In the backseat of a robotaxi named Charcuterie, operated by Cruise, I find myself on an unusually hot day in San Francisco. Sitting next to me is William Riggs, a professor at the University of San Francisco who specializes in self-driving cars. The front seats are unoccupied as the wheel effortlessly steers the car along a thoroughfare near Golden Gate Park. It is during this pause at a red light that I notice a stranger in a neighboring car filming our futuristic set-up. Riggs rolls down his window to engage in conversation, only to be interrupted by a pleasant robotic voice reminding him to keep his hands and arms inside the vehicle. Commenting on our situation, the woman from the neighboring car exclaims, “It’s weird!” to which Riggs calmly replies, “It’s totally normal and forgettable!”
This is the reality of summer 2023 in San Francisco, where hundreds of self-driving taxis from companies like Cruise (a General Motors subsidiary) and Waymo (owned by Alphabet, Google’s parent company) are omnipresent on the streets. These companies have been operating their autonomous vehicles in the city for several years, and recently, California has granted them permission to expand their services, enabling them to charge for rides and operate 24/7. However, this expansion hasn’t been without its challenges. There have been incidents such as a car getting stuck in wet cement, multiple stalls during a music festival causing traffic congestion, and a collision between a Cruise vehicle and a fire truck. Following the collision, Cruise agreed to reduce its fleet size while investigating the cause of the incident.
Robotaxis, like humans, are not infallible. In the United States alone, approximately 46,000 people lost their lives on the roads last year, a staggering number that surpasses many other developed nations. Cars are the second-leading cause of death for American children, trailing only guns. In theory, a future dominated by autonomous driving could significantly enhance road safety. Computers do not drive under the influence of alcohol, get distracted by their phones, or speed. These self-driving vehicles hold great promise, even though the present reality is far more complex. The question we must consider is how much risk and inconvenience we are willing to endure on the path to this utopian vision.
Some city has to serve as the testing ground for these vehicles, and San Francisco has taken up that role more extensively than any other city. Cruise also operates in Austin, Texas, and Phoenix, Arizona, while Waymo is present in Phoenix and has plans to expand to Los Angeles. However, according to Missy Cummings, a professor at George Mason University, San Francisco has been at the forefront of this technological advancement. Cruise selected San Francisco partially due to its notoriously difficult driving conditions, which provide the kind of chaotic environment that challenges their technology.
Notably, some residents have strongly resisted the presence of these autonomous vehicles. A form of protest involves placing cones on the robots’ hoods to trigger their safety systems and prevent them from operating. Videos mocking the cars’ perceived incompetence have gone viral on social media platforms. Driving is inherently unpredictable, and these self-driving cars can encounter difficulties in unfamiliar situations. Chief Jeanine Nicholson of the San Francisco Fire Department described the frustration of emergency responders working around these vehicles, recounting instances where taxis blocked the path of fire trucks and ambulances at the scene of emergencies. She emphasized the need to prioritize public safety.
Safety experts express concerns that these recent incidents are just a preview of what lies ahead. Phil Koopman, an engineering professor at Carnegie Mellon University, acknowledges that the vehicles have performed impressively but stresses the difference between being impressive and being safe. Both Cruise and Waymo defend their safety records, highlighting the millions of miles their vehicles have traveled without any fatal accidents or life-threatening injuries. According to spokespeople for the companies, their vehicles are statistically safer than human drivers. Koopman likens the current phase of robotaxis to the first mile of a marathon, acknowledging that early success does not guarantee success throughout the entire race.
However, while riding in these taxis, it is easy to envision a future where they operate flawlessly. In addition to my experience with Riggs in Charcuterie, I also took a ride in a Waymo car on a loop around San Francisco. Unlike Cruise, Waymo does not name its vehicles but allows customers to display their initials in the color of their choice on the spinning sensor atop the car. Mine had the initials CN in a soothing aquamarine hue. Both trips felt remarkably ordinary, with the cars adeptly navigating through challenging streets, pedestrians, and even encountering a fire truck, as was the case with Charcuterie.
