Would you travel in a driverless taxi.

[Bletchleyite]

What happens at the big event where all 40K spectators have ordered driverless taxis to take them home? How do you find the one you’ve ordered?

Why would it be any different to the big event where all 40K spectators have ordered manually driven taxis to take them home? It's not like the drivers get out and come and find you.

(The sensible answer here is that you have taxi ranks and people queue and take the next one, whether driven or not - the Uber model doesn't work very well for this situation regardless of whether someone is driving it or not)

 

[The exile]

Why would it be any different to the big event where all 40K spectators have ordered manually driven taxis to take them home? It's not like the drivers get out and come and find you.

(The sensible answer here is that you have taxi ranks and people queue and take the next one, whether driven or not - the Uber model doesn't work very well for this situation regardless of whether someone is driving it or not)

The difference is that now most people don’t order taxis (cost etc). If - as been suggested above- these eventually were to replace private ownership of cars and public transport, the dynamic would be very different. The “taxi rank” idea is fine - but it effectively means a monopoly supplier and rules out the pre booking of a vehicle with special features (child seats for example).

 

[Bletchleyite]

The difference is that now most people don’t order taxis (cost etc). If - as been suggested above- these eventually were to replace private ownership of cars and public transport, the dynamic would be very different. The “taxi rank” idea is fine - but it effectively means a monopoly supplier and rules out the pre booking of a vehicle with special features (child seats for example).

I would be surprised if it were the case that such vehicles were run by small companies like traditional minicabs, that model is dying out other than in rural areas. There are basically two big operators in the UK now aside from the Hackney fleets - Uber and Bolt (and maybe VIA DRT as the third). So that's only two or three ranks. And it's not unlikely that operators of venues might do a deal with one of them.

The choice of vehicle when taking a taxi is quite limited now and I doubt that would change.

 

[Mag_seven]

What happens at the big event where all 40K spectators have ordered driverless taxis to take them home? How do you find the one you’ve ordered?

How do you find the one you've ordered if they have a driver?

 

[The exile]

I would be surprised if it were the case that such vehicles were run by small companies like traditional minicabs, that model is dying out other than in rural areas. There are basically two big operators in the UK now aside from the Hackney fleets - Uber and Bolt (and maybe VIA DRT as the third). So that's only two or three ranks. And it's not unlikely that operators of venues might do a deal with one of them.

The choice of vehicle when taking a taxi is quite limited now and I doubt that would change.

If they simply replaced taxis as they are now, true. If they are to replace the concept of the privately owned car, then it’ll be different (or be a stumbling block to their doing so)

 

[Bletchleyite]

If they simply replaced taxis as they are now, true. If they are to replace the concept of the privately owned car, then it’ll be different (or be a stumbling block to their doing so)

Just as hire bicycles haven't replaced the private ownership of bicycles, I wouldn't expect cheaper taxis (which is what they are) to replace the private ownership of cars. Some people may choose not to own a car if taxis are cheaper, but not everyone will.

 

[Farigiraf]

How do you find the one you've ordered if they have a driver?

By asking each taxi one by one...

A solution for driverless taxis would be to lock the doors and put a scanner on it, which can only be unlocked with a barcode (like e-tickets)

 

[DelW]

By asking each taxi one by one...

A solution for driverless taxis would be to lock the doors and put a scanner on it, which can only be unlocked with a barcode (like e-tickets)

Along with a fleet number prominently displayed, and sent to the intending passenger with their booking confirmation. Then you'd be able to see "your" taxi from a distance.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

This is kind of odd, because taxi drivers generally aren't DBS checked, you're locked in a car with them, and it's not at all unusual that they are the actual threat. Whereas in a robotaxi you're on your own or with whoever you choose, can presumably lock the doors and could call the Police if someone was being stupid or threatening from outside.

If taxi drivers where you live aren't DBS checked that seems to be a problem with your local authority. I've no idea how "legit" the checks are (and I'm sure some "wrong 'uns" slip through) but all taxi firms in my area advertise their jobs with a disclaimer that a DBS check is required. I'm pretty sure my council, useless as they are on most things, require an enhanced DBS check for all private hire licences.

Personally I'd be very uneasy in a driverless taxi. Whilst I recognise that human error is a big factor in almost all road accidents, the idea of a "black box" operating system controlling a road vehicle is something I find very unsettling. The human factor, fallible as it is, is familiar and easier to understand.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Along with a fleet number prominently displayed, and sent to the intending passenger with their booking confirmation. Then you'd be able to see "your" taxi from a distance.

