I wonder if anyone has done some ROI calculations and if so how long it'd take. The LIDARs alone would require a huge number of trips just to pay them off, then you have the cars, the decade+ of enormously high software development salaries... if Waymo were another YouTube where it could hide amongst Google's other profitable businesses that'd be one thing. As a separate business with its own accountings, how long will it take until it's turned a profit?

Remember that the passenger cars are not the only thing that can scale; if you can automate the mapping and data preparation part of the process sufficiently, you may even be able to reduce it to mostly a matter of driving a few sensor cars around for a few weeks; maybe even cars that are adapted versions of your normal taxi vehicles, but with a human driver behind the wheel while you are mapping.

I would imagine that while Waymo's mapping efforts have been very human effort-intensive so far, they will be looking at developing this automatic map-making capability as a high priority for rolling out new cities. Scaling the rate of expansion is then mostly a matter of throwing hardware and compute at the problem.

Tesla is still stuck at Level 3 while Waymo has been operating at level 4 for years.

If Tesla does manag to jump straight from level 3 to level 5, they have a chance to compete, but that seems unlikely. They also might move to level 4 and be able to expand level 4 coverage faster, but that still remains to be seen.

Waymo has years of experience with the other hard part of self driving taxis: actually picking up and dropping off people without a human driver.

Anti-musk partisanship frustrates me, but I suspect it is your fan-boy talking points that drive the downvotes of your comment

Larry/Sergei left Waymo at a limbo state because they don't think in terms of economics, just coolness.

Larry/Sergei didn't create the Cybertruck

it can never buy 5 Million FSD cars

Why not? They only do the integration, and traditional car and electronics manufacturers have solved the scaling problems long ago.

Tesla doesn't even have a single autonomous vehicle yet...

They have driving assist that people still measure in 'number of times I had to grab the wheel'.

"The cost of building Tesla FSD = 1/100 * cost of building Waymo FSD

The cost of delivering Tesla FSD = 1/10 * cost of delivering Waymo FSD"

This seems like one of the key assumptions, but is not proven out at all because Tesla does not even have a level 4 vehicle. So the cost of delivering one comparable to waymo is infinite right now!

Your other key assumption is "Waymo can never get to the scale of Tesla (it can never buy 5 Million FSD cars, while Tesla is delivering them every 2 years)".

Both the assertion in the first part and the second part seem like super-strange assumptions, and not obviously true at all, yet are also critical to your analysis.

Waymo could get to the scale of tesla. It may or may not be too expensive to do. It could in fact, buy 5 million FSD cars. It may or may not be too expensive to do.

"Mathematically, Tesla has an upper hand over Waymo and it'll play out as that."

Or you know, if needed, Waymo could change?

It's funny to watch someone say "this one company will be able to adapt in every possible way to it's advantage, and nobody else can or will"

That almost never happens.

Your retort is then that you are getting downvoted because of anti-musk hate.

Have you considered that maybe you just don't have that good of an argument instead, and that your comment comes off as more of a tesla fanboy (regardless if you are) than a useful contribution?

I could write the literal opposite comment of what you did, in favor of Waymo. That would not be a useful contribution either for the same reasons.

They have several phases before they open fully: safety driver no passenger testing, safety drivers with employee passengers, driverless with employee passengers, limited rollout to paid passengers under NDA, wider rollout but with waitlist, and finally getting rid of the waitlist.

It's certainly true that they need to do a bunch of extensive mapping for each city, but I don't think we should expect their roll-out speed in later cities to be as slow as the first couple of cities. Most of the stuff they are learning in the initial roll-out will generalize to other location; it's not all city-specific learning.

I don’t think every city is a brand new learning experience, there will definitely be takeaways that will speed up deployments in new cities. Plus, a lot of these deployments can happen in parallel so seeing them come online in 20 places at a time simultaneously doesn’t seem extraordinary.

As a potential customer, Waymo's careful approach seems much more appealing to me. I don't want to ride in a move fast and break things robotaxi when it's snowing in Chicago.

Waymo doesn't have to convince its vehicle owners to let strangers ride in their car unsupervised.

Yes there can be cleaning fees and vetting, but all it takes is one or two people puking in your Tesla, and you'll have no interest in providing a Robotaxi for Musk's Mission.

