Would you travel in a driverless taxi.

[MattA7]

With driverless taxis being considered in the UK and already a thing in the US I am wondering how many people would actually travel in one. Personally I wouldn’t trust such vehicles and would refuse to travel in it however I was wondering if I was the only person who had such views.

 

[deltic]

Yes, happy to travel in one. My experiences of taxi drivers tends to put me off the ones with drivers.

 

[lxfe_mxtterz]

No.

A) I certainly wouldn't trust it.
B) I don't support putting taxi drivers out of jobs.

 

[jfollows]

No, never.
My career in IT tells me not to trust technology for this purpose.

 

[RailWonderer]

I sit in the front passenger seat when I use a taxi and often have good conversations with the driver. It’s nice to listen to a person, this modern world is reducing our social interactions one by one.

The novelty would be fun then it would wear off and I would think of the hardworking men and women that drive them and what they will have to do next. For some it is post retirement income but others have to feed a family and pay bills.

 

[jon0844]

I don't think driverless taxis are going to be a thing for a very long time. There are examples of moving vehicles in controlled environments, but there's SO much to get working on a taxi that will just turn up at any location and take you to any location, dealing with people inside and outside of the taxi, their bags, pets and that's even before considering accessibility issues.

 

[JohnMcL7]

Are they a big thing in the US? I thought the existing ones were all testing and prototypes and Elon Musk's annual claims about self driving Tesla each year suggesting they'd be great for taxis as usual hasn't happened yet.

 

[Bletchleyite]

With driverless taxis being considered in the UK and already a thing in the US I am wondering how many people would actually travel in one. Personally I wouldn’t trust such vehicles and would refuse to travel in it however I was wondering if I was the only person who had such views.

Given the standard of driving exhibited by many taxi drivers yes, I would. Most likely it would drive more safely than a human.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 25 Apr 2023 ==

I sit in the front passenger seat when I use a taxi and often have good conversations with the driver. It’s nice to listen to a person, this modern world is reducing our social interactions one by one.

The novelty would be fun then it would wear off and I would think of the hardworking men and women that drive them and what they will have to do next. For some it is post retirement income but others have to feed a family and pay bills.

Like for a haircut, the last thing I want is a random, awkward conversation with someone with whom I likely have nothing in common aside from being a human. One big thing that puts me off taxis is that one on one situation.

 

[75A]

If the driverless ones were registered, taxed insured etc, they'd probably be safer than some 'driven' ones.
Still wouldn't go in one though.
As to putting Taxi drivers out of jobs - that's called progress I'm afraid.
Steam trains put Stage Coach drivers out of work etc, etc.

 

[Lucan]

No

 

[Gaelan]

Are they a big thing in the US? I thought the existing ones were all testing and prototypes and Elon Musk's annual claims about self driving Tesla each year suggesting they'd be great for taxis as usual hasn't happened yet.

Waymo (the self-driving branch of Google-now-Alphabet) is doing actually-driverless (no safety driver) rideshares in Phoenix, AZ, and claiming they're coming to SF and LA soon - but it's not widespread outside a few cities.

 

[Intercity110]

i'd travel in one, but only in certain circumstances, such as in the countryside or for airport transfers, not that i use taxis that often.

 

[RichJF]

Not until it's 100% driverless vehicles only on the road.

What people fail to realise is, that to achieve true "driverless" infrastructure the human needs to be removed from the road system. In a world where you have programmed driverless vehicles driving along, the moment a human with potential for unpredictability enters the fray it throws the computer system off.

 

[Bletchleyite]

What people fail to realise is, that to achieve true "driverless" infrastructure the human needs to be removed from the road system. In a world where you have programmed driverless vehicles driving along, the moment a human with potential for unpredictability enters the fray it throws the computer system off.

People fail to realise it because it isn't true.

 

[zero]

I would use driverless taxis, but only after 3-4 years of them becoming increasingly commonplace and the statistics demonstrating that they are as safe or safer than human-driven vehicles.

I only take taxis once every 3-4 years anyway, the last time I took one was before covid. Being driverless would not cause me to use them more.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I would use driverless taxis, but only after 3-4 years of them becoming increasingly commonplace and the statistics demonstrating that they are as safe or safer than human-driven vehicles.

Might be different where you are, but the standard of taxi driving round here is so bad I think a half-blind monkey would drive more safely, to be honest. I really don't understand how it can be allowed to get so bad,. but it is.

 

[DC1989]

Unfortunately Musk and Tesla have really poisoned the well when it comes to the general publics opinion on driverless taxis, tesla are not even in the same solar system as others

Waymo ones are very much the real deal and if I was in a city that they'd already been operating in for some time I wouldn't have any hesitation to use one. In fact I may visit SF soonish and will try one out. It's pretty much a solved problem at this stage and now they just need to scale which is the difficult part. Is there a real route to profitability for them? That is the question mark now rather than ability

My rule of thumb for pretty much all tech is 'never be an early adopter' though so I wouldn't use one in a UK city until it had been there a few months at the least

 

[GRALISTAIR]

NO. Now in a few years when/if the technology has matured, then possibly.

 

[Basil Jet]

Taxis are legally required to be wheelchair/disabled friendly in London and presumably sizeable other parts of the country. It is hard to see how a driverless taxi would fulfil the requirements of old ladies who need their suitcase taken up to the first floor etc.

 

[DC1989]

Taxis are legally required to be wheelchair/disabled friendly in London and presumably sizeable other parts of the country. It is hard to see how a driverless taxi would fulfil the requirements of old ladies who need their suitcase taken up to the first floor etc.

