00:00 I know what you're thinking.
00:01 Yes, I have health insurance.
00:02 (upbeat music)
00:04 Driverless cars like this one are a common sight
00:08 here in famously tech-friendly San Francisco.
00:11 But even here, there's a lot of debate
00:13 as to whether the city is ready for them
00:15 or whether they should even be here in the first place.
00:18 To be sure, the tech isn't perfect.
00:20 The cars aren't always waiting where they're supposed to
00:23 and they have a habit of stopping when they get confused,
00:25 blocking traffic.
00:26 I don't know why we're stuck.
00:29 (horn honking)
00:30 It's one thing for regular drivers to be inconvenienced,
00:32 but quite another for emergency services to be affected.
00:36 Like when one of the cars crashed into a fire truck.
00:38 Residents had been divided
00:41 on whether driverless vehicles should be allowed
00:43 to pick up passengers for a fee 24/7
00:46 instead of just test riders within a limited time window.
00:49 As for the companies,
00:51 they say the cars will lead to fewer accidents.
00:54 Robo operators like Waymo and Cruise
00:57 argue that eliminating human drivers from the equation
01:00 makes passenger transport much safer
01:03 because drivers can get drunk, tired,
01:05 or distracted while driving.
01:07 The California Public Utilities Commission
01:09 heard hours and hours of public comment
01:12 urging it to either vote for or against
01:15 ramping up robo-taxis.
01:16 - Which vehicles?
01:17 - I take vehicles.
01:18 - That's not.
01:19 - San Francisco.
01:20 In the end, it gave Waymo and Cruise the green light
01:23 and opponents are seeing red,
01:25 especially drivers of traditional taxis.
01:28 - So we're here to say no, no to robo-taxis,
01:33 no to robo-taxis.
01:34 - They are a menace.
01:35 They stop unexpectedly.
01:37 They actually have broken the law many times.
01:40 We see them signal one way and then go another way.
01:44 - But for some, the ruling was welcome news.
01:48 Sharon Giovinazzo is a test rider
01:50 whose organization has a partnership with Waymo.
01:53 She says that as a blind person,
01:55 having no driver means having no one
01:57 who can discriminate against her.
01:59 - I see nothing.
02:01 So I'm totally blind.
02:02 It's blackout blind.
02:03 I've been this way for 23 years.
02:05 I have multiple sclerosis
02:07 and it choked off my optic nerves.
02:10 One of the things I found out
02:11 with taxis and ride share services,
02:13 because I choose to have a guide dog to navigate the world,
02:16 is they will leave me standing on the side of the street
02:18 and they will cancel rides even after they pull up
02:21 and they see the dog.
02:22 They don't want to have the dog in their vehicle.
02:24 Whereas here, there's no opinion because there's no driver.
02:27 When you're like, "Ahh!"
02:33 Or you know, that sudden stop that's made,
02:35 or you feel people swerving and people honking at you
02:39 and not being able to see what's going on,
02:41 it's fearful.
02:43 I've never had one fear sitting in one of these.
02:45 I just say that it's welcome to the future.
02:47 - But anti-robotaxi campaigner Safe Street Rebels
02:53 say it's a future that ignore the voices of San Franciscans.
02:57 The group is best known for street campaigns
02:59 to disable Waymo in cruise cars
03:01 by blocking their sensors with traffic cones.
03:04 That's why this activist speaking to us
03:07 wants his identity withheld.
03:09 - Waymo has specifically threatened
03:12 to pursue vandalism charges,
03:14 which we're pretty confident putting a cone on a hood
03:17 doesn't meet any vandalism charges,
03:20 but we are a bunch of individuals
03:22 and they are backed by a pretty massive company
03:26 with very deep pockets
03:27 and willingness to spend time in court.
03:30 - He says the real world experience
03:32 the cars need to improve comes at a cost to residents.
03:35 - There's definitely a kind of data,
03:39 need for certain data to conclusively say
03:42 if it's safe or if it's not,
03:44 and the only way to get there
03:46 is through this kind of open experimentation.
03:50 We don't like that we as residents of the city
03:54 have had no say in being subject to this experimentation.
03:58 - Another night, another ride.
04:00 Consultant Mario Herger is a cheerleader for the technology,
04:04 but acknowledges there's work left to do.
04:07 - I've heard from others and seen the videos
04:09 of people riding in the car and being attacked.
04:13 That means somebody throwing an empty box over the sensors
04:19 and then throwing empty pizza boxes on the hood,
04:23 on the windshield, and the car stops.
04:25 So in this moment where somebody's attacking the car,
04:28 I want the car to drive me out of that area
04:32 and put me at a safe area
04:36 and not stop in the middle of the mayhem going on.
04:39 - There's a question at the core of all this
04:41 for all cities coming to grips with innovation.
04:44 At what point should society decide
04:46 that imperfect technology is safe enough
04:48 to roll out on a mass scale
04:50 and that the benefits outweigh any unintended consequences?
04:53 - We normally see in innovation three stages.
04:57 The first stage is an idea,
05:00 and innovation is ridiculed and everyone laughs about that
05:04 and doesn't take it seriously.
05:06 Second stage is people realize,
05:08 "Oh my God, this is gonna stay.
05:09 "We have to fight it because it's threatening our jobs.
05:12 "It's threatening our old way of life."
05:15 The third one is the technology is finally here.
05:18 Everyone accepted it.
05:19 - Whether everyone is eventually going
05:22 to accept the driverless cars is further down the road,
05:25 but California authorities have chosen this path
05:28 for the residents of San Francisco,
05:30 and people will have to reckon
05:32 with the impact of their decision.
Comments