I recall that 1% motorcyclists were known to stick a dental mirror off the end of their handlebars so as to remain within the letter of mirror laws. it's not clear to me why zoox can't just kind of jam the features in somewhere in order to get the vehicles out there.
I think it makes perfect sense for the NHTSA to re-write or waive these laws, specifically for autonomous taxis. As others have mentioned, there are other means that can be used for emergency personnel to move a stuck car if the need should arise.
Regardless of the chosen tactic, the 800 lb gorilla in the room is, as always, Elon. With his government influence, would he want the NHTSA to grant Zoox, a competitor, to get to market two or more years before his own Cybercabs can hit the road?
I think he actually would. I'm no Elon expert but he tends to be arms wide open to competition when it enhances his longer term goals/missions in life. Like he wants every car to be EV, so he allows other OEMs to use Tesla supercharging network (which was/is a huge moat for Tesla)..
I am also skeptical of the strategy to go straight to a purpose built AV for the same reason Tim mentions. It’s a difficult engineering problem to reduce vehicle retrieval events down to zero and I would imagine it’s expensive to rescue a stalled out Zoox.
Another strategy they could pursue would be to convert their test fleet of Toyota Highlanders into commercial vehicles and perhaps manufacture more. Probably isn’t great unit economics but it could maybe get them on the road with paying customers faster
Yea the steering wheel is a good point but a lot of the other regulations don't seem to make much sense for an AV. Wouldn't be shocked if Elon/Trump get rid of them. Elon is surprisingly open to competition in situations like this.
Again and again, Waymo chose the sensible way forward. Work incrementally, and work really hard. Tesla, Cruise, and now Zoox, thought, in different ways, they could magically leapfrog over the hard reality.
I think it's fair though to take a different approach since that distinguishes them from Waymo/others. Waymo is going to have a big first mover advantage so merely copying them won't get big returns..
"In the closing weeks of the Biden Administration, federal regulators wrote a report that was bad news for Zoox, Amazon’s self-driving venture. The Washington Post obtained a copy of the report last week."
Makes sense that Bezos is using his newspaper WaPo to try to advocate for changes in self-driving regulations that favor Amazon.
Great post. This is a topic that is also coming in aviation but perhaps slightly differently. The business safety case and competitive advantage is what may hold this sensible adjustment back, momentarily perhaps but perhaps just long enough for second movers to catch up.
For example, New Airspace Users (think drones, EVTOL and Unmanned Aerial Systems) may seek concessions to certain regulations that they may struggle to comply with, and while they may be right, the established operations might also like reductions in many contingency and safety compliance measures for current and highly capable Jet A1 powered aircraft.
This presents a problem as current compliance is the playing field on which competition exists.
The context of regulations is changing. Safety cases and contingency planning for a different world still persists. Regulators and operators need to stay ahead of this so as to avoid expensive road blocks like this.
Can you please publish the law that disallowed the deployment of those kinds of robotaxis as I know the Executive Order published by the Biden Administration in regard to IA regulation was revoked by President Trump. Please !
The regulations are completely outdated. The most unsafe element in a car is the driver. Misbehavior (speeding, running red lights & stop signs, drinking, texting and "not seeing" by the driver is involved in >90% of crashes. Drivers are the problem. Why should any legislation/regulation insist that the unsafest element of a car be required in every car. Totally silly!
Over a century ago we decided a machine could power a cart better than a horse. Today driverless technology by Waymo, Zoox, Tesla and maybe 10s of Chinese companies can drive cars safer in well-defined situations (Operational Designed Domains). They should be permitted to do so by all regulatory/oversight entities. NHTSA should be operating in the public interest. Instead it is serving no interests. DOGE should reassign its budget to USAID. Shift would generate substantial net positive public good.
In general, I'm weary of solving two extremely hard problems at once. Zoox is trying to develop commercially viable AV technology and a purpose-built vehicle (ie basically a new car company). Not sure which one is harder.
