Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
AI Transportation United States

Tesla Begins Driverless Robotaxi Service in Austin, Texas (theguardian.com) 102

Posted by EditorDavid from the keeping-Austin-weird dept.
With no one behind the steering wheel, a Tesla robotaxi passes Guero's Taco Bar in Austin Texas, making a right turn onto Congress Avenue.

Today is the day Austin became the first city in the world to see Tesla's self-driving robotaxi service, reports The Guardian: Some analysts believe that the robotaxis will only be available to employees and invitees initially. For the CEO, Tesla's rollout is slow. "We could start with 1,000 or 10,000 [robotaxis] on day one, but I don't think that would be prudent," he told CNBC in May. "So, we will start with probably 10 for a week, then increase it to 20, 30, 40."

The billionaire has said the driverless cars will be monitored remotely... [Posting on X.com] Musk said the date was "tentatively" 22 June but that this launch date would be "not real self-driving", which would have to wait nearly another week... Musk said he planned to have one thousand Tesla robotaxis on Austin roads "within a few months" and then he would expand to other cities in Texas and California.
Musk posted on X that riders on launch day would be charged a flat fee of $4.20, according to Reuters. And "In recent days, Tesla has sent invites to a select group of Tesla online influencers for a small and carefully monitored robotaxi trial..." As the date of the planned robotaxi launch approached, Texas lawmakers moved to enact rules on autonomous vehicles in the state. Texas Governor Greg Abbott, a Republican, on Friday signed legislation requiring a state permit to operate self-driving vehicles. The law does not take effect until September 1, but the governor's approval of it on Friday signals state officials from both parties want the driverless-vehicle industry to proceed cautiously... The law softens the state's previous anti-regulation stance on autonomous vehicles. A 2017 Texas law specifically prohibited cities from regulating self-driving cars...

The law requires autonomous-vehicle operators to get approval from the Texas Department of Motor Vehicles before operating on public streets without a human driver. It also gives state authorities the power to revoke permits if they deem a driverless vehicle "endangers the public," and requires firms to provide information on how police and first responders can deal with their driverless vehicles in emergency situations. The law's requirements for getting a state permit to operate an "automated motor vehicle" are not particularly onerous but require a firm to attest it can safely operate within the law... Compliance remains far easier than in some states, most notably California, which requires extensive submission of vehicle-testing data under state oversight.
Tesla "planned to operate only in areas it considered the safest," according to the article, and "plans to avoid bad weather, difficult intersections, and will not carry anyone below the age of 18."

More details from UPI: To get started using the robotaxis, users must download the Robotaxi app and use their Tesla account to log in, where it then functions like most ridesharing apps...

"Riders may not always be delivered to their intended destinations or may experience inconveniences, interruptions, or discomfort related to the Robotaxi," the company wrote in a disclaimer in its terms of service. "Tesla may modify or cancel rides in its discretion, including for example due to weather conditions." The terms of service include a clause that Tesla will not be liable for "any indirect, consequential, incidental, special, exemplary, or punitive damages, including lost profits or revenues, lost data, lost time, the costs of procuring substitute transportation services, or other intangible losses" from the use of the robotaxis.
Their article includes a link to the robotaxi's complete Terms of Service: To the fullest extent permitted by law, the Robotaxi, Robotaxi app, and any ride are provided "as is" and "as available" without warranties of any kind, either express or implied... The Robotaxi is not intended to provide transportation services in connection with emergencies, for example emergency transportation to a hospital... Tesla's total liability for any claim arising from or relating to Robotaxi or the Robotaxi app is limited to the greater of the amount paid by you to Tesla for the Robotaxi ride giving rise to the claim, and $100... Tesla may modify these Terms in our discretion, effective upon posting an updated version on Tesla's website. By using a Robotaxi or the Robotaxi app after Tesla posts such modifications, you agree to be bound by the revised Terms.

Tesla Begins Driverless Robotaxi Service in Austin, Texas More | Reply

Tesla Begins Driverless Robotaxi Service in Austin, Texas

Comments Filter:

  • Musk posted on X that riders on launch day would be charged a flat fee of $4.20, according to Reuters. [reuters.com]

    How mature. /s [rolls eyes] Really instills investors w/confidence...

