Are robotaxis the future? Or instead, the past?
Are robotaxis the future? Or instead, the past?
TechCrunch reports on a Zoox robotaxi that crashed into another car in Las Vegas. It was fully the fault of the Zoox automated driving system. As a result all their robotaxis had to be recalled.
Forbes reports on how Waymo is creating more and more robotaxis. The odd thing is that Google has committed to Jaguar I-PACE vehicles and have 2,000 in storage, even though the car has been obsoleted. And their Chinese option is of course subject to 175% tariffs, making it very uneconomical.
Scientific American reports that the DoT has changed AV rules for Level 2 vehicles (Tesla FSD, but not Waymo) so that fewer safety incidents need to be reported. Three reporting regulations were also eased: whether the car had been driven in conditions in which it was designed to operate; a plain-language description of the circumstances of the crash; and the version of automated self-driving software that was in use.
electrek reports on Waymo's press release where they claim that their robotaxis are much safer. The problem is, safety isn't about making safer cars. It is instead about road design and reducing car use.
SF Examiner reports on how California state legislators are currently not trying to move forward legislation that would give local jurisdictions the opportunity to regulate robotaxis. Part of the reason is that Mayor Lurie is now trying to welcome Waymos to the transit only portion of Market St instead of trying to regulate them.
CNBC reports that the California DMV has announced that they are seeking public comment on proposed regulation changes for robotaxis.
