Driverless Taxis Are Coming To the Streets of San Francisco (npr.org) 58
An anonymous reader quotes a report from NPR: California regulators on Thursday gave a robotic taxi service the green light to begin charging passengers for driverless rides in San Francisco, a first in a state where dozens of companies have been trying to train vehicles to steer themselves on increasingly congested roads. The California Public Utilities Commission unanimously granted Cruise, a company controlled by automaker General Motors, approval to launch its driverless ride-hailing service. The regulators issued the permit despite safety concerns arising from Cruise's inability to pick up and drop off passengers at the curb in its autonomous taxis, requiring the vehicles to double park in traffic lanes.
The ride-hailing service initially will consist of just 30 electric vehicles confined to transporting passengers in less congested parts of San Francisco from 10 p.m. to 6 a.m. Those restrictions are designed to minimize chances of the robotic taxis causing property damage, injuries or death if something goes awry. It will also allow regulators to assess how the technology works before permitting the service to expand.
Cruise and another robotic car pioneer, Waymo, already have been charging passengers for rides in parts of San Francisco in autonomous vehicles with a back-up human driver present to take control if something goes wrong with the technology. But now Cruise has been cleared to charge for rides in vehicles that will have no other people in them besides the passengers -- an ambition that a wide variety of technology companies and traditional automakers have been pursuing for more than a decade. The driverless vehicles have been hailed as a way to make taxi rides less expensive while reducing the traffic accidents and deaths caused by reckless human drivers. Gil West, Cruise's chief operating officer, in a blog post hailed Thursday's vote as "a giant leap for our mission here at Cruise to save lives, help save the planet, and save people time and money." He said the company would begin rolling out its fared rides gradually.
The ride-hailing service initially will consist of just 30 electric vehicles confined to transporting passengers in less congested parts of San Francisco from 10 p.m. to 6 a.m. Those restrictions are designed to minimize chances of the robotic taxis causing property damage, injuries or death if something goes awry. It will also allow regulators to assess how the technology works before permitting the service to expand.
Cruise and another robotic car pioneer, Waymo, already have been charging passengers for rides in parts of San Francisco in autonomous vehicles with a back-up human driver present to take control if something goes wrong with the technology. But now Cruise has been cleared to charge for rides in vehicles that will have no other people in them besides the passengers -- an ambition that a wide variety of technology companies and traditional automakers have been pursuing for more than a decade. The driverless vehicles have been hailed as a way to make taxi rides less expensive while reducing the traffic accidents and deaths caused by reckless human drivers. Gil West, Cruise's chief operating officer, in a blog post hailed Thursday's vote as "a giant leap for our mission here at Cruise to save lives, help save the planet, and save people time and money." He said the company would begin rolling out its fared rides gradually.
Public mass transit please. (Score:2)
Direct to door mandatory in SF (Score:1, Interesting)
There are too many cars. Johnny Cab, no thanks.
Walk a few blocks on any SF street from a public transit station and you will change your tune very quickly.
In fact I would go so far as to say in SF, they need to develop a system where a riderless taxi can hook an airlock like tube up to the door of the building you are trying to reach.
Re: (Score:1)
I have been told here repeatedly that the street shitting there is just a myth.
nope (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Most people who whine about human poop in San Francisco "think" it's everywhere else.
We promise not to whine about your city's poop. We will accept it as normal and let the street crazies keep piling up, just as Californians do.
Well maybe streets clear... (Score:1)
I have been told here repeatedly that the street shitting there is just a myth.
Maybe that's true, all of the shit I've seen has been on many past trips to SF was on the sidewalk, and one time I saw a guy shitting against a brick wall, really rubbing his ass into it. But the streets seemed clean?
The homeless there really have devolved below the level of animals. Why the city/state chooses to let people live in that state, I have no idea.
I've seen homeless elsewhere but the homeless in California just take
Re: (Score:2)
I don't see what's the big deal about driverless (Score:2)
Every parking lot is full of them.
Saw one today (Score:3)
The license plate said AFKBRB.
GM's Fault? (Score:2)
Different priorities (Score:5, Interesting)
If a driverless taxi gets involved in an accident, does a human get the ticket regardless of who's at fault?
You're reversing the priorities.
