A few weeks ago, Dan Afergan, a software engineer, gathered with some friends at 540 Rogues, a bar in San Francisco’s Inner Richmond neighborhood. As they enjoyed their drinks, they heard news of a peculiar incident involving a self-driving cab from Cruise, a majority-owned company by General Motors. The cab was stuck with a cone on its hood, halting it in the middle of the street. Afergan went outside to witness it himself, dismissing it initially as a silly prank. However, his friend informed him about the growing opposition to autonomous vehicles.
This incident was part of a campaign orchestrated by a local activist group called Safe Street Rebel, known for advocating for bike-lane construction and public-transit funding. Now, their focus has shifted to robotaxis. According to government data, Cruise and its rival Waymo operate a total of 571 self-driving cabs in California. Users can hail them through an app, with the main concentration in San Francisco. However, there have been concerns raised by the San Francisco police union, transportation and fire departments regarding the disruptive nature of robotaxis blocking traffic and obstructing emergency vehicles. The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) is expected to vote on whether to remove restrictions on these companies tomorrow.
After discovering that placing a simple orange cone on the hood of a self-driving vehicle could immobilize it, Safe Street Rebel posted a TikTok video encouraging residents to try it themselves. However, Cruise and Waymo didn’t take it lightly, threatening to involve law enforcement for anyone attempting such actions.
This incident goes beyond a simple backlash against technology or San Francisco’s characteristic eccentricity. It raises questions about the integration of self-driving cars in densely populated cities. This discussion needs to happen now while the technology is still developing, before it drastically impacts life in San Francisco and other urban areas. A century ago, cities in the US reconfigured their infrastructure to accommodate privately owned automobiles, an impactful decision that has had its drawbacks for urban life. Self-driving cars have the potential to bring about similar transformations, emphasizing the need for a cautious approach.
In an ideal scenario, robotaxis would offer affordable, easy, and enjoyable trips in autonomous electric vehicles, leading many individuals to renounce car ownership. San Francisco serves as a prominent testing ground due to its proximity to Silicon Valley, attracting investors and tech enthusiasts. However, it poses unique challenges for autonomous vehicles compared to less dense areas like Phoenix and Las Vegas, where there are fewer pedestrians, cyclists, and public transit users.
Apart from the novelty factor, these companies offer services similar to ride-hailing, which researchers have found contribute to urban congestion and diminish the use of public transportation. One of the main advantages touted by proponents of robotaxis and self-driving vehicles is the fallibility of human drivers. Waymo and Cruise have cited their vehicles’ safety records as superior to human drivers in response to the 42,795 road deaths in the US last year. However, they have been hesitant to share data on their operations, hindering objective analysis from independent researchers.
Despite claims of safety, robotaxis have presented a myriad of challenges for San Francisco officials. Even with limited deployment, these vehicles have obstructed traffic, interfered with buses and streetcars, trespassed construction zones, and made unplanned stops on public streets. Between June 2022, and now, there have been almost 600 reported incidents of robotaxis causing disruptions. It’s important to note that this count only includes incidents reported to the city, suggesting that the actual number could be much higher.
Jeffrey Tumlin, the head of San Francisco’s Municipal Transportation Agency, acknowledges that self-driving vehicles perform well in basic suburban driving conditions but struggle in complex urban environments. He emphasizes that “in a city like San Francisco, the unexpected is ubiquitous.” Jeanine Nicholson, the city’s fire chief, expresses skepticism about the readiness of robotaxis, stating that “they’re not ready for prime time.” Steven Shladover, a research engineer at UC Berkeley, adds that while Cruise and Waymo vehicles demonstrate impressive sophistication, they still exhibit moments of inexperience like an adolescent driver.
Cruise and Waymo have responded to criticisms by emphasizing the overall safety of their vehicles, arguing that delays in deploying autonomous driving technology have adverse impacts on road safety. The pressure is on for these companies to rapidly scale their operations after investing significant amounts of money. Cruise aims to introduce 1 million robotaxis on US streets by 2030, with CEO Kyle Vogt suggesting that several thousand robotaxis could be accommodated in each city. Any delays from the CPUC make it increasingly challenging for Cruise to achieve its goals.
While self-driving technology continues to improve, gathering valuable insights from data collected on public streets, it’s important to consider the implications of a city dominated by robotaxis. Before the mass adoption of gas-powered automobiles, American streets were vibrant with activity, accommodating pedestrians, horse-drawn carriages, and bicyclists. Streetcars were a popular mode of transportation, with Chicago operating almost 100 streetcar lines, including overnight services. Although the early streets may seem chaotic in photographs, the limited speed of vehicles ensured reduced risks.
The introduction of affordable cars, especially the Ford Model T, changed the dynamics drastically. Car sales skyrocketed, exposing pedestrians and children to increasing danger. In 1927, 25,800 people lost their lives in crashes, despite the significantly smaller number of cars compared to today. The casualties primarily affected urban areas and individuals, as motor vehicles became a threat to pedestrians.
In conclusion, the current debate surrounding self-driving cars in dense cities like San Francisco is significant. It is crucial to address these issues and assess the potential impact of autonomous vehicles on urban life before widespread adoption occurs. The cautionary tale of how privately owned automobiles reshaped cities in the past serves as a reminder to proceed with care. While self-driving technology offers promises of enhanced safety and convenience, it’s imperative to consider its integration within the existing urban infrastructure and ensure that it benefits the urban population as a whole.
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.