Which is how it works now (the registration rather than fleet number and the model and colour of the car).

The Uber app (for example) translates directly to driverless operation other than that you'd want some sort of "press a button to open the door" arrangement on the app, just like the Starship food delivery robots do.

Of course some people don't like apps, but I suspect the overlap between "people who would use a driverless taxi" and "people who don't like smartphones and apps" is zero or close to it, so it's not really a worry for that business model.

 

[Towers]

This is kind of odd, because taxi drivers generally aren't DBS checked, you're locked in a car with them, and it's not at all unusual that they are the actual threat. Whereas in a robotaxi you're on your own or with whoever you choose, can presumably lock the doors and could call the Police if someone was being stupid or threatening from outside.

The taxis must be absolutely awful round your way; where do you live, the wild west?!

Private hire drivers should have a licence from their local authority and this will generally be on display inside the vehicle. They are one of the groups for whom not only a normal but an enhanced DBS check can be applied for. Even Uber do this, indeed their driver recruitment website states:

“Your first step to getting a Private Hire Driver Licence is to complete an enhanced background check through the Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS).”

With respect, whilst taxi drivers probably aren’t going to collectively win any driving awards, the idea that they often pose a threat to their occupants is a tad unfair - we’ve probably had about as many prolific sex attackers who turned out to be serving police officers as taxi drivers in recent years!

 

[Krokodil]

Private hire drivers should have a licence from their local authority and this will generally be on display inside the vehicle. They are one of the groups for whom not only a normal but an enhanced DBS check can be applied for. Even Uber do this, indeed their driver recruitment website states:

“Your first step to getting a Private Hire Driver Licence is to complete an enhanced background check through the Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS).”

Background checks only sift out someone who has been caught.

With respect, whilst taxi drivers probably aren’t going to collectively win any driving awards, the idea that they often pose a threat to their occupants is a tad unfair

I suggest that you speak to some of the younger women in your life, ask how they get back from a night out. Many will go to some lengths to avoid being alone in a taxi with the driver. They might arrange a route back that drops each one off in turn and the last two will get off together. If that's not possible they might engage in a phone call lasting for the whole journey so that there's always a second person listening as a deterrent.

we’ve probably had about as many prolific sex attackers who turned out to be serving police officers as taxi drivers in recent years!

Not all taxi drivers are bad, but it only takes one. In some towns it's prolific. Remember the child grooming rings that were operating in Rochdale and Rotherham? In both towns taxi drivers were at the centre of it, and it was well known locally.

 

[Towers]

Background checks only sift out someone who has been caught.


I suggest that you speak to some of the younger women in your life, ask how they get back from a night out. Many will go to some lengths to avoid being alone in a taxi with the driver. They might arrange a route back that drops each one off in turn and the last two will get off together. If that's not possible they might engage in a phone call lasting for the whole journey so that there's always a second person listening as a deterrent.


Not all taxi drivers are bad, but it only takes one. In some towns it's prolific. Remember the child grooming rings that were operating in Rochdale and Rotherham? In both towns taxi drivers were at the centre of it, and it was well known locally.

I can only suggest that it, thankfully, remains a minority; but I concede that clearly there are improvements that could - and should - be made there. An obvious one would be a mandatory requirement for all vehicles to be fitted with internal CCTV, in a sealed system with which the driver can’t tamper. Another might be an end to the nonsense mentioned above of taxis being registered all over the place. Overall it’s quite clear that the industry is ripe for better regulation, some sort of drivers’ hours enforcement would also be very welcome I would suggest.

All of that being said, I have zero desire for a world where AI makes us redundant in our own habitat. The stupidity of humankind sadly really does know no bounds, and technological achievement does not necessarily equal wisdom - “just because you can, doesn’t mean you should”, and so on. Tin foil hat on or off, depending one one’s views, I’m afraid I find the wholesale removal of the human driver - of which this is undeniably an opening salvo - utterly unpalatable for a variety of reasons.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Background checks only sift out someone who has been caught.

This is true... however that's a separate argument to Bletchleyite's untrue assertion that DBS checks aren't carried out. They are carried out.

in your life, ask how they get back from a night out. Many will go to some lengths to avoid being alone in a taxi with the driver. They might arrange a route back that drops each one off in turn and the last two will get off together. If that's not possible they might engage in a phone call lasting for the whole journey so that there's always a second person listening as a deterrent.