I'm also skeptical that the latter does much to improve the actual self-driving product. We know most rides are 1-2 people (Cybercab actually got this part right), and Americans do not like to share rides. So how does this purpose built vehicle benefit the consumer? Does it enable better AV tech or reduce the cost? Those would be the only two things I think that matter at this stage.
I think it also limits Zoox's TAM to a subset of the AV ridehail marketplace. Waymo has a much bigger narrative they can pitch to investors since their tech can go on any car. So start now with ridehail where utilization is higher, and then once the tech gets better/costs come down, expand to every personally owned vehicle in the world and you have the opportunity for a trillion dollar TAM.
The push by AV firms to remove the pedals and steering wheel has always baffled me. Sure, you save some money by taking them out, and that is no small deal. But why not pare them down to vestigial versions of themselves (e.g. a small retractable steering wheel) and leave them in? You still have the actual brakes and steering in place, why so eager to remove the controls? Imagine your Zoox breaks down somewhere. It's stopped by the side of the road. You and your buddies get out to push it onto the shoulder but - no wheel, no way for mere humans to turn it, so it stays in the exposed lane. Or imagine catastrophic failure on the highway at speed. No small emergency-only brake pedal for a desperate passenger to stand on, and bring the car to a halt? I've got an elevator in my house, the ultimate "autonomous" technology - but even it has a hand crank to raise or lower the car to the next floor for egress, in the event of an emergency. I just don't see why there isn't some middle ground between Full Size Legacy Controls on the one hand and Nothing at All Nada Zip Zilch on the other. (Alert: I am not an engineer and so don't know what I am talking about... but on the other hand I have never been able to get this question answered. And by someone at an AV company who actually knows the answer, not one of us rando online commentators!
The same applies to Tesla Cybercab, it does not have any the conventional gear.
I estimate it will be approve by 2H 2025.
It seems like retrofitting some kind of joystick control wouldn’t be hard. Steer-by-wire and brake-by-wire are already production-car technologies.
I recall that 1% motorcyclists were known to stick a dental mirror off the end of their handlebars so as to remain within the letter of mirror laws. it's not clear to me why zoox can't just kind of jam the features in somewhere in order to get the vehicles out there.
I think it makes perfect sense for the NHTSA to re-write or waive these laws, specifically for autonomous taxis. As others have mentioned, there are other means that can be used for emergency personnel to move a stuck car if the need should arise.
Regardless of the chosen tactic, the 800 lb gorilla in the room is, as always, Elon. With his government influence, would he want the NHTSA to grant Zoox, a competitor, to get to market two or more years before his own Cybercabs can hit the road?
I think he actually would. I'm no Elon expert but he tends to be arms wide open to competition when it enhances his longer term goals/missions in life. Like he wants every car to be EV, so he allows other OEMs to use Tesla supercharging network (which was/is a huge moat for Tesla)..
I am also skeptical of the strategy to go straight to a purpose built AV for the same reason Tim mentions. It’s a difficult engineering problem to reduce vehicle retrieval events down to zero and I would imagine it’s expensive to rescue a stalled out Zoox.
Another strategy they could pursue would be to convert their test fleet of Toyota Highlanders into commercial vehicles and perhaps manufacture more. Probably isn’t great unit economics but it could maybe get them on the road with paying customers faster
Yea the steering wheel is a good point but a lot of the other regulations don't seem to make much sense for an AV. Wouldn't be shocked if Elon/Trump get rid of them. Elon is surprisingly open to competition in situations like this.
How about we hire people to deliver since people need jobs
Again and again, Waymo chose the sensible way forward. Work incrementally, and work really hard. Tesla, Cruise, and now Zoox, thought, in different ways, they could magically leapfrog over the hard reality.
I think it's fair though to take a different approach since that distinguishes them from Waymo/others. Waymo is going to have a big first mover advantage so merely copying them won't get big returns..