  • Austin is already overrun with Waymo taxis. Adding Teslas in the mix sounds like it's going to be fun.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by mspohr ( 589790 )

      The TSLA fanbois have been hyping robotaxis as the future for Tesla and Elon has said there will be a million Tesla robotaxis on the road by 2020 (yes, 2020...some slippage there).
      The problem is that there are lots of Robotaxi competitors who are more experienced and established.
      Robotaxis are a race to the bottom. I doubt that anyone will make much money with robotaxis.

      • Re: (Score:3)

        by hey! ( 33014 )

        It isn't just fanboys. Tesla stock is astronomically overpriced based on the sales performance and outlook of what normal people consider its core business -- electric cars (and government credits). For investors, Tesla is *all* about the stuff that doesn't exist yet, like robotaxis.

        Are they wrong to value Musk's promises for Tesla Motors so much? I think so, but it's a matter of opinion. If Tesla actually managed to make the advances in autonomous vehicle technology to make a real robotaxi service viab

        • Are they wrong to value Musk's promises for Tesla Motors so much? I think so, but it's a matter of opinion.

          As long as Tesla is trying to depend on cameras, they are wrong.

          • And even then they will still be wrong. TSLA's numbers simply don't work for a car manufacturer, and TSLA is nothing more than that.

    • Austin is already overrun with Waymo taxis. Adding Teslas in the mix sounds like it's going to be fun.

      Wonder if they burn with different colors? :-)

    • What do you mean it's "overrun" with Waymo? What actual problems are it causing other than triggering you because it's autonomous? There are plenty of Waymo vehicles in San Francisco and it's more popular than Lyft. Obviously the citizens love it now.

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by vdc ( 3795451 )

        From the Cambridge dictionary:
        =====
        overrun
        verb [ T ]
        us /ovrrn/
        present participle overrunning | past tense overran us/ovrræn/ | past participle overrun

        to spread over an area quickly and in large numbers
        =====
        Nothing more, nothing less.

        I've visited Austin several times over the past two, three years and it was merely an observation. It are not causing problems other than that they seem to have their own interpretation of what constitutes a safe place to stop in order to drop off or pick up rides, but beyo

  • so kill some one and max pay out is $100?

    • I'm not sure if the slain individual couldn't sue. The T&C binds the rider, so if the rider dies, yep, 100 bucks. Less than Social Security death benefit of 255 I think it is. Curious though if buried in the T&C is if the rider is responsible for any violation the taxi performs while under contract, including while the taxi is enroute for pickup. That could include traffic tickets all the way to vehicular manslaughter.

  • Why would anyone rely on this for transportation?

    "Only in areas it considered the safest [...] plans to avoid bad weather, difficult intersections, and will not carry anyone below the age of 18."

    "Riders may not always be delivered to their intended destinations or may experience inconveniences, interruptions, or discomfort related to the Robotaxi ..."

    At best a novelty and probably closed down within months as they get up to legal status.

    • >> discomfort related to the Robotaxi
      There may be a giant swastika painted on the car.
      There may be a person hit and overrun by the car.
      Just a little discomfort, ignore it.

      • >> discomfort related to the Robotaxi
        There may be a giant swastika painted on the car.

        You laugh, but anyone even remotely neutral must really question the motives of the ones painting those “giant swastikas”.

        The exact same spastics paint them on the homes and businesses of Israel supporters, or of those that refuse to ally with Iranian backed extremists.

        They openly harass anyone with a yarmulke. They’re also all-in on judging folks according to their cultural group instead of individual character.

        • >> anyone even remotely neutral must really question the motives

          1) Nobody is remotely neutral. We don't lobotomize people any more. Think y yourself
          2) The boycott of Tesla is aimed at economically harming Elon Musk. But it harms also all the people who bought the car in good faith. I'm one of those, and will not by a Tesla any more (Unless E.M. resigns AND sells his shares)

  • Like it or not... (Score:2, Interesting)

    by greytree ( 7124971 )
    Like it or not, this ( and others before it ) herald the beginning of the future of transportation.

    It will dramatically improve our cities and our lives, and save many lives.

    Aggressive, dangerous, Top-Gear-stoked car drivers belong on racetracks, killing each other, and not on public roads, killing the innocent.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by mspohr ( 589790 )

      AI stoked cars belong on closed streets, not on public roads killing the innocent.
      Robotaxis won't be any cheaper than other taxis and Tesla's "FSD" is not safer (probably less safe) than human drivers.

      • AI stoked cars belong on closed streets, not on public roads killing the innocent.

        Wow did you miss the point. We already know that statistically, modern AI cars get into far fewer accidents than humans do.

