Are robotaxis the future? Or instead, the past?
Are robotaxis the future? Or instead, the past?
Robotaxis are not just limited by weak technology. They unfortunately also don’t make any business sense…
SF Chronicle reports that Cruise is gearing up for a return to the Bay Area. Note that they are not actually returning, but just "gearing up" to do so. If Cruise considers this feeble attempt newsworthy then they are indeed in deep trouble.
404 Media reports on how one of their delivery robots caused a pedestrian to be knocked down and injured. The company offered Promo Codes to make it all better. Meanwhile, they are pursuing felony charger against a couple of drunk students who temporarily snatched one of their robots.
Reuters reports that Waymo is looking at yet another vehicle to use, given that its current Jaguar vehicles are being discontinued. But the possible use of the Hyundai Ionic 5 vehicle appears to be very uncertain.
Washington Post reports on California legislation that would require vehicles built after 2030 to warn drivers when they are speeding. Even though this would obviously improve safety, it is being fought against by automobile manufactures and the constitutional right to recklessly speed community. But if safety is the goal, this type of technology would make much more of a difference than robotaxis, given it would apply to all new cars.
NY Times reports on the myth of "driverless" robotaxis. It turns out that all of the robotaxi companies have large and expensive remote operation centers, where actual humans help drive the vehicles for the inevitable situations where automation simply does not work.
NY Times asks the truly pertinent question: is Waymo a viable business that will continue? While most articles dwell on safety issues, the NY Times digs into how Waymo might not continue once it realizes it is in a hopeless taxi business where they have to front all the costs.
SF Examiner reports that the California state Legislature has once again approved requiring vehicles over 10,000 to have a human operator on board. It is now up to Gov Newsom to sign the legislation. But given his love of lobbyists he will most likely veto it for the second time.
Mission Local reports on how robotaxis will not be ticketed for breaking the law after all, perpetuating a two tiered system for safety.
SF Chronicle reports that Waymo is starting to understand that they need to have a profitable business in order to continue.
Wired reports that Waymo has not started curbside pickups and drop-offs at the Phoenix Sky Harbor airport in Arizona. And indeed, people who cannot lift their suitcases into the trunk will simply not be accommodated.
WSJ reports that yet another import VP has departed from Tesla. The rats are clearly jumping ship, given their lack of faith in Tesla's purported future.
Bloomberg reports on an purported deal where Uber will offer Cruise robotaxi rides early 2025.
Business Insider reports that Elon Musk's buyout of Twitter was the worse deal for banks in a long time. The banks still are burdened by not being able to sell off these risky loans. This is more evidence that Tesla/Musk do not even have the financial capability of creating a robotaxi fleet.
Waymo reports that they served 100k paid trips in a week. They should have also mentioned that they have about the same number of completely empty trips, clogging our roads and generating pollution.
The Verge reports that Waymo will be using fewer sensors in the future to lower costs. The article also explains that the vehicle in question will face a 100% tariff since it is made in China.
