Latest news with #WilliamRiggs
San Francisco Chronicle
30-06-2025
- Automotive
- San Francisco Chronicle
Tesla's primitive robotaxis are driving in Texas. Will they come to San Francisco next?
When Tesla rolled out a primitive robotaxi service Sunday in Austin, Texas, it took the reverse approach of its competitors. While other companies, such as Waymo, highlight their time-intensive engineering and heavy investments in safety and reliability, experts have marveled at Tesla's more radical philosophy: Scrap the sophisticated hardware, put full faith in AI, deploy in places that don't have a lot of rules. It all seemed very seat-of-the-pants, befitting Tesla's brash chief executive, Elon Musk. And the first days were messy. Viral videos of the robotaxis depict basic fumbles, like the car pulling up nearly a block away from its pickup spot. Though the erratic behavior echoed early phases of Waymo and General Motors' self-driving subsidiary, Cruise, Tesla's mishaps drew immediate derision. By Wednesday, commenters on the social media site Reddit had put together a list of captured-on-video mishaps in Austin, where at least one robotaxi had dropped its passenger off in the middle of an intersection. Such scenes have raised doubts about Tesla's ability to expand its business to California, a more tightly regulated state with tantalizing urban markets, including San Francisco, the epicenter of autonomous car technology. Industry watchers are now divided over whether Tesla needs to crack those markets if it aims to be a player in the driverless taxi sector. 'They have a very long road before they can even consider California,' said University of San Francisco engineering professor William Riggs. He characterized Musk's style as bullish, and grounded in 'a really bold prediction.' It just might work, he said. Clearly, Tesla had eyed the populous West Coast state long before the company sent its tiny fleet of modified, self-driving, electric Model Ys to pick up passengers in Austin. In a sign of ambition, Tesla obtained a permit with California's Department of Motor Vehicles to test autonomous automobiles in 2015. This year the company secured a separate permit from the California Public Utilities Commission to serve as a charter party carrier, or taxi. Yet, even with those initial steps locked down, Tesla is following a jagged path from Austin's scrappy Silicon Hills to the original Silicon Valley. And some observers are puzzled by the company's new way of doing business. As a titan of electric cars, Tesla initially focused on high-performance luxury models before shifting to mass-market products. But as a robotaxi venture, Tesla did the opposite: The company took its most recent suburban utility vehicle, upgraded the software and slapped a flashy logo on the side. Thus, a new ride-hail service was born. 'Everybody else's plan is, make it work first, then make it cheap,' said Brad Templeton, a Sunnyvale-based self-driving car consultant. 'Tesla is saying, 'It's gotta be cheap on Day One. We gotta make it work with the cheapest hardware.'' From Templeton's perspective, Tesla made a big gamble with cars that operate chiefly on 'computer vision,' combining cameras with machine-learning. Lacking the intricate LiDAR sensors and high-definition maps on which Waymo vehicles are trained, Teslas instead build maps on the go. Tesla robotaxis might drive up to an intersection in Austin and 'feel out' where the lanes are, Templeton said. Waymos, by contrast, 'know' every crack in the road. Tesla's methodology wouldn't fly in a state with complicated policies and politics and road conditions. But it might fit well in suburbs and rural areas that are less penetrated by technology, particularly if the people there are car-dependent and lack adequate public transit, Riggs said. 'There's too much regulatory friction in California,' Riggs conceded. 'Tesla doesn't have to come.' During an earnings call in April, Musk touted the shrewdness of his strategy. 'Generalized' artificial intelligence would be more adaptable, and easier to scale, he said, than 'very expensive sensors and high precision maps' developed for specific areas. 'Once we can make it work in a few cities in America, we can make it work anywhere in America,' Musk said. 'Once we can make it work in a few cities in China, we can make it work anywhere in China. Likewise in Europe, limited only by regulatory approvals.' (To date, Tesla has not announced any robotaxi testing outside Texas.) After the call, Tesla saw a fleeting rise in share values. Austin's robotaxi debut had a frat party vibe. A fleet of roughly a dozen vehicles provided rides to an invite-only group of influencers and Tesla enthusiasts. Trips cost a flat rate of $4.20, a reference either to marijuana or 'Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy.' The videos posted online show passengers galloping up to the electric SUVs, craning cellphones to film steering wheels that turned by themselves. But Musk had failed to deliver on some of the promises he'd made in the earnings call. He had hyped the modified Model Y taxis as 'fully autonomous,' meaning they don't need human intervention. He had even claimed that with a software update, regular Model Y owners could convert their cars into robotaxis. In reality, the robots that cruised Austin streets this week came with with babysitters: Tesla had