Are robotaxis the future? Or instead, the past?
Are robotaxis the future? Or instead, the past?
The robotaxi companies have been more than just a bit misleading to both the public and the regulators. Untruths or downright lies? You decide…
SF Gate reports on how Mayor Lurie's bending of the laws and allowing Waymo vehicles on car-free Market Street has completely backfired. A year later Waymo is not providing service on Market Street because there are no adequate locations to drop off or pick up passengers. Instead, Market Street is now plagued by car drivers who wrongly think that all cars are now allowed on the "car-free" portion.
SF Chronicle publishes a marketing piece for Waymo as an op-ed. William Riggs, the author, is paid by Waymo and other robotaxi companies to do their bidding. Not stating that William Riggs is funded by robotaxi companies is journalistic malpractice by the newspaper.
StreetsBlog NYC reports that despite claims by Waymos, their robotaxis mean more cars rather than fewer. They encourage riders to not just take Waymos, but also other ride hail vehicles. The result is less transit usage and more congestion.
The NTSB collision summary is out for the January 23, 2026 incident where a Waymo collided with a child. It is very unfortunate that Waymo continues to try to blame a child for problems with its robotaxis.
We already knew that remote operators were involved in driving Waymo "autonomous" vehicles. But this NTSB report provides a concrete example of the remote operator dangerously providing incorrect information, causing the Waymo robotaxi to pass by a stopped school bus. Credit goes to Phil Koopman for calling out this problem.
The Verge reports that Waymo is still trying to hide that remove drivers in the Philippines are actually controlling the vehicles in some situations.
Washington Post Editorial Board publishes absolute nonsense on the safety of autonomous vehicles, in the hopes of minimizing safety regulations. The Washington Post used to be an important newspaper, but clearly no longer.
electrek fact checks Elon's statements on the alleged Tesla robotaxi service and finds that it is all just a bunch of lies.
Waymo was stuck until an actual human could fully shut the door of the vehicle. Given that Waymo support can be all the way in the Philippines, they had to resort to getting a DoorDasher to do it.
electrek reports that Tesla continues to try to hide as much as their safety data as possible, yet the data available still shows that they have a 3x crash rate compared to human drivers.
electrek reports on how Tesla robotaxis are still in no way automomous. Musk recently announced that Tesla would be operating service without a safety driver human in the car. Turns out the safety human is simply in another car following close behind. Just as the Tesla Optimus "robots" are simply teleoperated puppets, the Tesla robotaxis aren't actually autonomous. But hey, expect lots of BS at the earnings announcement on January 26 in order to keep the stock inflated as much as possible.
NY Times reports on how Waymo continues to flaunt California regulations and allows unattended minors to ride in Waymos.
While the title is correct, we do need to change course, the opinion piece is just another tech fantasy. The truth is that the data show that the solution for safety is clearly better designed streets and better safety policies. Simply look at Europe to see how safety can be greatly improved through street design, not robotaxis.
Fast Company reports on taking the Tesla "robotaxi" service in the Bay Area, and concludes that it simply isn't a real service. Limited availability, long wait times, and of course the human in the driver seat. Smoke and mirrors.
More Perfect Union presents a short but very compelling video on what a scam Tesla "Autopilot" and "Full-Self Driving" have always been. Well worth the watch.
