> Are normal taxis any different? Most of them only have one or two passengers. Typically in the backseat which gets kind of crowded with more people. You can get bigger taxis of course. But I'm talking about the common sedan model with the driver in the front. An unused front seat on the right. And the one or two passengers in the back. Exactly the same thing. Except there's no need for the driver.
We need to invest in walkable, bikeable cities and public transportation, not help these companies that lobby for making less liveable cities and towns. That was my main point for that angle. I know Americans hate each other and public transportation, but everything has a trade off and Robotaxis won't make our lives better.
> I don't get the moral outrage here. It's taxi with one person less (the driver). Also available as a model 3 and y. And the robovan thing. So they do actually cover a range of vehicles with different amounts of passengers.
How often to riders get banned from taxi companies? The Robotaxi looks like a
service, ride hailing. Are these vehicles actually sold?
I don't think what you outline here, which I agree would be a good thing, and what Tesla announced are mutually exclusive. In fact, I think Tesla's announcement is just about the most concrete thing from any car manufacturer that gets us closer to that.
Getting rid of drivers means less space for parking is needed. It also means better utilization of the vehicles. So, less cars on the road. And they'll be electric so a lot more quiet and less smelly. And they also have a bus form factor; perfect for public transport.
Elon Musk actually showed some visuals of cities being greened this way. Complete with a cheesy joke about taking the 'ing' out of parking.
So, you are outraged because Elon Musk is doing exactly as you demand but just not in a way that you like?
Cars are inherently space inefficient. Self driving won't save them. We're talking about 10-15 sqm directly occupied on the road plus probably 100 more sqm for safe braking, etc.
This new tool should be at best a niche one, but convenience, as usual, kills.
Americans talking about 2.5T / 5m length cars to "save space" is tragically comic. The bus form factor is a good think but it can’t realistically compete with the one already in fonction in hundred of thousand cities. Sure it will have a market share from airports to luxury resorts and may replace some Dubai lines but that’s not a "democratic" transport.
Elon’s green city is a marketing pitch, nothing more or less. A marketing pitch is far from being "exactly" a "walkable, bikeable city with public transportation".
On the public transportation side, GP skepticism come from that tech giga corps are know for their kafkaïan (at best) or hostile (at worst) customer services.
Oh, and on the overreaction part, do you know that Las Vegas, one of the best places in the US to put high quality public transportation towards its "central business district", is instead going to build a "tunnel for single occupant Teslas".
Surely nobody lobbied for that instead of a proper subway system or bus rapid transit? (I'm being sarcastic here)
We need to invest in walkable, bikeable cities and public transportation, not help these companies that lobby for making less liveable cities and towns. That was my main point for that angle. I know Americans hate each other and public transportation, but everything has a trade off and Robotaxis won't make our lives better.
> I don't get the moral outrage here. It's taxi with one person less (the driver). Also available as a model 3 and y. And the robovan thing. So they do actually cover a range of vehicles with different amounts of passengers.
How often to riders get banned from taxi companies? The Robotaxi looks like a service, ride hailing. Are these vehicles actually sold?