        We also know for sure that AI cars have much better visibility than human drivers, since they can see all sides of a car clearly with zero blind spots. Perfect for city driving which is where the taxis will operate, and driving the accident rate even lower,

        You just sound like some backwater amish luddite.

        • Wow did you miss the point. We already know that statistically, modern AI cars get into far fewer accidents than humans do.

          Statistically, Uber/Lyft get into far fewer accidents than all the other drivers. And that's the only thing we should be comparing driverless taxis too... taxis.

          • Wow did you miss the point. We already know that statistically, modern AI cars get into far fewer accidents than humans do.

            Statistically, Uber/Lyft get into far fewer accidents than all the other drivers.

            Which is really irrelevant. There are far fewer Uber/Lyft drivers so you would expect them to have fewer accidents than all other drivers.

            And that's the only thing we should be comparing driverless taxis too... taxis.

            Where there are fewer driverless taxis than Uber/Lyft drivers wouldn't you expect them to "statistically" have fewer accidents.

            Lets be clear, there are lots of human drivers on the road when they shouldn't be. I don't think being better than them is the measure of success for driverless cars or taxis. Not being drunk or high is not good enough.

        • Re:Whoosh (Score:4, Informative)

          by Jeremi ( 14640 ) on Monday June 23, 2025 @01:25AM (#65469053) Homepage

          We already know that statistically, modern AI cars get into far fewer accidents than humans do.

          We know that the self-driving car companies have provided us with data that they say indicates that... but it's in their economic interest to convince us of that, and it's straightforward to lie with statistics if that is what you want to do. ... and even if we accept that "modern AI cars get into far fewer accidents than humans do", it's not clear that safety record extends to the LIDAR-shunning, camera-dependent Tesla implementation. Musk is making an aggressive bet that adequate safety can be achieved by a camera-only system; other companies think otherwise and have designed their systems accordingly. Time will tell who is correct.

          • Time will tell who is correct.

            Time already told. Cameras + LIDAR is superior to cameras alone and all else being equal always will be, period. Vehicles with both just plain have more information to work with, period. People like to say all the time that humans make mistakes and self-driving cars only have to be better than them, but the ones boosting Tesla who are saying that are forgetting that one of the reasons that humans make mistakes is fallibility of "sensor" input.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by stooo ( 2202012 )

          >> We already know that statistically, modern AI cars get into far fewer accidents than humans do.
          That's pure investor B.S. propaganda.

    • Like it or not, this ( and others before it ) herald the beginning of the future of transportation.
      It will dramatically improve our cities and our lives, and save many lives.

      Can't wait for driver-less car settings like in the Amazon series Upload [wikipedia.org] ... :-)
      (a) Prioritize occupant.
      (b) Prioritize pedestrian.

      • Can't wait for driver-less car settings like in the Amazon series Upload [wikipedia.org] ... :-) (a) Prioritize occupant. (b) Prioritize pedestrian.

        What about following the law and picking (c) avoid accidents.

    • You're comparing driverless taxis to teenagers in overpowered cars or assholes in oversized trucks instead of to taxis... Ubers, etc.

      The experience won't be better or safer than an Uber/Lyft, and the assholes won't be trading in their fast cards and huge trucks to use taxis.

      • "the assholes won't be trading in their fast cards and huge trucks to use taxis."

        We won't be asking the assholes for their opinions - they're assholes.
    • We can't keep automating the shit out of every possible type of job. Not without coming up with a way to give people money to buy things without them working for them, and that's just not in the cards.

      As it stands we've had 50 years of automation ripping through the factory job market. Those used to be good paying middle class jobs now they are few and far between or they are borderline slave labor in places like India and China.

      As more and more things are automated you have fewer and fewer people a

    • All true unless you intend to imply that Tesla had something to do with it. Late to the party, missed the party. Tesla will only lose money in the taxi business and probably kill a lot of people before they get sued out of it.

  • Somebody's going to get killed. They just had an incident on a test course where their vehicles ignored a School bus with its lights and stop sign out.

    This is Elon trying to pump his stock and the corrupt government of Texas letting him do it at the cost of their own citizens' lives and property.

    It's not working anymore. There isn't anyone left alive who doesn't know and understand Tesla is going to collapse soon. It's not if it's when and who is going to get caught holding the bag.

    In the old days

    • Re:Their tech doesn't work (Score:4, Informative)

      by quonset ( 4839537 ) on Sunday June 22, 2025 @06:10PM (#65468491)

      Somebody's going to get killed. They just had an incident on a test course where their vehicles ignored a School bus with its lights and stop sign out.

