Tesla updates robotaxi users about chauffeur-style service in California, Business Insider reports
Tesla did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Reuters reported earlier that unlike Alphabet's Waymo unit, Tesla cannot operate its service using autonomous vehicles in the Bay Area because the EV maker does not have the required permits and has not applied according to the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC).
Tesla said the service would use a variant of its supervised Full Self-Driving software, the report said.
For the Bay Area service, Tesla may be able to use its Full Self-Driving (Supervised) feature, which can perform many driving tasks but requires a human driver to pay attention and be ready to take over at all times.
This week, Tesla CEO Elon Musk said on an earnings call that the company was "getting the regulatory permission to launch" robotaxis in several markets, including the San Francisco Bay Area.
Tesla told the CPUC on Thursday that it plans to offer rides to "friends and family of employees" and "select members of the public" under a permit the company has that allows a human driver to transport passengers in a "traditional vehicle" for "charter services."
Tesla recently met with the agency but has not applied for additional permits that would be needed to collect fares or test without a safety driver, Reuters reported earlier this week.
The next step for Tesla would be to apply for a CPUC license for an autonomous vehicle to pick up passengers with a safety driver, according to a review of California's autonomous driving regulations. But companies must first operate a pilot phase, where they cannot charge customers.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNA
41 minutes ago
- CNA
Why has India vowed to protect its farmers in the face of tariff threats?
MUMBAI: United States President Donald Trump on Thursday (Jul 31) slapped a 25 per cent tariff on Indian goods after prolonged talks that got bogged down over access to India's labour-intensive agricultural sector, which New Delhi has pledged to protect. WHY IS INDIA OPPOSING THE PRODUCTS THE US IS LOBBYING FOR? The US is pressing India to open its markets to a wide range of American products, including dairy, poultry, corn, soybeans, rice, wheat, ethanol, fruits and nuts. While India is willing to provide greater access for US dry fruits and apples, it is holding back on corn, soybeans, wheat and dairy products. A key reason for this resistance is that most US corn and soybeans are genetically modified (GM), and India does not permit the import of GM food crops. GM crops are widely perceived in India as harmful to human health and the environment, and several groups affiliated with Prime Minister Narendra Modi's ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) are opposing their introduction. The commercial cultivation of a high-yielding GM mustard variety that India developed itself is currently not allowed due to an ongoing legal battle. Like GM crops, dairy is also a highly sensitive issue, as it provides a livelihood for millions of farmers, including many who are landless or smallholders. The dairy industry helps sustain farmers even during erratic monsoon seasons, which can cause significant fluctuations in crop production. In India, where a large proportion of the population is vegetarian, food choices are strongly influenced by cultural and dietary preferences. Indian consumers are particularly concerned that cattle in the US are often fed animal by-products - a practice that conflicts with Indian food habits. WHY ARE AGRICULTURAL IMPORTS POLITICALLY CHARGED? India is self-sufficient in most farm goods, with the exception of vegetable oils. After liberalising cooking oil imports over three decades ago, the country now has to import nearly two-thirds of its supply to meet demand. India does not want to repeat this mistake with other basic foods, which account for nearly half of its consumer price index. Though agriculture makes up just 16 per cent of India's nearly US$3.9 trillion economy, it is the lifeblood for nearly half the country's 1.4 billion people. Four years ago, this powerful voting bloc forced Modi's government into a rare retreat on a set of controversial farm laws. Some in power fear a flood of cheaper US imports would bring down local prices and hand opposition parties an opportunity to sharpen their attack on the government. New Delhi is also worried that a trade deal with the US could force it to open its agricultural sector to other countries. HOW DOES FARMING IN INDIA AND THE US DIFFER? The vast disparity in the scale of farming makes it difficult for Indian farmers to compete with their US counterparts. The average Indian farm is 1.08ha, compared to 187ha in the US. For dairy farmers, the difference is even more dramatic - a small herd of two or three animals versus hundreds or more in the US Many Indian farmers also rely on traditional, unmechanised techniques, while American agriculture has developed into a highly efficient, tech-driven industry. WHY IS INDIA HESITANT TO USE US ETHANOL IN ITS BIOFUEL PROGRAMME? One of India's key goals with its Ethanol Blended Petrol (EBP) programme is to reduce energy imports and support domestic farmers by using sugarcane and corn for biofuel production. Indian companies have invested heavily in new distilleries, and farmers have expanded corn cultivation to meet the rising demand. India recently achieved its ambitious target of a 20 per cent ethanol blend in petrol. With state assembly elections approaching in Bihar, a major corn-producing state in the east, allowing US ethanol imports would lower local corn prices. This would probably anger farmers and turn them against the BJP ahead of the election, and also undermine the growing distillery sector.
