5 ms·

> And given that in Austin they just reached parity with Waymo (i.e. completely unsupervised robotaxi service), they are not doing badly. There is no unsupervi

> And given that in Austin they just reached parity with Waymo (i.e. completely unsupervised robotaxi service), they are not doing badly. There is no unsupervised robotaxi service in Austin and there won't be, for years, if ever. Just like the way "FSD" is not fully self driving and likely never will be.

llboston 8mo ago
According to https://robotaxitracker.com/ https://robotaxitracker.com/ there are 7 unsupervised robotaxi in Austin right now.
- DerekL 8mo ago
  Are these the cars where the safety driver is in a car tailing the robotaxi, or do they actually run without the need for a safety driver? https://electrek.co/2026/01/22/tesla-didnt-remove-the-robotaxi-safety-monitor-it-just-moved-them-to-a-trailing-car/ https://electrek.co/2026/01/22/tesla-didnt-remove-the-robota...
  - WarmWash 8mo ago
    It seems they run without a safety driver or follow car (mostly?). However the area it operates is extremely small, and they are still only allowing Tesla bros to try it.
    - senordevnyc 8mo ago
      So in other words, like literally every other word out of Elon’s mouth for a decade now, it’s incredibly dishonest. He lies about everything, all the time, without any acknowledgment. Nothing is ever delivered on time, most of it isn’t delivered at all, and virtually every bit of promised capability is exaggerated. Why does anyone want to do business with a person or company like that? I genuinely do not understand.
    - small_model 8mo ago
      Nope is open to the public and covers bigger area then Waymo. EDS is limiting a lot of people here's ability to critically evaluate the current autonomous auto rollout.
      - senordevnyc 8mo ago
        This is totally false. If there are any truly autonomous robotaxis in Austin (a bit if, since Tesla has repeatedly lied and faked things like this in the past), it’s only a handful and they’re limited to a tiny area. The “robotaxis” with a safety driver are the ones that have the bigger area, probably because Tesla sucks at actual self-driving. Still. After a decade of broken promises and shitty engineering practices. Elon has been blatantly lying about FSD for years, and yet the fans still take whatever he says as gospel. And yet the skeptics are the ones with EDS? lol, ok.
      - WarmWash 8mo ago
        The unsupervised area is a tiny subset of the supervised area.
        small_model 8mo ago
        Any evidence of this?, even it its true right now, and they are being ultra cautious, (they are hardly going to just dump 100k unsupervised teslas in one week), it won't stay that way for long. They will overtake Waymo in a few months, then kill them by the end of the year.
        WarmWash 8mo ago
        https://www.reddit.com/r/SelfDrivingCars/comments/1qvf7hu/tesla_unsupervised_robotaxi_in_austin_is_limited/ https://www.reddit.com/r/SelfDrivingCars/comments/1qvf7hu/te... It's unsurprising someone so out of the loop on its true status is so hyped on it's future... If robotaxi was doing legit rides, Elon would be posting about it 20 times a day.
        8mo ago
    - deleted 8mo ago
      [deleted]
testing22321 8mo ago
> and there won't be, for years, if ever. That is a lot of confidence. Do you work in the autonomous vehicle space? What makes you so certain?
- UltraSane 8mo ago
  Because camera only simply won't be reliable enough with current technology.
  - red75prime 8mo ago
    Try to find a single ablation study of a sensor suite. Waymo is in a good position to do such a study and the corporation would have benefited from showing that vision-only systems aren't viable (by demonstrating the corporation's good will to maintain public safety and by making it harder for vision-only competitors), but no such study from them. I guess they understand that computer vision is a fast-moving target and their paper might become obsolete the next day.
    - UltraSane 8mo ago
      FSD and Robotaxi are plenty of evidence vision only aren't viable.
      - deleted 8mo ago
        [deleted]
      - red75prime 8mo ago
        Read Electrek articles with a mouthful of salt. Fred Lambert’s “robotaxi is 10x worse than a human” estimate is based on his personal statistical reasoning, which somehow arrived at 200,000 miles per accident for humans. Minor accidents that Tesla reports for robotaxis (such as low-speed collisions with stationary objects) do not make it into publicly available statistics, so his estimate might be significantly off.
        8mo ago
small_model 8mo ago
lol its running now and growing every day, the thing about Tesla's solution is it works globally and the costs are much much less than Waymo will ever be able to achieve (Given there reliance on third parties for most of the hardware) Waymo and uber will be gone in a year.
- senordevnyc 8mo ago
  Been hearing this for years now. But sure, any day now…
- youarentrightjr 8mo ago
  > lol its running now and growing every day, the thing about Tesla's solution is it works globally and the costs are much much less than Waymo will ever be able to achieve (Given there reliance on third parties for most of the hardware) Waymo and uber will be gone in a year. A year? They'll be gone in two weeks! Seriously, what portion of your financial and emotional net worth is tied up in TSLA?
  - small_model 8mo ago
    None, it's just obvious to anyone who has a high school level of business knowledge.
    - youarentrightjr 8mo ago
      > None, it's just obvious to anyone who has a high school level of business knowledge. That's a highly ironic statement given your position on "cost per mile". With a small amount of business acumen, you'd know that betting on technology staying expensive is a bad idea. This is seen in all industries, but especially electronics, where there are many competitors continuously optimizing for cost. E.g., we're at the point now where an internet enabled phone is basically disposable, costing people ~ a few hours of wages. History has shown that technology costs decrease over time, and rapidly if it's a critically important technology. If you don't agree, share a counter example.

llboston 8mo ago

According to https://robotaxitracker.com/ https://robotaxitracker.com/ there are 7 unsupervised robotaxi in Austin right now.

