Robotaxis to the rescue?

My junior high instrumental music teacher and band director was a spinster who never owned a car. She took taxis to get around our small town. At the time, it seemed odd. Now that I’m 70 years old, it looks like my future. 

The promises of robotaxis (I’m looking at you, Elon) have so far outdistanced reality. I’m silently cheering for them, though. I know the day will come when my wife or daughter will demand the car keys, saying I’m no longer fit to drive. 

There are several alternatives, of course. An e-bike. Lyft/Uber. Regular taxis. But Elon isn’t the only one making promises about robotaxis:

 

“Tesla, again on the downswing for its vehicle deliveries, is on the upswing, aiming to overhaul ride-hailing like it did the auto industry.

“Uber is wheeling and dealing, touting more than a dozen partnerships, with plans to operate robotaxi services in 10 markets by the end of 2026.

“Alphabet's (GOOG, GOOGL) Waymo is seeking new funding at a valuation of at least $100 billion. And other players like Amazon's Zoox have launched early rider programs before a making a bigger splash in the nascent market.”

One of the big unmet challenges for robotaxis is safety: not just the safety of passengers, but the safety of pedestrians and other cars on the road.

“On the weekend before Christmas, a widespread power outage in San Francisco took traffic lights across the city offline. Human drivers had to navigate the mess using their judgment, but autonomous vehicles, specifically Waymo's vehicles, halted in the middle of roadways. Videos circulating on social media showed the vehicles blocking traffic at intersections with their hazard lights blinking.”

I’m betting that the kinks will eventually be ironed out, albeit with collateral damage being the lives and health of beta-testing victims. The march of progress will take a toll, but it is irresistible.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/2026-will-be-the-year-of-the-robotaxi-110007422.html

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Yes, the CDC can change its mind

The Nobel Laureate economist Paul Samuelson famously acknowledged in a Meet the Press interview: “Well when events change, I change my mind. What do you do?” This observation applies to the advice from medical authorities such as the CDC and WHO during the COVID pandemic. Some members of the public are fond of pillorying these agencies for having published different guidelines at different times, as though health officials are in the business of issuing ex cathedra dogma rather than responding to incomplete and ambiguous information. Science doesn’t deal in proof, it deals with the weight of evidence. A scientific hypothesis is one that is capable of being tested and falsified by experiment. I get it. I used to teach problem-based learning to first year medical students, and they often struggled with what to do with incomplete and ambiguous information, which is what physicians in clinics do every day. Sometimes, one cannot wait for all the tests to be completed and all the data analyz...
Read more

I agree with RFK Jr.

Though it feels weird to say it, RFK Jr and I agree on something: curtailing direct-to-consumer marketing of pharmaceuticals. “ The Trump administration is discussing policies that would make it harder and more expensive for pharmaceutical companies to advertise directly to patients, in a move that could disrupt more than $10 billion in annual ad spending.   Although the US is the only place, besides New Zealand, where pharma companies can directly advertise, banning pharma ads outright could make the administration vulnerable to lawsuits, so it’s instead focusing on cutting down on the practice by adding legal and financial hurdles, according to people familiar with the plans who weren’t authorized to speak publicly on the matter.   “The two policies the administration has focused in on would be to require greater disclosures of side effects of a drug within each ad — likely making broadcast ads much longer and prohibitively expensive — or removing the industry’s ability to d...
Read more

About that Trump lawsuit

So Trump is suing Rupert Murdoch for defamation because of the release of a salacious doodle. Nothing remarkable about Donald J. Trump weaponizing the legal system against his opponents, I know. But there are some things that do bear remark here: “ . . . he's suing Rupert Murdoch personally. But you know who he's not suing? Lachlan Murdoch, who's actually the chairperson of News Corp and Fox, who's actually the decision-maker. Rupert Murdoch has no official role there anymore. He's an adviser.   “So, I thought that was revealing in a lot of ways, because it isn't just about going after the entity. It's sort of this expansion spillover, trying to send as much of a message as you possibly can. He's sort of hitting every potential lever, not just against Murdoch and that empire, but then all the other media properties in the future. It's also about sending an example.” “HAYES: Yeah. That, to me, is the point here, is that these lawsuits are not lawsuits...
Read more