Although your points have merit, I don’t think they’re relevant to this specific situation. This is a limited-run vehicle specifically for the purpose of provid

Although your points have merit, I don’t think they’re relevant to this specific situation. This is a limited-run vehicle specifically for the purpose of providing a driverless taxi service. If we look at Waymo’s competing service in Arizona, we see that passengers sit in the back, where they don’t have access to the car’s controls either. Both your points apply equally to that situation, even though the cars have a normal steering wheel and driver’s seat. So what you’re really arguing against is driverless taxi services in general, not this vehicle. As a point against this specific vehicle: Waymo’s vehicles occasionally get “stuck” and have to be recovered manually. (Waymo dispatches a driver who comes and takes over the car.) How does Cruise plan to deal with situations requiring manual intervention, where remote labeling and pathfinding isn’t enough?