Tesla's long-awaited robotaxi service is coming to Austin this month

[DragonSlayer101]

Something to look forward to: Robotaxi services are widely seen as the next major breakthrough in transportation, with Alphabet-owned Waymo already expanding its self-driving taxi operations across several US cities. Now, Elon Musk has announced that Tesla is finally ready to launch its long-awaited autonomous cab service in Austin, Texas, later this month.

Replying to an X user asking about when public rides would begin, Musk said the launch date is "tentatively" set for June 22, but the actual timing could change because Tesla is "being super paranoid about safety." He also added that the first fully driverless Tesla trip – from the factory floor to a customer's home – is scheduled for June 28.

Tentatively, June 22.

We are being super paranoid about safety, so the date could shift.

First Tesla that drives itself from factory end of line all the way to a customer house is June 28.

– Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 11, 2025

The announcement came just hours after Musk shared a short video showing Tesla's driverless cars operating on public roads in Austin. The black Model Y SUVs featured in the clip had "Robotaxi" painted in white on their sides and appeared to have no human driver behind the wheel.

Musk had previously stated that Tesla would launch a robotaxi pilot in Austin this June but did not specify an exact date. He also said the initial rollout would be limited to 10 to 20 Model Y SUVs until the futuristic CyberCab enters production next year.

If the initial launch goes smoothly, Tesla plans to rapidly expand its self-driving fleet and roll out services in Los Angeles, San Antonio, San Francisco, and several other cities.

Beautifully simple design. https://t.co/eA7QgzW1jh

– Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 10, 2025

In an interview with CNBC last month, Musk revealed that Tesla will use geofencing to ensure the robotaxis stay within areas deemed safest for autonomous navigation. This technology will also enable the company to remotely monitor the fleet, helping to safeguard passengers and other road users.

Austin has become a hotspot for robotaxi testing in the US, with several companies operating driverless cabs in the city. While Alphabet's Waymo already offers commercial rides to paying customers, Amazon's Zoox began testing its autonomous vehicles there last year. However, unlike Waymo, Zoox still employs human drivers behind the wheel and does not provide commercial services.

Tesla's upcoming launch of its self-driving cab service comes after weeks of drama, including a very public fallout between Musk and President Donald Trump. The company also experienced nearly a 50 percent drop in sales in Europe last April amid backlash over Musk's actions as head of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).

Permalink to story:

Tesla's long-awaited robotaxi service is coming to Austin this month

 

[wiyosaya]

Yeah, that's all Tesla would need to seal its fate - people getting killed in their robo taxis.

 

[Megalomaniac]

Considering how many accidents I've seen with driver operated cars - at high speed - I can't imagine the Robotaxi would be worse. I suppose there is a "death threshold" we are willing to tolerate to push the technology forward. This would revolutionize designated drivers, rideshares and car services offered by small businesses.

 

[Plutoisaplanet]

For a comparison, here's a Tesla and Waymo vehicle self driving to the same destination in Inglewood, CA. The two things I noticed when watching it was that the Waymo stopped in the middle of an intersection when a firetruck with its sirens on approached (potentially blocking its path), and it also decided to wait for 10 seconds with no pedestrians crossing before a crosswalk sign lit up (only to wait some more afterwards). But the conclusion was that it took 50% longer for the Waymo to arrive and right off the bat it avoided unprotected left turns in traffic that the Tesla didn't mind taking (even though the Waymo supposedly has superior hardware):

 

[Plutoisaplanet]

Yeah, that's all Tesla would need to seal its fate - people getting killed in their robo taxis.

That's unlikely to happen considering there have been Teslas intentionally driving off cliffs with all passengers surviving:

 

[scavengerspc]

Considering how many accidents I've seen with driver operated cars - at high speed - I can't imagine the Robotaxi would be worse. I suppose there is a "death threshold" we are willing to tolerate to push the technology forward. This would revolutionize designated drivers, rideshares and car services offered by small businesses.