Is the priority to assign blame, to give tickets, or to reduce accidents/fatalities?
If it's the last case, then so long as driverless taxis are safer than human drivers, it's appropriate to *not* give them a ticket when the taxi is at fault.
The purpose of tickets and blame is to clamp down on accidents and make everything safer. If you're using driverless vehicles, the ticket model shouldn't apply. Perhaps the NTSB or some similar agency could collect accident statistics and make software recommendations, and that would make everything safer in the long run. OTA updates would make all driverless vehicles learn from expert advice at once, so even a single recommendation would have wide-reaching effects on safety.
(I'm reminded of the analysis of airplane accidents from about the 1970s onward, where the FAA comes in and determines what went wrong, and issues protocol recommendations and hardware changes.)
Driverless vehicles are safer than human drivers right now. There is some nuance, because driverless vehicles don't work in all conditions (snow, limited visibility, and so on) but when they work they are statistically much safer.
And yes, there are individual accounts of the self-driving programs screwing up online, and individuals here who swear they are unsafe because they read an account on the internet and yada yada yada.
Follow the science and the statistics. Despite anecdotal failures, driverless is still safer when it is used. Driverless plus human monitoring is even safer, and should help catch the anomalous anecdotes.
So unless your goal is some sort of driver equity or the "just universe hypothesis", it doesn't make sense to give tickets to the vehicle when it is at fault.
Are there more masters (Score:2)
So much for equal protection.
You've already decide who some of your masters are I see.
I'm unclear on the masters thing. Which masters have I decided on?
Also, are there other masters I should be considering?
Re: (Score:2)
So manufacturers or autocab companies get a number on the average expected amount of damage it will cause per vehicle km in different zones (or some other measure). If they perform below this number, they get an insurance or tax reduction. If they cause more damage, the CEO gets jail time.
Re: GM's Fault? (Score:2)
My concern here is that the kids in San Francisco also tend to be paying rent above their means. And donâ(TM)t seem to be educated to get more money, just complain. I donâ(TM)t think it is likely the cars will get on an accident. I do think that kids hoping to get
can you be DUI in an driverless taxi? (Score:2)
can you be DUI in an driverless taxi?
Probably not (Score:2)
can you be DUI in an driverless taxi?
I just now reviewed California law, and the answer is: almost certainly not.
DUI is defined as *operating* a vehicle while impaired. Passengers generally cannot be charged with DUI, and this leads to a lot of "designated driver" agreements with people. Since you are not operating the vehicle, you won't be charged with DUI in California.
I know that some DUI arrests have been made while parked, so I'm now wondering if laws in other states are "being in the driver's seat" while impaired is the condition. If so,
but will the say app on phone = in control and in (Score:2)
but will the say app on phone = in control and in control = DUI.
As people can get an DUI for sleeping with the keys on them even when not in driver's seat
Re: (Score:2)
> If a driverless taxi gets involved in an accident, does a human get the ticket regardless of who's at fault?
If a driverless elevator gets involved in an accident, does a human get the ticket regardless of who's at fault?
Very handy (Score:1)
Driverless taxis are a good innovation in an environment where most taxis are also riderless, due to San Francisco falling into epic levels of urban decay.
Re: (Score:2)
Spotted the guy who's never been to SF!!
Re: (Score:1)
Spotted the guy who's never been to SF!!
I've visited SF for years until I couldn't take it anymore. SF is probably the city I've spent the most time wandering around in, on foot, on bike, besides the place I live or where I went to college.. I had family who lived there and I stayed with them off and on.
That is why I am so harsh, SF was so beautiful once (at one point I was thinking about moving there) and now it is hell on Earth. I don't know how many decades it will take to make the city livable again.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't believe a word you say.
Re: (Score:1)
And I don't think you've ever even been to SF either if you don't understand what I am saying...
I'm a known iOS developer from past posts, so why is it so hard I would have been to SF many times wince they held WWDC there for years, and then in San Jose (which is pretty close by train) up until the pandemic?