The risks posed by those with ill intent are obviously not something we should accept as a society. If driverless taxis were the norm the would-be attackers would have to find some other way of enacting their wickedness, but the fault isn't with the very concept of private hire taxis.

Not all taxi drivers are bad, but it only takes one. In some towns it's prolific. Remember the child grooming rings that were operating in Rochdale and Rotherham? In both towns taxi drivers were at the centre of it, and it was well known locally.

Your first clause says it all. There have been railway workers who have committed terrible acts but that doesn't make all railway workers bad actors. In another thread there's been a lot of hand-wringing about "collective punishment", the same should apply here. There are other parallels one could draw about the offenders in the cases you cite, but that would also be wrong.

We can't punish people for what they could do but haven't actually done. This is a good thing, not a problem to be solved. The world would undoubtedly be a better place if nobody committed those crimes, but sadly that isn't the world we live in.

 

[Krokodil]

Your first clause says it all. There have been railway workers who have committed terrible acts but that doesn't make all railway workers bad actors. In another thread there's been a lot of hand-wringing about "collective punishment", the same should apply here. There are other parallels one could draw about the offenders in the cases you cite, but that would also be wrong.

We can't punish people for what they could do but haven't actually done. This is a good thing, not a problem to be solved. The world would undoubtedly be a better place if nobody committed those crimes, but sadly that isn't the world we live in.

It's not about punishment, it's about risk assessing. I suspect that (like me) you are male and do not have to worry about things like leaving drinks unattended.

A taxi is a confined space so poses a particular risk. There's a reason that some taxi firms offer the opportunity to request a female driver, it makes some passengers feel safer.

 

[GusB]

I'd quite like to see @Bletchleyite's evidence that DBS checks are never carried out. I assume that they've compiled a list of all councils in the UK and submitted freedom of information requests to every single one for them to have reached such a conclusion.

 

[jon0844]

I know some drivers have been found to car share, and have other family members keeping the taxi on the road almost 24/7. If it was a brother, a photo ID might trick anyone looking at it. As such, has the necessary check been done on the person in the car some of the time?

I would hope taxi firms would be monitoring the hours to detect such frauds, although I don't know how it would/could work when drivers are logged into multiple taxi apps (Uber, Bolt etc).

I suspect councils are extremely short staffed when it comes to monitoring too, and an awful lot of drivers in Welwyn Hatfield are registered elsewhere (like Luton, or TfL).

Nevertheless, I still don't believe we're going to have driverless taxis for some time so we're going to have to put up with all the risks associated with some taxi firms.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I'd quite like to see @Bletchleyite's evidence that DBS checks are never carried out. I assume that they've compiled a list of all councils in the UK and submitted freedom of information requests to every single one for them to have reached such a conclusion.

I didn't actually say never, if you re-read my post.

 

[DavyCrocket]

I have used a driverless (unattended) taxi and felt safer than in a driven taxi (Uber). There were some moments when I would have stopped or slowed before the driverless vehicle or when it wasn’t satisfied with where to stop to let me out.

 

[GusB]

I didn't actually say never, if you re-read my post.

Okay, so your actual words were: "taxi drivers generally aren't DBS checked".

It still doesn't change the fact that you've made a sweeping statement and provided no evidence to back up your claim.

 

[DM352]

yes, I would. I don't like taxi small talk and know they are not cheap but a driverless one would not want a tip

 

[johncrossley]

yes, I would. I don't like taxi small talk and know they are not cheap but a driverless one would not want a tip

A driverless taxi *would* be cheap. That's the whole point of them being driverless. It should be cheaper than owning your own car as the fixed cost of ownership is spread across all the users. There would of course be a profit margin for the operator, but that would be vastly lower than the cost of paying a human.

 

[75A]

Not for me thank you.

 

[deltic]

It should be cheaper than owning your own car as the fixed cost of ownership is spread across all the users. There would of course be a profit margin for the operator, but that would be vastly lower than the cost of paying a human.

That is very debatable - depends on what standards are set for vehicle type - fully accessible with a working ramp, age limits etc - against the type of car you may own which might be a 20 year old banger. It then needs to be regularly cleaned, charged and stored when not in use. Around 40% of its mileage may be empty if in line with Uber. Surge peak pricing will be in operation.