Buckle up. There are far more smoke pumps catching fire for various reasons than EVs.
But you only hear about the EV fires. Even though its hybrids that catch fire the most (High voltage and gasoline underneath, who could have guessed) Smokers are 2nd and EVs are last.

https://www.autoinsuranceez.com/gas-vs-electric-car-fires/

A new study has some surprising findings on car fires

A new analysis from an auto insurance company compared rates of fires among EVs, combustion-engine cars, and hybrids. These are the results.

www.popsci.com

Government data show gasoline vehicles are up to 100x more prone to fires than EVs

Aside from the argument that gasoline vehicles operate via combustion, a study shows how prevalent gas vehicle fires are compared to EVs.

electrek.co

So now even if robotaxis have a far better safety record, its those accidents we will hear about.

 

[SRB]

Buckle up. There are far more smoke pumps catching fire for various reasons than EVs.
But you only hear about the EV fires. Even though its hybrids that catch fire the most (High voltage and gasoline underneath, who could have guessed) Smokers are 2nd and EVs are last.

https://www.autoinsuranceez.com/gas-vs-electric-car-fires/

A new study has some surprising findings on car fires

A new analysis from an auto insurance company compared rates of fires among EVs, combustion-engine cars, and hybrids. These are the results.

www.popsci.com

Government data show gasoline vehicles are up to 100x more prone to fires than EVs

Aside from the argument that gasoline vehicles operate via combustion, a study shows how prevalent gas vehicle fires are compared to EVs.

electrek.co

So now even if robotaxis have a far better safety record, its those accidents we will hear about.

Probably because dino fuel cars get put out in fairly short order. An EV fire is the gift that keeps on giving, sometimes for days.

Or, in the case of the L.A. Waymo cars, they just let them burn until theire's nothing but the lower frame left and dig them out of the asphalt.

 

[m3diapers]

Smart choice of austin. unlike waymo testing in LA got burned LOL

 

[wiyosaya]

That's unlikely to happen considering there have been Teslas intentionally driving off cliffs with all passengers surviving:

Sorry, but this is Logical fallacy. Just because one managed to survive does not mean that every Tesla in such an accident would survive, much less its passengers.

I know you like your Tesla, but for me, its not my cup of coffee. There have been far too many stupid self-driving accidents that have hit the news over the years - most especially, that "self driving" Teslas have run into parked emergency vehicles.

You can blame the drivers all you want (as I am sure Tesla/Musk HAS done), but ultimately, the self-driving feature failed to accommodate for the weakest link in the chain, if you will, the human driver.

IMO, there are plenty of intelligent things that the self-driving feature could be programmed to do in the case of a non-responsive driver, but crashing MUST be avoided at all costs if Tesla's self-driving feature is going to be safer than human drivers.

As I see it, it is going to be difficult for Tesla to get out from under that kind of negative publicity. Now add on to that Musk's recent foray into right-wing politics and Musk and his companies have a load of crap over their heads that is going to be very difficult to get out from under if they can even get out from under it.

Lastly, add significant competition from long-lived automobile manufacturers and EV manufacturers entering the market with a competitive product.

 

[Plutoisaplanet]

Sorry, but this is Logical fallacy. Just because one managed to survive does not mean that every Tesla in such an accident would survive, much less its passengers.

I know you like your Tesla, but for me, its not my cup of coffee. There have been far too many stupid self-driving accidents that have hit the news over the years - most especially, that "self driving" Teslas have run into parked emergency vehicles.

You can blame the drivers all you want (as I am sure Tesla/Musk HAS done), but ultimately, the self-driving feature failed to accommodate for the weakest link in the chain, if you will, the human driver.

IMO, there are plenty of intelligent things that the self-driving feature could be programmed to do in the case of a non-responsive driver, but crashing MUST be avoided at all costs if Tesla's self-driving feature is going to be safer than human drivers.

As I see it, it is going to be difficult for Tesla to get out from under that kind of negative publicity. Now add on to that Musk's recent foray into right-wing politics and Musk and his companies have a load of crap over their heads that is going to be very difficult to get out from under if they can even get out from under it.