In any case, this is my last post on the topic because for me to care if you believed me would mean I respect anything you have to say, which obviously there is no reason to. Good luck with life rando w
Re: (Score:2)
I've lived in SF for 20 years in the Upper Haight area and have worked in the FiDi for 10 of those years. My favorite food spot used to be Sparrow Bar on the Haight but it closed during the pandemic. I can provide any number of details you want to prove my residency. As to why I don't believe you? Well first off it's the internet and lying is cheap (yes I get the irony, which is why I flirted with giving personal info). Secondly, I know that 100% of your posts have some rightwing bent to them. You have
Uh oh (Score:3)
I hope Karl Malden and Michael Douglas remember to look both ways before dashing into the street in pursuit of a criminal.
Re: (Score:2)
Dammit, you beat me to it [slashdot.org]!
Re: (Score:2)
Haha, we're showing our age...
Mobile poop palaces (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
They know who's getting in and out of the taxis, and you're not getting in before you "verify" your identity, so there's no big risk of anonymous turds.
Car theft is a much smaller risk when the vehicle drives itself, and is constantly connected.
Re: (Score:2)
"there seems to be a huge amount of theft related to cars there."
#59th in 2018, with a 39% decrease over the preceding 3 years: https://www.buyautoinsurance.c... [buyautoinsurance.com]
2,000 thefts in 2021, which is half what the first link reported for 2018: https://www.way.com/blog/219-v... [way.com]
Cool. (Score:2)
"The Streets of San Francisco" takes me back to giant 70s land yachts going airborne at high speed over hills at busy intersections.
Hopefully, this will be the driverless version of that.
Re: (Score:1)
And people do that (going airborne with vehicles) today...but with a TESLA.
Pretty certain there was a problem with airborne TESLA cars on a certain inclined roadway in the Los Angeles area.
Driverless Taxis or .... (Score:1)
I believe... (Score:2)
...that in a city where they actually have to employ a multiman team full time to remove the HUMAN FECES lying everywhere, the idea of driverless taxis will almost certainly provide an entirely new context to "tragedy of the commons".
Coming to the streets of San Francisco (Score:2)
For those old enough to remember, this will be a Quinn Martin production.
Re: (Score:2)
So, uh, have you seen a one-armed man around here lately?
Signed, an innocent victim of blind justice.
Cruise: GMs bastard son ? (Score:2)
"Cruise, a company controlled by automaker General Motors"
Why doesn't GM want their name on these cars? Are they expecting that Cruise experiments will bring bad publicity and lawsuits? And when Cruise declares bankruptcy due to the lawsuits, can GM avoid liability or costs related to the experiment?
Should riders worry that GM has no confidence in these vehicles?
Where is Tesla's Robotaxi? (Score:2)
What's their progress?
Johnny Cab (Score:2)
"Welcome to Johnny Cab! Hope you enjoyed the ride!" /Crashes and bursts into flames.
Class-War Solution Fixes No Problem (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It is as if you would be suggesting that taxi-users don't need to eat and human drivers never kill pedestrians and cyclists.
headline missing second half (Score:2)
Driverless Taxis Are Coming To the Streets of San Francisco, So WATCH OUT!"
FTFY.
PS.
Also better tell Karl Malden. Driverless Express. Don't leave home without it! A QM Production...
in other news... (Score:1)
Taxiless drivers are coming to the streets of san francisco
Re: (Score:2)
That is fair argument, but is everything within walking distance? For example I don't have a personal car at all. It means that in some rare cases, I need to use taxi in order to get from A to B, e.g. with heavy luggage. Having taxis makes it possible for me to be without a personal car, which makes it more likely for me to walk most of my time.
Re: (Score:2)
Really fat people can't really walk anywhere. You are just fat shaming.
Remember the chore in Taxi Driver? (Score:2)
How Travis Bickle had to wipe down the seats after his shift? These cabs will likely see a lot of action, imo, and the clean-up will need to be done before end of shift. Cameras won't deter, and might be considered a turn on.
"Travis Bickle:
Each night when I return the cab to the garage, I have to clean the cum off the back seat. Some nights, I clean off the blood."
https://www.quotes.net/mquote/... [quotes.net]
P.S. I'm sure it's already been thought of, but a lot of physically challenged people wouldn't be able to get an
Crazy Taxi, but in real life! (Score:1)
PR plant by GM (Score:2)
Mysterious failures (Score:2)
Look for mysterious failures of the robots, suspiciously near where taxi and uber drivers were drinking beer.