 

[johncrossley]

That is very debatable - depends on what standards are set for vehicle type - fully accessible with a working ramp, age limits etc - against the type of car you may own which might be a 20 year old banger. It then needs to be regularly cleaned, charged and stored when not in use. Around 40% of its mileage may be empty if in line with Uber. Surge peak pricing will be in operation.

Surge pricing exists to encourage more drivers to go out to work. By contrast, with a driverless taxi, the operator can easily supply as many taxis as needed without depending on getting humans out of bed. If, as is likely, they replace local buses, then pricing would have to be regulated. They may even be operated by the local authority along the lines of a municipal bus company.

 

[deltic]

Surge pricing exists to encourage more drivers to go out to work. By contrast, with a driverless taxi, the operator can easily supply as many taxis as needed without depending on getting humans out of bed. If, as is likely, they replace local buses, then pricing would have to be regulated. They may even be operated by the local authority along the lines of a municipal bus company.

No operator will provide vehicles only to meet peak demand - its why public transport dependent on commuters virtually never pay their way - and why private sector operators like airlines and coach operators use surge pricing at peak times. From a regulatory point of view there needs to be a decision as to whether the vehicles are treated as taxis and subject to a published fare tariff, need to provide accessible vehicles and no right to refuse to accept a fare or like minicabs with no restrictions on fares, vehicle types or ability to refuse fares.

 

[johncrossley]

No operator will provide vehicles only to meet peak demand - its why public transport dependent on commuters virtually never pay their way - and why private sector operators like airlines and coach operators use surge pricing at peak times. From a regulatory point of view there needs to be a decision as to whether the vehicles are treated as taxis and subject to a published fare tariff, need to provide accessible vehicles and no right to refuse to accept a fare or like minicabs with no restrictions on fares, vehicle types or ability to refuse fares.

The difference with public transport is that there is huge additional labour cost to run additional services for a few hours a day. That won't apply with driverless taxis. They just have to buy enough vehicles to meet maximum peak usage.

 

[deltic]

The difference with public transport is that there is huge additional labour cost to run additional services for a few hours a day. That won't apply with driverless taxis. They just have to buy enough vehicles to meet maximum peak usage.

There is huge additional cost in providing vehicles for just a few hours a day - why as a business would I buy/lease an expensive asset to sit in a parking lot for 18hrs a day?

 

[johncrossley]

There is huge additional cost in providing vehicles for just a few hours a day - why as a business would I buy/lease an expensive asset to sit in a parking lot for 18hrs a day?

We are comparing against personal car ownership. The daily utilisation per vehicle will be much higher than the average personally owned car.

 

[The Ham]

A driverless taxi *would* be cheap. That's the whole point of them being driverless. It should be cheaper than owning your own car as the fixed cost of ownership is spread across all the users. There would of course be a profit margin for the operator, but that would be vastly lower than the cost of paying a human.

It would still depend on usage.

For someone doing (say) 4,000 miles a year, the certainly it should be possible to get the cost down to around 60p per mile so that it was at least comparable (although it's worth noting that's at least 1/2 the cost of the typical £1.20-£3 per mile taxis currently cost).

However, for someone doing (say) 20,000 miles a year it would still likely be cheaper to open their own car.

What might be viable is a vehicle with a few pods, so that more than one person could use the vehicle at a time. You might find that your have to divert from the most direct route to pick someone up or drop someone off, but in exchange the cost is reduced. If the cost had typically got to that 60p per mile rate, by offering to "share a route" you may only pay 45p per mile (of the most direct route), in doing so you save money, but the operator gets the potential to make more money by earning more per mile (although this is likely to be reduced due to diversions, not always being able to fill the other half/the other two thirds, and higher vehicle costs).

For example, a MPV typically has 3 rows of seats, given most cars on the roads have one person in them (with quite a lot which have more than one person only having two), and mostly only carrying a limited amount of stuff out shouldn't be that complex to create a vehicle with 3 zones, each with two seats and a bit of space for (say) a few small backpacks.

The other advantage of such a vehicle, is that it would reduce the number of vehicles needed to provide peak capacity. This has two main advantages, firstly the extra cost wouldn't be as much as twice the cost of a standard vehicle (so cheaper to provide peak capacity), secondly it would take up less road space than three vehicles and so would mean that there was less congestion, which would mean fewer vehicle minutes in operation to move the same number of people.