"In the closing weeks of the Biden Administration, federal regulators wrote a report that was bad news for Zoox, Amazon’s self-driving venture. The Washington Post obtained a copy of the report last week."
Makes sense that Bezos is using his newspaper WaPo to try to advocate for changes in self-driving regulations that favor Amazon.
Great post. This is a topic that is also coming in aviation but perhaps slightly differently. The business safety case and competitive advantage is what may hold this sensible adjustment back, momentarily perhaps but perhaps just long enough for second movers to catch up.
For example, New Airspace Users (think drones, EVTOL and Unmanned Aerial Systems) may seek concessions to certain regulations that they may struggle to comply with, and while they may be right, the established operations might also like reductions in many contingency and safety compliance measures for current and highly capable Jet A1 powered aircraft.
This presents a problem as current compliance is the playing field on which competition exists.
The context of regulations is changing. Safety cases and contingency planning for a different world still persists. Regulators and operators need to stay ahead of this so as to avoid expensive road blocks like this.
Can you please publish the law that disallowed the deployment of those kinds of robotaxis as I know the Executive Order published by the Biden Administration in regard to IA regulation was revoked by President Trump. Please !
Hi, the vehicle safety rules are called called the FMVSS. It's not an executive order and predates the Biden administration.
Thank you so much ! I appreciate
The regulations are completely outdated. The most unsafe element in a car is the driver. Misbehavior (speeding, running red lights & stop signs, drinking, texting and "not seeing" by the driver is involved in >90% of crashes. Drivers are the problem. Why should any legislation/regulation insist that the unsafest element of a car be required in every car. Totally silly!
Over a century ago we decided a machine could power a cart better than a horse. Today driverless technology by Waymo, Zoox, Tesla and maybe 10s of Chinese companies can drive cars safer in well-defined situations (Operational Designed Domains). They should be permitted to do so by all regulatory/oversight entities. NHTSA should be operating in the public interest. Instead it is serving no interests. DOGE should reassign its budget to USAID. Shift would generate substantial net positive public good.
ALK
In general, I'm weary of solving two extremely hard problems at once. Zoox is trying to develop commercially viable AV technology and a purpose-built vehicle (ie basically a new car company). Not sure which one is harder.
I'm also skeptical that the latter does much to improve the actual self-driving product. We know most rides are 1-2 people (Cybercab actually got this part right), and Americans do not like to share rides. So how does this purpose built vehicle benefit the consumer? Does it enable better AV tech or reduce the cost? Those would be the only two things I think that matter at this stage.
I think it also limits Zoox's TAM to a subset of the AV ridehail marketplace. Waymo has a much bigger narrative they can pitch to investors since their tech can go on any car. So start now with ridehail where utilization is higher, and then once the tech gets better/costs come down, expand to every personally owned vehicle in the world and you have the opportunity for a trillion dollar TAM.
The push by AV firms to remove the pedals and steering wheel has always baffled me. Sure, you save some money by taking them out, and that is no small deal. But why not pare them down to vestigial versions of themselves (e.g. a small retractable steering wheel) and leave them in? You still have the actual brakes and steering in place, why so eager to remove the controls? Imagine your Zoox breaks down somewhere. It's stopped by the side of the road. You and your buddies get out to push it onto the shoulder but - no wheel, no way for mere humans to turn it, so it stays in the exposed lane. Or imagine catastrophic failure on the highway at speed. No small emergency-only brake pedal for a desperate passenger to stand on, and bring the car to a halt? I've got an elevator in my house, the ultimate "autonomous" technology - but even it has a hand crank to raise or lower the car to the next floor for egress, in the event of an emergency. I just don't see why there isn't some middle ground between Full Size Legacy Controls on the one hand and Nothing at All Nada Zip Zilch on the other. (Alert: I am not an engineer and so don't know what I am talking about... but on the other hand I have never been able to get this question answered. And by someone at an AV company who actually knows the answer, not one of us rando online commentators!