Driverless taxis will have no issues in being wheelchair friendly etc as there's just so much more space (due to no steering wheel being needed) I don't know how to post pictures here but you can google 'Cruise Origin' for GM's Cruise driverless taxi

 

[Bletchleyite]

Taxis are legally required to be wheelchair/disabled friendly in London and presumably sizeable other parts of the country. It is hard to see how a driverless taxi would fulfil the requirements of old ladies who need their suitcase taken up to the first floor etc.

It might be that some drivers will carry luggage, but there is no requirement for them to do so and not all will.

 

[eoff]

With driverless taxis being considered in the UK and already a thing in the US I am wondering how many people would actually travel in one. Personally I wouldn’t trust such vehicles and would refuse to travel in it however I was wondering if I was the only person who had such views.

I'm never going to be happy with driverless vehicles on normal roads (assuming that is what these are) unless an identified individual (not the passenger) has personal liability for any accidents/injuries caused by the vehicle.

 

[deltic]

I'm never going to be happy with driverless vehicles on normal roads (assuming that is what these are) unless an identified individual (not the passenger) has personal liability for any accidents/injuries caused by the vehicle.

By an individual I assume you also mean a company or similar as would be the case with a lift or a DLR train.

Having just witnessed another abusive and aggressive mini-cab driver in central London I would have no qualms in getting in a driverless taxi.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I'm never going to be happy with driverless vehicles on normal roads (assuming that is what these are) unless an identified individual (not the passenger) has personal liability for any accidents/injuries caused by the vehicle.

True self driving would indeed not give responsibility to the passenger, because they wouldn't be in control of it in any way bar telling it where to go.

By an individual I assume you also mean a company or similar as would be the case with a lift or a DLR train.

Having just witnessed another abusive and aggressive mini-cab driver in central London I would have no qualms in getting in a driverless taxi.

The standard of minicab driving throughout the UK is so excruciatingly poor that they are probably an even better example of a trade wishing to put itself out of a job ASAP than some booking office staff. London (exclusively London) black cab drivers are better but not that much better.

I would't mourn the complete end of the disreputable trade it is.

I'll do almost anything in preference to using one.

 

[OptareLover]

It depends; I may in years to come if the technology is proven to be smart enough and is a popular option.

Thing is, how will it know you are there trying to get into the taxi? Will you have to book it etc.?

You could probably enter any old rubbish into the destination!

 

[jon0844]

I occasionally see videos published online from companies demonstrating how their tech allows vehicles to drive without getting confused by things like roundabouts, pedestrians, police giving instructions (that is a tough one as it isn't enough just to identify a person but know who they are and what they are gesturing!), and dealing with an accident and having to cross a lane to go around an incident etc. Most are likely videos to attract funding.

Given Tesla was caught faking, I am never sure how real these demos are. Indeed, a situation could be staged and the demo merely operates a pre-programmed sequence.

Or, in other videos, you see vehicles moving at a snail pace that nobody would ever sit in. Who would want to travel in a car that crawls, stops, has to calculate its next move, as well as the vehicle needing to keep an eye on the occupants and help them get in and out (as well as stopping safely somewhere to do so).

All in all, I can't see how it will happen anytime soon. The tech will be fine for controlled, segregated, routes from a fixed A to B (say a long stay car park to airport terminal) and things like that.

Calling a cab at 2am to negotiate badly parked taxis, drunks on the road like zombies, and so on, isn't going to be a thing.

 

[Magdalia]

No. What would happen if the driverless taxi was in a collision?

 

[richa2002]

If the driverless ones were registered, taxed insured etc, they'd probably be safer than some 'driven' ones.
Still wouldn't go in one though.
As to putting Taxi drivers out of jobs - that's called progress I'm afraid.
Steam trains put Stage Coach drivers out of work etc, etc.

I find this post odd. Because something has been given the notion of "progress", doesn't mean it should be proceeded with at any cost. This attitude seems to be the downfall of so much in modern life, that we should just accept technological progress whatever the consequences. It's fundamentally anti-human. People then wonder why there's a "mental health crisis". Zero surprise when you sanatise the human experience in favour of short-term convenience whilst increasingly making humans redundant.

 

[Bletchleyite]

No. What would happen if the driverless taxi was in a collision?

What would happen if a manned taxi was in a collision? I don't see an awful lot different other than that, being less likely to be injured if you were sitting in the back, you may find yourself having to give first aid to or call an ambulance for the driver.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 19 May 2023 ==

I find this post odd. Because something has been given the notion of "progress", doesn't mean it should be proceeded with at any cost. This attitude seems to be the downfall of so much in modern life, that we should just accept technological progress whatever the consequences. It's fundamentally anti-human. People then wonder why there's a "mental health crisis". Zero surprise when you sanatise the human experience in favour of short-term convenience whilst increasingly making humans redundant.

I'm not quite clear why people see this as new.

Word processors made typing pools redundant (but remember IT spawned a whole new industry of its own that simply didn't exist 60 years ago)
DOO makes guards redundant (OK, OK, I know a lot oppose that, but normally on safety grounds)
Electric lighting made lamplighters redundant
Alarm clocks made knocker uppers redundant

When did it stop being progress and start being bad?

 

[Magdalia]

What would happen if a manned taxi was in a collision? I don't see an awful lot different other than that, being less likely to be injured if you were sitting in the back, you may find yourself having to give first aid to or call an ambulance for the driver.

It would only be similar if the driver was incapacitated, but that would not be the case in lots of accidents, where the taxi driver would be in a position to act.

Say, for example, the driverless taxi hit a pedestrian or cyclist? Can the occupant of the driverless taxi leave the scene? If yes, how? If the collision is with another vehicle, with a driver, who does that driver "exchange details" with?

I'll say no to the risk of getting involved in any of that.