The service area of self-driving taxis is growing ever broader, encroaching on more and more of our urban centers. We already have Waymo taxis prowling the streets of New York City, lurking and gathering data until the day they can oust 200,000 New Yorkers from their taxi driving jobs, and the company is expanding to more cities. Earlier this week, Waymo announced its next targets: Detroit, Las Vegas, and San Diego.
As self-driving taxis go, Waymo’s cabs are by far the lesser evil. They’re genuinely safer around pedestrians, cyclists, and motorcyclists, according to data from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, even if they’re imperfect. They seem truly competent in their autonomy, taking shortcuts and weighing risk and caution the way a human driver would — habits that have the added benefit of making them act predictably human on the road.
Are they right, though?
But Detroit, Las Vegas, and San Diego already rely on automotive traffic. They’re car-forward cities, where public transit is largely limited to road-going buses. Sure, one can make the argument that self-driving taxis could reduce vehicle ownership long-term and lead to less traffic, but that’s far from an answered question. These robotaxis are still built around the private vehicle as default transportation, a form of locomotion that’s wildly space-inefficient. Self-driving cars aren’t a suitable replacement for buses, streetcars, or trains — they’re just a half measure.
Bringing Waymo robotaxis to Detroit, Vegas, and San Diego could reduce pedestrian, cyclist, and motorcyclist deaths and that’s a good thing, and a goal worth pursuing. But they still contribute to social isolation, tire microplastics littered on roadways, and tothe fiction that paved roads and private vehicles are a good core around which to build densely-packed cities. Waymos are better than nothing, but less than Detroit, Las Vega, and San Diego deserve.