DerekL 8mo ago
Are these the cars where the safety driver is in a car tailing the robotaxi, or do they actually run without the need for a safety driver? https://electrek.co/2026/01/22/tesla-didnt-remove-the-robotaxi-safety-monitor-it-just-moved-them-to-a-trailing-car/ https://electrek.co/2026/01/22/tesla-didnt-remove-the-robota...
- WarmWash 8mo ago
  It seems they run without a safety driver or follow car (mostly?). However the area it operates is extremely small, and they are still only allowing Tesla bros to try it.
  - senordevnyc 8mo ago
    So in other words, like literally every other word out of Elon’s mouth for a decade now, it’s incredibly dishonest. He lies about everything, all the time, without any acknowledgment. Nothing is ever delivered on time, most of it isn’t delivered at all, and virtually every bit of promised capability is exaggerated. Why does anyone want to do business with a person or company like that? I genuinely do not understand.
  - small_model 8mo ago
    Nope is open to the public and covers bigger area then Waymo. EDS is limiting a lot of people here's ability to critically evaluate the current autonomous auto rollout.
    - senordevnyc 8mo ago
      This is totally false. If there are any truly autonomous robotaxis in Austin (a bit if, since Tesla has repeatedly lied and faked things like this in the past), it’s only a handful and they’re limited to a tiny area. The “robotaxis” with a safety driver are the ones that have the bigger area, probably because Tesla sucks at actual self-driving. Still. After a decade of broken promises and shitty engineering practices. Elon has been blatantly lying about FSD for years, and yet the fans still take whatever he says as gospel. And yet the skeptics are the ones with EDS? lol, ok.
    - WarmWash 8mo ago
      The unsupervised area is a tiny subset of the supervised area.
      - small_model 8mo ago
        Any evidence of this?, even it its true right now, and they are being ultra cautious, (they are hardly going to just dump 100k unsupervised teslas in one week), it won't stay that way for long. They will overtake Waymo in a few months, then kill them by the end of the year.
        WarmWash 8mo ago
        https://www.reddit.com/r/SelfDrivingCars/comments/1qvf7hu/tesla_unsupervised_robotaxi_in_austin_is_limited/ https://www.reddit.com/r/SelfDrivingCars/comments/1qvf7hu/te... It's unsurprising someone so out of the loop on its true status is so hyped on it's future... If robotaxi was doing legit rides, Elon would be posting about it 20 times a day.
        8mo ago
  - deleted 8mo ago
    [deleted]

testing22321 8mo ago

> and there won't be, for years, if ever. That is a lot of confidence. Do you work in the autonomous vehicle space? What makes you so certain?

UltraSane 8mo ago
Because camera only simply won't be reliable enough with current technology.
- red75prime 8mo ago
  Try to find a single ablation study of a sensor suite. Waymo is in a good position to do such a study and the corporation would have benefited from showing that vision-only systems aren't viable (by demonstrating the corporation's good will to maintain public safety and by making it harder for vision-only competitors), but no such study from them. I guess they understand that computer vision is a fast-moving target and their paper might become obsolete the next day.
  - UltraSane 8mo ago
    FSD and Robotaxi are plenty of evidence vision only aren't viable.
    - deleted 8mo ago
      [deleted]
    - red75prime 8mo ago
      Read Electrek articles with a mouthful of salt. Fred Lambert’s “robotaxi is 10x worse than a human” estimate is based on his personal statistical reasoning, which somehow arrived at 200,000 miles per accident for humans. Minor accidents that Tesla reports for robotaxis (such as low-speed collisions with stationary objects) do not make it into publicly available statistics, so his estimate might be significantly off.
      - 8mo ago

small_model 8mo ago

lol its running now and growing every day, the thing about Tesla's solution is it works globally and the costs are much much less than Waymo will ever be able to achieve (Given there reliance on third parties for most of the hardware) Waymo and uber will be gone in a year.

senordevnyc 8mo ago
Been hearing this for years now. But sure, any day now…
youarentrightjr 8mo ago
> lol its running now and growing every day, the thing about Tesla's solution is it works globally and the costs are much much less than Waymo will ever be able to achieve (Given there reliance on third parties for most of the hardware) Waymo and uber will be gone in a year. A year? They'll be gone in two weeks! Seriously, what portion of your financial and emotional net worth is tied up in TSLA?
- small_model 8mo ago
  None, it's just obvious to anyone who has a high school level of business knowledge.
  - youarentrightjr 8mo ago
    > None, it's just obvious to anyone who has a high school level of business knowledge. That's a highly ironic statement given your position on "cost per mile". With a small amount of business acumen, you'd know that betting on technology staying expensive is a bad idea. This is seen in all industries, but especially electronics, where there are many competitors continuously optimizing for cost. E.g., we're at the point now where an internet enabled phone is basically disposable, costing people ~ a few hours of wages. History has shown that technology costs decrease over time, and rapidly if it's a critically important technology. If you don't agree, share a counter example.