assigned safety monitors to sit in the front passenger seats. These shotgun riders are not compelled by Texas regulators, and have led to confusion over whether they are needed for emergencies, or merely there for optics. The company's push to full autonomy will face challenges in September, when a new Texas law takes effect, requiring a state permit for self-driving vehicles, and mandating that they comply with traffic laws. With the new oversight, it appears Tesla's wings 'were clipped significantly,' said Cameron Gieda, a mobility executive who specializes in autonomous vehicles. For all of Musk's daunting ideas, the real 'moon shot,' as Templeton sees it, is a commercial ride service that doesn't need human supervision. Other companies are far ahead: By next year, Waymo will operate driverless taxis in at least seven U.S. cities, while Amazon's Zoox, which just opened a second Bay Area factory, will soon offer rides in San Francisco, Las Vegas, Austin and Miami. Ultimately, Musk's chance of success depends on whether he can move beyond Austin to dense areas of California or New York, Gieda said. Getting there won't be easy. Whereas Texas is just starting to clamp down on self-driving operators, California has two agencies that regulate them — the Department of Motor Vehicles and the California Public Utilities Commission — and requires six permits to run a passenger service in fully autonomous vehicles. The two that Tesla has obtained from the DMV and CPUC do not authorize its vehicles to drive without a human. And then there's the political climate. Long a polarizing figure, Musk recently faced an intense backlash in California and other blue states for being an erstwhile adviser to President Donald Trump. As the Tesla CEO installed himself in the White House and led an aggressive campaign to torch federal programs and agencies, owners of Teslas began putting anti-Elon stickers on their bumpers. Some traded their cars in for other brands. Sales of what had once been a pioneering electric vehicle plummeted. Though Musk's relationship with Trump has since unraveled, it doesn't mean disenchanted consumers will forgive him. Tesla's brand identity is particularly shaky in metropolitan regions anchored by San Francisco and Los Angeles. The company will have to saturate those areas with robotaxis if it seeks to challenge Waymo, which now logs more than 250,000 fares each week. Tesla is 'under a microscope' in a way that Waymo and other companies never were, wrote Phil Koopman, an associate professor of engineering at Carnegie Mellon University, in a post on his personal Substack. Koopman expressed concern about some of the errors: In one video, for instance, a Tesla robotaxi wobbles on a left-hand turn before bailing, then briefly veers into a lane of oncoming traffic. So far none of these errors has caused a collision or serious injury, and taken together, they aren't necessarily an indictment of Tesla, in Koopman's view. Nonetheless, he urged the company to 'get its house in order' before one of the vehicles crashes — and takes Musk's world-conquering plans down with it.
Daily Mail
04-06-2025
- Automotive
- Daily Mail
Driverless taxis are beginning to react like humans on San Francisco streets… and the results could be terrifying
Driverless cars are beginning to display human-like behaviors like impatience on the roads, in a sign of increased intelligence in the robotaxis. The chilling development was identified by University of San Francisco engineering Professor William Riggs, who has been studying Waymo cars since their inception. On a journey with a reporter from the San Francisco Chronicle, the pair noticed the Waymo they were traveling in crept to a rolling start at a pedestrian crossing before the person had reached the other footpath. The subtle movement was reminiscent of the way humans act behind the wheel, but a strange occurrence for the robotic Waymo, which prides itself on being safer than a driver because it errs on the side of caution and leaves no room for human error. The action of letting the foot gently off the break moments before they should to allow the car to begin creeping forward at a rolling pace displays a sense of impatience - a human reaction not previously seen in the robotic cars. 'From an evolutionary standpoint, you're seeing a lot more anticipation and assertiveness from the vehicles,' Riggs said. Up until this point, Waymo taxis have been known to follow the road rules down to the letter, sometimes causing frustration among motorists. But robotaxis are designed to constantly gather information about road conditions, and the algorithm is often fine-tuned to ensure the product is the best it can be. David Margines, the director of product management at Waymo, said human specialists who drive the cars to train them had to juggle two separate goals: ensuring the Waymo followed every traffic law, whilst simultaneously working to transport customers in a reasonable timeframe. 'We imagined that it might be kind of a trade-off,' he told the publication. 