← back

Advice, not control: the role of Remote Assistance in Waymo's operations

xnx | 2026-02-18 01:19 UTC | source

Advice, not control: the role of Remote Assistance in Waymo’s operations

Our mission at Waymo is to be the world’s most trusted driver, and we are committed to earning the public’s trust through transparency and proven road safety outcomes. As we expand around the world, we are investing in an operations team that matches our global scale, including U.S.-based operations personnel and global operations teams, to ensure seamless, safe, 24/7 operations worldwide.

In 2024 we published a detailed outline describing how our Remote Assistance (RA) works. Though some have compared the function to aircraft dispatch, based on my decade as a U.S. Naval aviator flying F-14s and F/A-18s, I can firmly say that analogy is wrong. Aircraft dispatch is responsible for active flight monitoring, weather routing, and mechanical oversight for the duration of a journey.

Waymo’s service does not rely on remote drivers. RA does not continuously monitor a vehicle or set of vehicles. Instead, they respond to specific requests for information initiated by the Waymo Driver – our automated driving system (ADS) – and provide advice which the system can decide to use or reject. Our vehicle-to-RA connection is also as fast as the blink of an eye. Median one-way latency is approximately 150 milliseconds for U.S. based operations centers and 250 milliseconds for RA based abroad.

Waymo RA is composed of different functions, including our Event Response Team (ERT) which is exclusively based in the U.S. Waymo’s ERT is certified for more complex tasks like coordinating with emergency responders and managing post-collision protocols.

Despite differences in role and responsibilities, all RA agents must have and maintain driver’s licenses and are rigorously vetted, including a comprehensive review of their driving history, thorough criminal background checks, initial and ongoing drug testing, and color blindness and spatial recognition assessments. As of February 17, 2026, there are approximately 70 Remote Assistance agents on duty worldwide at any given time, including ERT. For context, Waymo currently has a fleet of 3,000 vehicles. Every week, our vehicles drive over four million miles and provide over 400,000 rides.

Waymo is committed to safety and transparency, and we’ll continue to work with lawmakers and regulators around the world as we scale our service globally. To learn more about how RA works at Waymo, you can view our letter to Congress here.

53 points | 47 comments | original link

Comments

Flux159 | 2026-02-18 01:34 UTC
This seems like it’s in response to the congressional testimony last week to clarify some things about their remote assistance systems.

It’s interesting that they only have 70 people for this - I can understand the outside the US ones for nighttime assistance and they need to be able to scale for other countries too in the future.

What I’m still wondering is what is limiting the scaling for Waymo - just cars or also the sensor systems? They’ve had their new test vehicles in SF for a while but I still think that most customers only get their Jaguars right now (and still limited on highway driving to specific customers in the Bay Area).

xnx | 2026-02-18 02:24 UTC
> What I’m still wondering is what is limiting the scaling for Waymo

I'm also very curious about this. Probably a mix of many things: training the driver to handle tricky conditions better (e.g. flooded roads), getting more Ohai vehicles imported and configured, configuring the backlog of Jaguar iPace and trucking them out to new markets, mapping roads and non-customer testing in new markets, getting regulatory approval/cooperation in other market (e.g. DC), finding depot space, hiring maintenance team, etc.

jefftk | 2026-02-18 01:37 UTC
That it's 70 remote assistance people for 3,000 cars is pretty good counter-evidence to the "they're not driverless, they're remote controlled" claims.
jeffbee | 2026-02-18 01:41 UTC
70 on-duty, that probably translates to 200-300 people on staff.
jefftk | 2026-02-18 01:47 UTC
I wish they included how many active cars they have at any one time so we could make a proper comparison.
ameliaquining | 2026-02-18 01:49 UTC
But presumably most of the 3,000 cars are on the road at any given time? In which case the point stands, namely, that their remote operations people can't be the ones driving the cars because there aren't enough of them on duty at any given time; therefore, the cars really do drive themselves. (Which I would have thought was never in doubt, but I suppose some people are really determined to be skeptics.)
altairprime | 2026-02-18 01:41 UTC
They’re not “no human in the loop” driverless. They’re just on autopilot, same as any airliner. We don’t call planes that takeoff and land themselves “pilotless”, because there’s humans in the loop. Waymo must be rather defensive about being called out for merely having autopilot cars, which is weird because that’s rather miraculous in historical terms — but certainly the generic term “autopilot” is a much less distinctive claim to success than “driverless”.
estearum | 2026-02-18 01:59 UTC
They are actually "no human in the loop" driverless most of the time.