Tesla definitely has lower costs, but what they don't have is a car that can drive itself.

They only have a car that can drive with a human partner behind the wheel who's ready at any second to take over and prevent it from crashing.

You are assuming Tesla is anywhere close to the capabilities of Waymo. Ignoring Elon and his history of hyping things far beyond reality, Tesla does not appear to have the equipment, data, or organizational culture to achieve what Waymo has done.

The main factor though is that California appears poised to hand them a monopoly.

Tbh I love my experience with Uber. I know people who don't own a car because they think it's cheaper to use Uber. But you're right - I am an above-average driver.

You are correct, Waymo has not solved the economics of robotaxis yet. However Waymo does have a huge head start on the solution. Waymo has been able to manage their scale growth to manage the cost of finding these solutions. It seems like a competitor that hasn't had that will have to pay a lot more to catch up.

Really, you can't repeat this point enough. Tesla has zero experience in autonomous operation. Their vehicle has not ever driven itself any distance, under any circumstances. There is no reason to believe their software is on the cusp of a sudden improvement. They simply release new major version numbers that have different sets of flaws.

Could you point me to this episode, please?

Highly recommend people read how Waymo's fleet response works before throwing out phrases like "remote drivers take over cars": https://waymo.com/blog/2024/05/fleet-response/

Where did you get this information? There are definitely people ready to respond to any requests from the car or passenger when they come up, but I've never read anything to indicate that each ride is actively monitored by a person.

If you could rent/purchase a vehicle without a steering wheel, would you not want there to be someone available who can help out when the system runs into trouble? As long as there is no driver in the car, does it matter how it drives? Is that not just an irrelevant implementation detail that has no bearing on your passenger experience?

The waymo I took on Sunday didn't have a driver.

It's us in the EU who are having the sacrifice though. As we're left behind economically and technologically as a load of octogenarian bureaucrats decide to ban genetic engineering, AI, etc.

Sitting in traffic in a taxi or your own car sucks either way. Public transportation is the only sustainable solution.

Congrats on your breakthroughs in writing laws.

One thing that really impressed me about riding Waymo is that when you start to open the door, it'll give really good warnings if you're potentially opening the door into traffic. Even specifying if there's a passing car/bike/scooter

Yeah I wonder what people do, and have done, around the world in walkable communities predating the car. Perhaps people in these communities are on average more mobile into old age because they frequently walked?

> In the future, when you're old and quite possibly disabled, you might rethink the whole "walkable cities" thing.

I am disabled, and like many other disabled people, I can't drive a car. Often times as people age they also lose the ability to drive a car safely.

That is precisely why walkable neighborhoods are so important to old and disabled people.

The biggest reason people loose muscle mass as they age is due to lack of use, so a built environment that encourages walking is going to help keep people in shape to walk as they age.

when you're old and quite possibly disabled, you might rethink the whole "walkable cities" thing

Manhattan is incredibly senior friendly.

Old and handicapped people have lived before cars, and in less car-centric cities forever. Walkable cities mainly mean that things are close to you so you _can_ walk to them.

Actual car-free areas, like the access-controlled dense old towns in Europe, are possible (if built-out where they don't exist), but not necessarily to be walkable.

"Walkable cities" doesn't mean that everyone is forced to walk everywhere. It means that there are destinations (grocery store, restaurant, pub, library, cinema, hospital etc) you can reach within walking distance without having to play frogger on a highway. They are absolutely a boon to someone old and disabled. They can use assistive devices, public transport, and even cars to get around.

I think you have the wrong impression about what "walkable cities" mean.

Many more disabled people are disabled in a way that prevents them from driving a car than in ways that prevent them from walking. There is also a huge class of people who are physically capable of driving but legally barred from it.

A walkable city doesn't preclude driving. In fact it often improves it. If almost everybody is walking or biking or using transit that means there are few other cars and driving becomes much nicer too.

Many things incorrect here.

Better driving can only get you from 1 curb to another. You still have to walk to your actual destination whether it’s to the other end of the mall, or to your home’s door. In no way is this any worse in a walkable city which will not only allow you to walk everywhere when you’re able, therefore delaying any loss in walking capabilities, but will also include better and more accessible public and private curb to curb transportation.

