zlacker

> I'm gonna be honest, I really don't see how these opinion pieces are relevant. There are a lot of smart people working at these companies and I'm sure they have done a lot of research and work into determining that this is a viable thing to try.

Like "robo"taxi, right? A lot of smart people have been working on this at same company for decade+

> I am going to put more faith into that than somebodies opinion online.

There are opinions and then there are things you can review that are factual and based on laws.

>>bdangu+(OP)
> Like "robo"taxi, right? A lot of smart people have been working on this at same company for decade+

I'm a bit confused what you're trying to imply here. They have launched RoboTaxi's and recently have been removing the human safety monitors in them. Are you trying to imply this didn't take a lot of work from a lot of intelligent people?

>>Fogest+u
No, I am trying to not imply but say that it doesn't work which is why the company is now pivoting away to "humanoid robots" and is slowly starting to stop making cars.

>>bdangu+W2
You're talking about two different things. Robotaxi's are different from the self-driving style features of a personal Tesla vehicle. You specifically said RoboTaxi but now are referring to a pivot related to their Tesla vehicles.

>>Fogest+Y7
I am just talking about (non-existent and will never materialize or exist) robotaxi. not about “full” “self driving” features of regular teslas (I own one)

>>bdangu+Qj
They exist and are operational. I am confused by what you are talking about. How can you say "non-existent" and "never materialize" when they are quite literally in operation as a service right now.

>>Fogest+om
There are as many operating as there are 9’10” tall teenagers.