> Despite some unfortunate and highly publicised accidents, data suggests the best AVs are already a lot safer than human drivers. Nearly 1.2mn people die globally every year in road crashes; human error is a contributing factor in the vast majority. An independent analysis found driverless vehicles from Alphabet’s Waymo in four US cities were involved in 68 per cent fewer crashes per vehicle mile than human drivers — though this is human drivers generally, not just professional ones. Driverless vehicles can struggle with “edge cases” ranging from snow to traffic light failures. But they may become better at handling such situations over time as the technology evolves. Rather than relying on their training on high-definition maps, the latest “vision-language-action” models, developed by companies including Wayve, use cameras paired with language-based AI to improve their ability to interpret unfamiliar situations.

> For now, robotaxis are costlier to operate due to development costs and extra kit. But Goldman Sachs says operational and scale efficiencies could cut costs sharply, and projects a $415bn global robotaxi market by 2035. As costs fall, driverless vehicles could start to displace driver-operated taxis and, in big cities, even private car ownership (the RAC found the average personal car in England is parked for 96 per cent of the time). AV evangelists suggest that could open the way, longer term, to their vision of “shared mobility”, easing congestion and cutting emissions — provided cheap AV rides do not encourage more journeys and lots of unnecessary miles by loitering vehicles.

Goldman Sachs Report: https://www.goldmansachs.com/insights/articles/robotaxis-to-...

It's kind of clear to me that operating a fleet of robotaxis was Uber's original plan - humans were only a temporary thing. It was not optimal for them that self-driving vehicles were a lot more complicated than we expected back then.