CNA
41 minutes ago
- CNA
Design software maker Figma extends gains after blockbuster NYSE trading debut
Design software maker Figma's shares rose another 10 per cent in premarket trading on Friday, extending strong debut-day gains after a blowout U.S. initial public offering that has reignited the tech listing market. The San Francisco, California-based company's shares closed at $115.5 on Thursday, compared with its IPO price of $33. The 250 per cent surge lifted Figma's market value to nearly $68 billion, far exceeding the $20-billion valuation in a now-scrapped buyout deal with Photoshop maker Adobe. Figma's $1.22-billion offering, the fourth-largest U.S. IPO of the year, is being seen as a potential catalyst for other startups eyeing a flotation after a three-year freeze in the tech listings market. The deal's strong reception renewed hopes of a broader reopening of the pipeline, as private companies and investors look to capitalize on improving market conditions and strong demand for growth names. Figma, which has highlighted its focus on AI, has also benefited from Wall Street's enthusiasm for the technology. The boom fueled a sharp rally in tech stocks over the past year and drove up valuations and investor demand for companies seen as central to the AI ecosystem. "In order for application software companies to remain relevant and provide value to end users, they will need to implement GenAI capabilities which represents a potential catalyst for adoption and increased usage of Figma," D.A. Davidson analyst Gil Luria said in a note. Founded in 2012 and led by CEO Dylan Field, Figma provides cloud-based collaborative design tools, with a roster of marquee clients including Google, Microsoft, Netflix and Uber. Though the blockbuster performance is good news for the IPO market, particularly for high-growth tech listings, the sharp surge suggests Figma may have priced its IPO too conservatively, potentially leaving money on the table. Bankers typically target a first-day rise of 10 per cent to 20 per cent to balance strong demand with optimal fundraising.
CNA
an hour ago
- CNA
European equity funds log sharp outflows on tariff worries; US funds attract inflows
European equity funds came under selling pressure in the week through July 30 as a rally in regional stocks cooled, with investors growing cautious over the uncertain economic implications of the U.S.–EU trade deal and signs of weakening corporate earnings. However, a record-setting rally on Wall Street drew investors into U.S. equity funds. According to LSEG Lipper data, investors offloaded a net $41.12 billion worth of European funds in their largest weekly sales since at least 2018 but scooped up U.S. funds worth a net $6.34 billion to end a two week trend of net selling. They also added a net $3.05 billion into Asian funds. Some European capitals criticized the U.S.-EU trade deal struck last weekend, saying the headline 15 per cent tariff on EU goods, up from a previous average of 1.47 per cent, tilts in favor of the United States and offers little support for the bloc's economic prospects. The Stoxx 600 index hit nearly a month's low of 540.63 on Friday, while the S&P 500 closed 0.37 per cent lower on the previous day's trade after logging a fresh record high of 6427.02. Global equity sectoral funds saw a second successive weekly inflow, amounting to $1.65 billion. The financial, tech and industrial sectors received a significant $1.09 billion, $931 million and $691 million, respectively while healthcare witnessed a net $757 million in weekly sales. Debt oriented funds were popular for the 15th week in a row with a net $15.35 billion worth of investments in global bond funds. Short-term bond funds saw a massive $3.38 billion weekly inflow following a net $4 billion purchase the prior week. Euro denominated bond funds and government bond funds also witnessed a robust $2.85 billion and $1.5 billion weekly net purchase. Investors, meanwhile, withdrew $36.02 billion from money market funds in their largest weekly sales since May 28. In the commodities space, demand for gold and precious metals funds eased to a 10-week low, with a net $285.8 million in net inflows. Emerging markets saw upbeat demand, with investors snapping up $1.92 billion worth of equity funds, the most since July 2 and plowing in a net $1.31 billion into bond funds, data for a combined 29,684 funds showed.