If an airplane did not have a human inside the airplane and they only "dialed in" for extraordinary events, then yes I do think we'd call them pilotless.

Anyway Waymo, to my knowledge, doesn't use the terms "driverless" nor "autopilot." They claim that they are creating an artificial driver or that their cars are autonomous. There's something driving the car, it's just not a human driver, ergo it's not "driverless."

AlotOfReading | 2026-02-18 02:07 UTC
Autopilot in planes is much closer to cruise control than it is to a Waymo. This is of course the purported rationale behind Tesla's use of the name for their L2 feature. Both require a human operator available and monitoring at all times.

The aeronautic equivalent of Waymo is a fully autonomous UAV. A human might be needed to set high-level goals, but all of the actual flying/driving is done by the machine.

nearbuy | 2026-02-18 02:12 UTC
Autopilot in planes does not handle takeoff. Pilots still do that. Traditional autopilot was mostly just to keep the plane flying straight. Capabilities have improved over time, but it still doesn't fly the plane the way Waymo drives itself.
shadowgovt | 2026-02-18 02:14 UTC
Pilots in a plane on autopilot are never out of the control authority of the plane (by which I mean: "ready to take over at a moment's notice"). Driverless AVs do drive without perpetual eyes-on oversight. The FAA would never allow that for commercial planes.
CobrastanJorji | 2026-02-18 01:48 UTC
The remote control claim never made sense anyway. "There is no computer driver, it's all fake, they're paying teams of drivers in India" only sounds plausible to anyone who's never encountered lag in a video game.
netsharc | 2026-02-18 02:04 UTC
Plenty of people believe since Covid is a virus, just like software viruses it was being transmitted by 5G base stations.

I've mentioned to a friend that humans are monkeys, but which are capable of building an Internet. But maybe plenty of us are closer to monkeys...

Noumenon72 | 2026-02-18 02:04 UTC
What is their claim about latency here?

> Our vehicle-to-RA connection is also as fast as the blink of an eye. Median one-way latency is approximately 150 milliseconds for U.S. based operations centers and 250 milliseconds for RA based abroad.

That's still not fast enough for remote control, but are they implying they only send the RAs screenshots, since sending video would take seconds, not milliseconds?

shadowgovt | 2026-02-18 02:12 UTC
Interestingly, the round-trip latency from the West Coast to continental Asia isn't nearly as long as I'd assumed (60ms to 250ms, depending on who's measuring).

Not nearly fast enough for real-time highway remote operation IMHO, but surprisingly fast. That's what I get for underestimating how fast light and electric fields can go.

kakapo5672 | 2026-02-18 01:51 UTC
I've got people in my social network who firmly believe that every car is, in fact, "driven by Indonesians". Apparently a widespread belief.

I've pointed out that these vehicles are quickly become more prevalent, here and (especially) in China. To which the counter is that there plenty of Indonesians to go around.

Ygg2 | 2026-02-18 02:27 UTC
After stunt Amazon pulled off, with its shop, being skeptical is warranted.

I know Google and Amazon aren't the same company, but their incentives are.

actinium226 | 2026-02-18 02:01 UTC
70 active on average at any given time per the article, which then lists total fleet size, as opposed to number of active cars on average, so it's not a fair comparison.

Although then it says they drive about 4m miles per week, which works out to 57,000 miles per active RA agent per week. A person driving ~25 mph on average 24/7 would do ~4000 miles in a week (and we can assume 24/7 here because they reported active agents, so we assume a team of ~3 people swapping out as driver in this hypothetical).

So that gives you a car/operator ratio of at least 14, and probably more since I bet the average speed is less than 25 mph.

oceliker | 2026-02-18 02:10 UTC
I think anyone who goes for a drive in Los Angeles can attest that there are way mo than 70 cars active at any point. It's not unusual to see multiple Waymos at intersections.