      Tesla vehicles are already killing people. Specifically, they keep plowing into emergency vehicles who have [autoweek.com] their [arstechnica.com] lights [qz.com] on [cbsnews.com].

      • Re:Their tech doesn't work (Score:5, Insightful)

        by JaredOfEuropa ( 526365 ) on Sunday June 22, 2025 @06:47PM (#65468551) Journal
        Humans drive into stationary emergency vehicles all the time. Self-driving cars don't need to be perfect, they just need to be a bit better than humans. In the end it'll come down to insurance companies*, and they'll just look at the numbers. There will be a point where insurers will charge you extra if you have a steering wheel and pedals fitted.

        *) in sane legal systems, where a robotaxi manufacturer can't just be sued for millions just because someone died; the plaintiff would have to show gross negligence. For the rest: liability would lie with the robotaxi operator or owner, through their insurance. Just as is the case now.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by Jeremi ( 14640 )

          Self-driving cars don't need to be perfect, they just need to be a bit better than humans.

          The exact values of "a bit" and "humans" are worth examining. Is it enough for them to just be better than the average human driver, or do they need to be as good as or better than the best human drivers? And if so, how much better is "enough better" to offset the social cost and complexity overhead of integrating the new technology into the road system?

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

          It's a different problem with humans. If they hit an emergency vehicle with the lights on, they must be compromised somehow. Alcohol, drugs, medical problems, extreme tiredness.

          With Teslas it's a systemic problem. Their computer vision just can't see those vehicles. It doesn't understand what it is looking at. It's not easy to make it understand either, because it doesn't see like a person does. It recognizes things it has been trained to recognize, and that's it. It can't extrapolate from what it has seen

      • Clearly that's just Elon musk's deep concern for the black lives matter movement being programmed into the code /s

        Seriously though I hadn't realized they were crashing into emergency vehicles but I suppose I shouldn't be surprised. Fucking Christ I'm so tired of being experimented on.

    • Somebody's going to get killed.

      Human-driven vehicles already cause plenty of fatalities. As long as they do better than the average Uber/Lyft driver, they're ahead of the curve.

      My gripe about this cars-as-a-service business model is that it's another step towards a "you'll own nothing and be happy" future. China gets a sub-$10k BYD Seagull EV, while we get "affordable EVs" via a rent-seeking scheme that would make a Ferengi proud.

  • Just not going to support the fascist overthrow of the U.S. government.

    I'm beginning to suspect the election might have been hacked.

  • Notice the subtle change from Elon's original "no one in the car" to "no one behind the steering wheel". That is because there is still a safety driver, just sitting in the front passenger seat. https://www.forbes.com/sites/b... [forbes.com]

  • "If we kill you, you get $100. RoboTaxi!!!"

  • I cant wait to never get in one. I count on the instinct for self preservation by my driver which no computer system will ever truly have.
  • This is going to revolutionize the auto industry. When it becomes cheaper to take a robotaxi (or an Uber or taxi) than it is to maintain your own vehicle, the shift to them will be insane. The $4.20 lets you go up to 20 miles. A month usually has roughly 21 weekdays, lets say you need to uber twice a day. At $4.20 a ride, you would only spend 21*2*$4.20 = $176.40 for your entire work commute. That is literally less than the cost of gas I spend in a month for work and I wouldn't need to buy or maintain a veh

    • This is going to revolutionize the auto industry.

      I think self-driving vehicles will (eventually) revolutionize the auto industry. I doubt Tesla is going to lead that revolution.

  • I have been reading (and loving) Slashdot for so long, I cannot remember. (When was it founded?) And other than The Register (whose previous editor I knew), Slashdot has remained outside the dumb creepy toxic hateful rude childish woke behaviour of The Verge, Reddit, WIRED and in particular, Gizmodo. But I am saddened to read the comments below this column on the Robotaxi trial. You may notice that a few days ago, Starship 10 exploded during fuelling for an engine test. Despite the huge fireball and such, n

  • Nothing illustrates how seriously Tesla takes safety as paying someone to be a full-time safety driver, but sticking them in the passenger seat so it looks like the car is more self-driving.

    Could one ask for a clearer illustration of sacrificing safety (of the passengers and wider public) for publicity purposes?

Slashdot Top Deals

... though his invention worked superbly -- his theory was a crock of sewage from beginning to end. -- Vernor Vinge, "The Peace War"

Close