As driverless cars begin to hit the streets, human-driven vehicles continue to claim lives. Recently, a four-year-old was tragically killed by an oncoming car while crossing the street in San Francisco with her father. Riggs shared with me that robotaxis hold personal significance for him, having lost a friend who was struck by a human-operated vehicle while riding a scooter. Riggs argues that the collision with the fire truck was an extremely rare incident. The potential for self-driving cars to create safer roads and prevent unnecessary deaths is tremendous. Alain Kornhauser, an engineering professor at Princeton, describes cars like these as a do-it-yourself solution to transportation, where you pay upfront and gain the ability to travel anywhere you desire. However, what about those who cannot afford to own a car? Or those who are too young or physically unable to drive? Kornhauser questions whether these individuals deserve mobility as well. While the current cost of Cruise and Waymo rides is comparable to ride-hailing apps like Uber, autonomous vehicles could eventually become more affordable than traditional taxis. The experts I spoke with believe that these vehicles have the potential to expand beyond private taxi services into self-driving shuttle operations that can help bridge gaps in the nation’s public transportation system.
Nevertheless, this desired future is far from guaranteed and may come at the cost of more lives. In 2018, an Uber-operated self-driving car killed a woman in Arizona. Tesla’s autopilot feature has been involved in over a dozen fatalities. Both supporters and opponents of robotaxi expansion in San Francisco argue that lives are at stake. This debate revolves around issues of consent and risk. Koopman emphasizes that it is wrong to increase the risk of harm to city residents in the hope of potential future benefits, especially when the timeline for such benefits remains uncertain.
The potential of self-driving cars is easy to imagine; the possibilities they offer seem incredibly promising. They are currently functioning well, but continuous testing and improvement are necessary. The question lies in how much risk and inconvenience San Francisco and other cities are willing to bear in order to reach this future. It is understandable that people in the city harbor skepticism towards technology companies that promise grand advancements while causing tangible harm in the present. This contradiction is not unique to the world of self-driving cars and affects many aspects of Silicon Valley. While chatbots and AI may hold the power to transform the world, the reality feels distant, and the journey to widespread adoption is filled with obstacles.
After completing our successful journey, Riggs and I find respite under a tree, continuing our discussion. A few moments later, a Cruise vehicle passes by, prompting me to wonder if it’s Charcuterie heading out to pick up its next passenger. It turns out it’s not Charcuterie, but another car named Winter.
San Francisco finds itself caught between the present reality of self-driving cars and their future potential—a position that may soon be shared by more cities across the country. Companies like Amazon are also testing autonomous vehicles. Sandy Karp, a spokesperson for Waymo, explains that the company aims to develop a product that can be deployed in any city, on any type of vehicle, supporting various use cases such as ride-hailing and long-haul trucking. The advancements in driverless cars are not limited to private taxi services but have the potential to revolutionize public transportation as well.
Whether this future becomes a reality is uncertain, and progress towards it may come at the cost of additional lives. In 2018, an Uber self-driving car struck and killed a pedestrian in Arizona. Tesla’s autopilot feature has also been involved in several fatalities. For proponents and opponents of robotaxi expansion in San Francisco, this is ultimately a conversation about consent and risk. Phil Koopman rightly asserts that it is unjust to expose city residents to increased risks for the sake of potential benefits that remain uncertain as to when they will materialize.
In conclusion, self-driving cars have tremendous potential, and the current state of these vehicles is promising. However, there are still obstacles to overcome, and the path to widespread adoption is not without risks. San Francisco is at the forefront of this technological revolution but faces backlash from skeptical residents. The journey toward a future dominated by autonomous vehicles comes with inherent contradictions, similar to the challenges faced by other Silicon Valley advancements. While the possibilities are exciting, the road ahead is filled with uncertainty, and the balance between risk and innovation must be carefully considered.
Denial of responsibility! VigourTimes is an automatic aggregator of Global media. In each content, the hyperlink to the primary source is specified. All trademarks belong to their rightful owners, and all materials to their authors. For any complaint, please reach us at – [email protected]. We will take necessary action within 24 hours.