Also, the average speed is way less than 25 mph, considering it may take 30 minutes to go 3-4 miles in city traffic.

toddmorey | 2026-02-18 02:10 UTC
Yeah that sentence struck me as very carefully worded. They also don't mention how often RA is needed or invoked. We'll encounter a lot of these autonomous systems (cars, robots, equipment) that escalate decisions and edge cases to human employees until they are trained enough that reliability goes up.
skybrian | 2026-02-18 01:49 UTC
Style nit: weird that it's in a modal dialog, unlike their other blog posts. Also, it doesn't come up when searching their blog.
ameliaquining | 2026-02-18 01:54 UTC
That doesn't seem to be unique to this blog post, I got the same thing clicking the other ones linked at the bottom of the page. I see the word "short" in the URL, maybe they have a separate category of "shortform" posts and the modal is for those?
esafak | 2026-02-18 01:56 UTC
Rather inelegant.
OhMeadhbh | 2026-02-18 02:00 UTC
Welcome to the savage future.
xnx | 2026-02-18 02:19 UTC
It's also a peeve of mine that their "blog" has no feed.
dddgghhbbfblk | 2026-02-18 02:50 UTC
It's not a nit at all. This is some of the worst web design from a tech company that I've seen in a long time.
OhMeadhbh | 2026-02-18 01:57 UTC
I would be very interested to see how the Waymo cars fail when RA workers aren't available.

(I would recommend that we put the unit back in operation and let it fail. It should then be a simple matter to track down the cause. We can certainly afford to be out of communication for the short time it will take to replace it.)

jgauth | 2026-02-18 02:02 UTC
I believe we already saw something like this happen with the PG&E power outage in San Francisco in December. The waymo post-mortem [1] describes the outage causing a backlog of RA requests, which seems to have resulted in cars blocking roads an intersections. I would imagine they've improved the system after that incident, however.

[1] https://waymo.com/blog/2025/12/autonomously-navigating-the-r...

mikepurvis | 2026-02-18 02:03 UTC
I would expect the assistance is typically around environmental hazards, like is it safe to drive in this construction zone. Basically, not the kind of hardware faults that would be resolved by just sending in another car.
OhMeadhbh | 2026-02-18 02:42 UTC
That seems to be the example Waymo gives as something that remote drivers help the cars with, but it doesn't go on to say that's typical or the only thing they help the cars with.
briandoll | 2026-02-18 02:14 UTC
The fact that this took SO LONG to come out after their PR crisis on this topic is more problematic than the claims themselves
wmf | 2026-02-18 02:29 UTC
I suspect the haters have constructed a lose-lose situation where if Waymo says nothing "it's a conspiracy" but if they say anything "it's not self driving". Ultimately Waymo just has to wait them out.
fragmede | 2026-02-18 02:47 UTC
You would prefer they rush something out that's half baked to satisfy your impatience?
spankalee | 2026-02-18 02:20 UTC
OT, but why in the world would you have your blog posts pop up in a little modal dialog in the middle of the screen and force readers to scroll more than they have to?
xnx | 2026-02-18 02:25 UTC
It's annoying, but they divide their blog posts into big public-relation type articles at the top of the page, and minor/informational ones at the bottom.
crazygringo | 2026-02-18 02:32 UTC
To anyone else confused, who closed the random modal dialog with just a photo thinking it was a bizarre popup --

-- that's the article. You need to keep the popup open and scroll down to see it. This is about that, not the article underneath when you close it. There doesn't seem to be any other way to link to it, strangely?

godelski | 2026-02-18 02:36 UTC
I really hate that all these companies play smoke and mirrors. Honestly, I don't see a major problem with companies using remote assistance in the transition to fully autonomous systems (jumping straight to autonomous seems insanely dangerous!), under the condition that it is disclosed and the users/public are aware. I don't see how anything short of just is anything but fraud.

To be clear, I think Waymo meets my bar. They appear to be working mostly autonomously and are clear about having assistance. They seem to have stated that from the very start and has been the response to many public questions.

But we waste so much time and money because of that fraud. It breeds distrust in our society and frankly I just don't understand why it's legal or fines are so small. Fraud kills legitimate businesses. It kills those playing fair. It makes people doubt those that do play fair so it just reinforces more fraud.