Robotaxi is often framed as a technical moonshot.That framing is wrong.
The technology is not the primary risk.
If Robotaxi fails, it will fail for non-technical, system-level reasons.
1. Not Safety—But Perceived SafetyStatistical safety is not the same as social acceptance.
A system can be 10× safer than humans and still fail if:
Incidents are rare but spectacular
Media amplification is asymmetric
Human-caused accidents are normalized, machine-caused ones are not
Robotaxi must overcome salience bias, not just engineering benchmarks.
Insurance backing helps—but perception lags data.
2. Regulatory Latency, Not Regulatory HostilityMost regulators are not anti-autonomy.They are anti-liability ambiguity.
Robotaxi fails if:
Responsibility is unclear across software, fleet operator, and manufacturer
Incident attribution cannot be cleanly resolved
Legal frameworks lag operational reality
Progress stalls not at approval, but at scalable approval.
3. Operations, Not AlgorithmsThe hardest part of Robotaxi is not driving.
It is:
Fleet maintenance
Edge-case recovery
Cleaning, vandalism, misuse
Geographic scaling without human fallback
Algorithms scale geometrically.Operations scale linearly—and break under friction.
This is where many promising systems historically collapse.
4. Unit Economics Under Real LoadRobotaxi looks extraordinary in slide decks.
It becomes fragile when:
Utilization is uneven
Urban density is lower than modeled
Insurance, maintenance, and downtime are fully accounted for
If margins depend on perfect conditions, the model will not survive contact with reality.
5. Public Trust Is Path-DependentOne early, mishandled failure can poison years of progress.
Robotaxi does not get unlimited retries.Trust, once lost, is slow to rebuild.
This makes early-stage discipline more important than speed.
The Bottom LineRobotaxi will not fail because autonomy “doesn’t work.”
It will fail if:
Society cannot agree on liability
Regulators cannot scale approval
Operators underestimate real-world friction
Or trust collapses faster than it can be rebuilt
Technology is necessary—but insufficient.
转载本文请联系原作者获取授权，同时请注明本文来自李维科学网博客。
链接地址：https://wap.sciencenet.cn/blog-362400-1520007.html?mobile=1
收藏