'It wasn't that at all. Being an assertive driver means that you're more predictable, that you blend into the environment, that you do things that you expect other humans on the road to do.' The result is a more 'humanistic' way of driving. In another example of these developments, Margines provided an example of a Waymo driving through an intersection, merging into traffic in which it had the right of way. Another car swerves into Waymo's path. The robotaxi hit the brakes and prevented a crash, while simultaneously beeping its horn to let the other driver know of its displeasure. The act of using its horn is just another example of human-like behavior which serves as a reminder of the intelligence capabilities of the robot. These small tweaks may be beneficial in getting a passenger from point A to B faster, but it raises the question of whether the car is becoming too similar to humans, now to the point that it is mimicking poor choices motorists make on the roads out of frustration or emotion. While Waymo prides itself as the 'world's first autonomous ride-hailing service' and is intended to give riders a safer experience, that has not always been the experience customers have had. Data suggests there have been 696 crashes involving a Waymo since 2021. This does not mean the Waymo was at fault. In one tragic accident, the W aymo killed a small dog which was off leash and wasn't detected by the technology in the car. The service is available in Phoenix, San Francisco, and Los Angeles. Waymo cars are also coming to Austin, Atlanta, and Miami. Elon Musk's Tesla had planned to roll out its own self driving taxi this month in Austin, Texas, with about 10 models powered by its Full Self-Driving (FSD) program.. His vision suffered a minor hitch last month when the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) sent the company a letter to gather additional information. The NHTSA wants to 'understand how Tesla plans to evaluate its vehicles and driving automation technologies for use on public roads' before the robotaxis are unleashed on busy Austin streets. The agency highlighted its investigations into four crashes and a pedestrian linked to Tesla's FSD. The automaker is also developing a dedicated autonomous model, dubbed the Cybercab, with production starting next year. 'I predict that there will be millions of Teslas operating fully autonomously in the second half of next year,' he said. Musk made a similar prediction six years ago, in 2019, saying 'next year, for sure, we'll have over one million robotaxis on the road.' Tesla also revealed in April that it has completed more than 1,500 trips and 15,000 miles of autonomous driving, which has helped them develop and test FSD networks, the associated mobile app and other supporting technologies. However, the NHTSA seems alarmed at the idea of Tesla is basing the robotaxi service on its FSD program. Since October 2024, the NHTSA has been investigating Tesla's FSD software — an advanced driver-assistance system that allows vehicles to operate semi-autonomously — due to concerns about its performance in low-visibility conditions. Tesla is required to respond to the NHTSA's information request by June 19. If Tesla fails to meet this deadline, or the answers it provides are not satisfactory, it could delay the robotaxi launch.
San Francisco Chronicle
13-05-2025
- Automotive
- San Francisco Chronicle
A Zoox and an e-bike collided in S.F. Here's what it says about robotaxi safety
The light turned green at a busy intersection in San Francisco's South of Market neighborhood, where Bryant, Division and 11th streets conjoin at acute angles — and traffic becomes an omnidirectional snarl. What happened next was captured, probably in stark detail, by multiple cameras on a Zoox robotaxi. The company is not required to publicly share its footage, and has declined to do so. A spokesperson said Zoox supplied video to regulators. But in a report filed to the Department of Motor Vehicles, Zoox gave a clinical description of the crash on April 4: A driverless taxi collided with a Bay Wheels e-bike whose rider had swerved into the car's path. The Zoox sustained fender damage while the cyclist rode away. Nobody called police. Though apparently minor, the SoMa fender-bender came at an inflection point for Zoox, an autonomous vehicle company owned by Amazon. Widely recognized as the No. 2 player behind Waymo, Zoox is testing its buggy-shaped robotaxis and retrofitted Toyota Highlanders in the wilderness of downtown traffic, and preparing to launch passenger service. It's also endured some growing pains. Four days after the e-bike jolt, another unoccupied Zoox vehicle collided with a passenger car in Las Vegas. Again, no one emerged with injuries, but the company opted to pause operations in Vegas for several days and recall 270 vehicles for a software update. Such episodes could become more commonplace as self-driving cars flood the roads, treating cities like San Francisco not only as markets, but as laboratories. While the makers of these vehicles contend that a machine programmed to follow traffic laws is safer than an erratic human driver, the crash research is less conclusive. The stakes for these companies are high: Waymo, the most established among them, is rapidly expanding commercial service as Zoox test-runs its carriages in several cities. As they integrate into the transportation system, robotaxis are drawing excitement and delight. At the same time, they're clashing with other road users. Last year a self-driving Waymo car struck and injured a bicyclist in San Francisco's Potrero Hill neighborhood, provoking anger from district Supervisor Shamann Walton. He questioned whether any car operated by artificial intelligence could quickly react to traffic chaos. Representatives of Waymo said an oncoming truck had occluded the Waymo vehicle's view of the cyclist. A review of California DMV reports for March and April suggests that so far, most of these incidents have not caused injuries, and have resulted in minimal damage. Still, they raise a vexing question for the average San Franciscan: Should I be worried a robot car might hit me? The notion has incited a spirited debate among experts. William Riggs, a professor of engineering and management at the University of San Francisco who studies autonomous vehicles, is so confident in the technology that he doubts they pose much danger to other drivers or cyclists — even the ones who violate traffic laws. 