This is your city on driverless cars.

A blackout in San Francisco yesterday cut power to traffic lights. Drivers coped; Waymos just stopped moving, often in intersections, stranding passengers and compounding gridlock.

https://sfstandard.com/2025/12/20/waymo-sf-blackout-robotaxi-traffic-jams/

Maybe allowing a private company to flood public space with a massive fleet of unmanned vehicles isn't great transportation policy. (Especially when shit happens. And shit *always* happens.)

@straphanger

cars of any sort are not a great transportation policy

@darwinwoodka @straphanger … at least not privately owned within city limits with heavy reliance on a bus/Metro system.
@Huntn00 @darwinwoodka @straphanger Taxis and robotaxis are still cars taking up just much space on the rod as a privately owned car...more, actually, since they are on the road without passengers.
@jhavok @darwinwoodka @straphanger except if for example you have 50k families each with a vehicle replaced by public transportation, in a much smaller network of total vehicles, a mix of mass transit, metro lines, bus and many less hired automated cars.
@Huntn00 @darwinwoodka @straphanger So your theory is that the inconvenience of calling a robotaxi will drive people to public transit.
@jhavok @darwinwoodka @straphanger Dude, I said in theory. I’m not locked into any hard position. At this point, I’d rather hear your solution.
@Huntn00 @darwinwoodka @straphanger My theory is that improving the speed and reliability of mass transit and the walkability of cities will reduce traffic, whereas robotaxis will be traffic.

@jhavok A particular kind of traffic, yes, and your point has been where many fellow SDV advocates decide I'm an asshole and won't talk to me, heh.

The hard reality is that a car is car is a car, and that's just immutable physics. We'll always need them, but we can sure do with WAAAY fewer of them. SDVs can help with that (by moving more people in fewer vehicles), but are only part of larger solution, which in my mind MUST emphasize mass transit.

It's not either/or, though; we'll have both.

@wesdym So now you're imagining the autonomous cars as mini-trams that carry several people on each trip?

@jhavok I think you might be replying the wrong person, but I admit I'm not sure.

What *I* said is that SDVs are PART of the solution to congestion, but mass transit is always preferable.

The larger point is echoing yours, that SDV or not, all cars take up the same space (more or less) and carry the same (not many). We'll have to have them, but the more people we can get out of ANY kind of car, the better.

@jhavok The tech is still in early stages, and for all their sometimes hilarious or infuriating failures, I sense that Waymo's ahead of everyone else, and will sort out more sooner. But right now, it's bound to be weird and often annoying.

In time, a combination of SDVs and mass transit can make a big difference. Neither is inherently better overall, and we can have both.

@jhavok Eh, the math can be tricky. It depends what you want to measure, and why. Transportation experts often talk about 'passenger lane-miles' or the like, which is good for comparing xy space taken up per person per lane per mile travelled, and that's how we know that buses are many times the infrastructure efficiency of private cars. In theory, a taxi is more efficient than a car, because it's used more. Waymo would be the same (when it works, of course).