Lastly, add significant competition from long-lived automobile manufacturers and EV manufacturers entering the market with a competitive product.

You said deaths in robo taxis. This is a completely different claim you’re making. There have been no deaths in robo taxis, because the software wasn’t developed enough to drive on its own. If that was the case, they wouldn’t have needed drivers supervising. It was not full self-driving before, and it’s improved since. That’s why they’re going to start offering robo taxis now, and not before.

You might think it’ll be hard for them to get out from under any bad publicity, but rideshare passengers are going to opt for Tesla robotaxis when they undercut the competition. And I don’t see any other automakers producing self-driving vehicles—you can hardly call them the competition. They can’t even make money on EVs as it is.

 

[scavengerspc]

Probably because dino fuel cars get put out in fairly short order. An EV fire is the gift that keeps on giving, sometimes for days.

Or, in the case of the L.A. Waymo cars, they just let them burn until theire's nothing but the lower frame left and dig them out of the asphalt.

That's a good point I didn't think of. Hours to put out a car fire is a bit..... excessive and
it makes sense it would draw a lot more attention.
I read recently that it can take nearly 3000 gallons of water to put out an EV fire.

 

[wiyosaya]

That's a good point I didn't think of. Hours to put out a car fire is a bit..... excessive and
it makes sense it would draw a lot more attention.
I read recently that it can take nearly 3000 gallons of water to put out an EV fire.

The problem with putting out a Lithium fire is that Lithium does not react well with water, being exothermic and releasing hydrogen gas. In this case, its probably like putting out a regular fire with gasoline - especially if the hydrogen gas that is released catches fire.

What Happens During a Lithium and Water Reaction?

Can lithium batteries be in water? This explores the lithium and water reaction, highlighting potential hazards and safety tips to protect your batteries.

www.ufinebattery.com

 

[wiyosaya]

You said deaths in robo taxis. This is a completely different claim you’re making. There have been no deaths in robo taxis, because the software wasn’t developed enough to drive on its own.

I never said there were deaths in robo taxis. What I implied was that since Tesla's self-driving software is crap and Tesla's self-driving software was almost certainly used that as a basis for their "robo taxi" software, that leaves open a non-zero possibility that Tesla's "robo taxis" will end up in accidents, and people might die in those accidents. Tesla's self-driving software has been known to be on the aggressive side which, IMO, is not a good thing. In addition, if there's a human supervising the "robo taxi" then its another BS item that Tesla is using to market their crap to the gullible and ignorant people in the world.

If that was the case, they wouldn’t have needed drivers supervising. It was not full self-driving before, and it’s improved since. That’s why they’re going to start offering robo taxis now, and not before.

You might think it’ll be hard for them to get out from under any bad publicity, but rideshare passengers are going to opt for Tesla robotaxis when they undercut the competition. And I don’t see any other automakers producing self-driving vehicles—you can hardly call them the competition. They can’t even make money on EVs as it is.

You brought up this fluke of a Tesla and all its passengers surviving a fall off a cliff. That you brought it up is yet another logical fallacy called a "straw man."

If you want to think that "robo taxis" are saving Tesla's butt, that's fine. However, Tesla has just had some of the worst financial performance it has ever had in part because of Musk's actions in the Department of Government Ejits and his attitudes toward anyone and everyone who is not a US citizen.

The writing is on the wall. Musk is not a God and, IMO, is not living up to his claims of being an autistic savant. If anything, he's a drug addict on the road to self-destruction and, perhaps, losing his "empire" whether anyone likes it or not. His net worth on the books does not make him smart. Even his parents and other members of his family want nothing to do with him.

Certainly you are free to keep worshiping him. I suggest you remember the old adage - The bigger they are, the harder they fall.

IMO, its more likely, ATM, that Tesla's foray into "robo taxis" are a Hail Mary move to keep the company afloat.

Good luck.