'You probably have a greater chance of being struck by lightning' than by a robotaxi, Riggs said. Other researchers are less certain. Scott Moura, a UC Berkeley professor of civil and environmental engineering, said past studies have shown a similar 'crashes-per-million miles' rate between self-driving cars and humans, though data also suggests that AV companies are learning from their experiences, and swiftly course-correcting. In California, AVs are held to a higher standard than human drivers, with a requirement to report any collision that results in injury, death or property damage to the Department of Motor Vehicles and, in some instances, to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Yet since the companies write those reports, they are by definition one-sided and could omit details. The most notorious example is the crash of Oct. 2, 2023, in which a robotaxi operated by General Motors' Cruise struck a jaywalking pedestrian. Although initiated by a hit-and-run driver, the incident led to Cruise's suspension, largely because the company withheld video from state investigators. When pressed about the April 4 collision with the cyclist in SoMa, staff at Zoox point back to their report to the DMV. It portrays two vehicles navigating a complex, unpredictable road space with crosswalks and traffic signals on all sides. The scene unfolded shortly after 9:30 a.m., the fade-out of a Friday morning rush hour. According to Zoox, an e-bike rider had started crossing before the change in signal. Pedaling south down 11th Street, the rider zipped ahead of the robotaxi, which had no driver at the time. Both vehicles had nearly crossed the intersection when the cyclist abruptly turned left. Sensing the maneuver, the robotaxi 'braked hard,' yet a collision 'was unavoidable,' Zoox staff wrote in their incident summary. The cyclist struck the self-driving car's right fender and body, causing minor damage. As the Zoox pulled over on Bryant Street, the cyclist rode to the sidewalk, briefly stopped, and then rolled away. By slowing down and stopping, the Zoox demonstrated its ability to drive defensively, and likely preempted a more serious accident, according to a company spokesperson. 'Autonomous vehicles have the capability to see farther and understand the speed and trajectory of those sharing the road, which is especially important when interacting with vulnerable road users,' the spokesperson wrote in a statement. It continued: 'Safety is foundational at Zoox, and we are continuously learning from our testing across markets to improve the overall safety of roadways.' Whether the Zoox performed worse or better than a human driver in this instance is unclear, said Matthew Raifman, a transportation safety researcher at UC Berkeley's Safe Transportation and Research Education Center. 'There are scenarios where an AV might see (a cyclist) that a human wouldn't see, because they have 360 degree views,' Raifman said. Even so, he noted, an AV doesn't have a human's intuition or ability to anticipate behavior. For all of its perspectives and sensors, a robot car might not understand how a cyclist moves through space. 'I think that's where there's a heuristic process that human drivers have. Maybe a computer can replicate that perception and understanding, but it's also possible that a human driver would have eye contact with the cyclist, or detect something in that cyclist that was indicative they were going to turn instead of go straight.' Or alternatively, perhaps the robotaxis could over time become more perceptive than humans, Raifman said. What if, for instance, a network of them are passing through that intersection every day, collecting data, and sharing it with all of the other robotaxis in a company's fleet? Steven Shladover, a research engineer at UC Berkeley's Institute of Transportation Studies, had a more cut-and-dry reading of the incident. 'It sounds like this was probably the fault of the cyclist,' he said, surmising that a human motorist wouldn't have been able to avoid the collision either. Every expert who spoke with the Chronicle acknowledged the basic math of exposure: More autonomous vehicles traveling more miles means more opportunities to crash. Yet the companies are making a case that their fleets will eventually make the roads safer. After all, a robot won't drive while intoxicated, or start texting friends at a stop light, or get distracted and fail to yield to a pedestrian. Robotaxis 'are getting safer over time as the companies gain more experience with driving in traffic,' Shladover said. 'But that's a long, slow process.'