A walkable city will also make the curb to actual destination far more walkable.

A walkable city will also mean a lot more options are accessible to the disabled through their wheelchairs, etc.

I meant airport rides to the terminal at all hours of the day.

Waymo is already giving driverless freeway rides to employees in Phoenix, so I don’t agree that it’s far away. It’s definitely a different challenge though.

Airport rides in Phoenix are always available, but apart from the hours you note, Waymo drops riders off at the 24th or 44th Street Sky Train locations.

Freeway driving is more straightforward in many ways compared to urban driving, but the problem is that the impact of screwing up is a LOT more severe.

If you screw up at typical speeds in SF, probably nobody will die. On a freeway, odds are a lot higher.

If a car is confused in an urban area, stopping in the middle of the street isn't 100% safe, but it's not super dangerous, whereas stopping in the middle of freeway suddenly is obviously extremely dangerous.

Boston resident here seconding this.

I am not artificially intelligent and Boston’s streets are a fuckshow.

The issue is not a confusing road network, it's that Waymos require a modicum of grace in other drivers to operate. They aren't super aggressive, they'll defer to pedestrians and other drivers, they drive safely.

That I think is where they'll find problems when expanding to locales with less than conscientious drivers.

They’re testing in DC and giving media rides there. So DC is a candidate too.

the regulators deserve considerably worse than a middle finger

https://teamster.org/2023/05/teamsters-halt-waymo-in-san-fra...

There are cheating devices that simulate hands on the wheel. If FSD becomes good enough they could go from suicidal to popular. Regulators wouldn't be able to stop illegal aftermarket modifications for obvious reasons. I still think Waymo will win, but this is how I think a Tesla victory would look.

Except they are not "doing it" as long as it requires driver supervision. They are doing something that's few levels below Waymo. Removing the driver is the whole problem domain, which Waymo has done years ago.

There's a reason Tesla hasn't been able to remove the driver (or even let them take their eyes off). It's because the car has "just" a few cameras.

Ubers don't smell bad until someone shits or pukes in one.

I can't imagine these will be any different...

so "Driven by Ms. Daisy"

A lot of people depend on those job to survive. We need some type of off-ramp if we're going to just wipe out a large section of the economy .

I've worked horrible jobs before, and I needed the money to survive. Not everyone can write Ruby code and make 300k a year.

It's quite feasible. The cost structure only permits those e-bike riders in SF to do it reasonably. But it's feasible.

When the option is a choice between going possibly hungry for the day, you and your family, and not going hungry then that is not called financial illiteracy.

Just as a comparison, the people who did that also do highway protests. There's a video if you'll scroll down a little https://sfstandard.com/2023/06/08/activists-block-san-franci...

1:1 remote human monitoring would not scale from a unit economics perspective, and even if they did that, the remote operators can't drive the car, only offer small feedbacks. So the car is really driving itself.

The safety story is an interesting one. Companies like Cruise and Waymo are not forthcoming with their incident data. They share infrequently and through spreadsheets that do not capture every incident. It's pretty ass, and I'd be wary of trusting their self-reported data. I imagine their insurance companies have slightly better data than the gov't, but even then maybe not.

4 year old quote from their former CEO: "It costs as much as a moderately equipped S-class".

That's around $150,000.

You can’t get rid of your car in London, one of the best public transit cities in the world...?

I saw a Waymo on 280 the other day. Maybe it was being driven by hand, but the lidar was spinning.

"Tesla Robotaxi unveil on 8/8"

https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1776351450542768368

Your clothes are still mainly made by women and children, working 14 hours a day. They just don't live in the US anymore...

Then why go to office in the first place? :P

Thanks! Found the perfect video. He talks about the depots here, there are some that are full service and some that are not. These are actually a lot bigger than I was expecting and have a bunch of staff.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3QZ3e7mWD9E

All it takes is one competitor in a hot space to get companies offering venture-subsidized prices, like we've seen when rideshare and delivery companies. And though the upfront investment may be huge, the price per trip can end up close to zero, unlike rideshares and delivery which have a much higher floor.

Not that there's any competitor that seems even close to Waymo.

“When I first saw it before filming, it was all alone, no peds, no other moving traffic. So, I don’t think it was yielding for any of the peds, just stopped for the steam.”