Tesla launches ride-hailing in San Francisco, but there's no mention of self-driving robotaxis
Tesla still faces regulatory hurdles in California, which has not permitted the EV-maker to use robotaxis for ride-hailing services.
FILE PHOTO: Tesla logo is seen in this illustration taken July 23, 2025. [Photo: Dado Ruvic/Illustration/ File Photo/REUTERS]
BY
Tesla launched ride-hailing in San Francisco's Bay Area on Thursday but did not mention using self-driving robotaxis for the service.
California has not permitted Tesla to offer robotaxi service, and the limited rollout highlights the regulatory hurdles the company faces as it looks to pivot to robotaxis amid cooling electric vehicle sales.
The state's rules could potentially delay Musk's target of deploying robotaxis across half the U.S. by year-end.
The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) said last week that Tesla was not allowed to 'test or transport the public' with or without a driver in a self-driving vehicle.
Tesla had notified the CPUC of its intent to include friends and family of employees, plus select public participants in the Bay Area service, but only in human-operated vehicles.
But the regulator reiterated that Tesla must first complete a pilot phase without charging customers before pursuing full-autonomous permits, a process that has taken competitors such as Alphabet's Waymo years to navigate.
'You can now ride-hail a Tesla in the SF Bay Area, in addition to Austin,' Musk said in a post on X, without adding other details.
Tesla, in a post on X, showed the service area would include the San Francisco area, San Jose and Berkeley.
Tesla only has a permit from California's Department of Motor Vehicles to test self-driving vehicles with a safety driver on public roads. It does not have the permits needed to collect fares in robotaxis.
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.
A CPUC spokesperson last week did not respond to a question on whether Tesla could use that feature, but such technology does not require an autonomous vehicle permit in California because the human driver is expected to be in control at all times.
Tesla did not immediately respond to a Reuters request for additional details.
The EV maker will require permits from the CPUC and California's Department of Motor Vehicles to launch a ride-hailing service competing with Waymo, Uber and Lyft, though the regulatory approval process is lengthy and can stretch for years.
Tesla's launch pits the company against Waymo on its home turf. The Alphabet unit surpassed Lyft's market share in San Francisco this year, making it the city's second-largest ride-hailing provider behind Uber, according to data from analytics firm YipitData.
Musk said last week that Tesla was aiming to get the regulatory permission to launch robotaxis in several states, including California, Nevada, Arizona and Florida, but did not provide details on the approvals it was receiving.
—Gnaneshwar Rajan, Akash Sriram and Gursimran Kaur, Reuters
The early-rate deadline for Fast Company's Most Innovative Companies Awards is Friday, September 5, at 11:59 p.m. PT. Apply today.
Sign up for our weekly tech digest.
SIGN UP
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Privacy Policy
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
25 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Elon Musk Spent Millions to Get Back in Donald Trump's Good Graces
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Elon Musk made donations totaling $15 million to three super PACs supporting Donald Trump and the Republicans after his very public falling out with the president, but all before he announced his plans for the new "America Party." Newsweek reached out to the White House and Musk via X, SpaceX, and Tesla for comment by email outside of normal business hours on Saturday morning. Why It Matters Musk and Trump formed a fast and mutually beneficial friendship in the runup to the 2024 presidential election, with Musk bankrolling Trump's campaign to the tune of at least $250 million and helping him secure victory against then-Vice President Kamala Harris, the Democratic nominee. Trump then positioned Musk as the point person for the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), giving him free rein to look into the federal government to cut back on "waste, fraud, and abuse" and bring down spending across all departments. However, their relationship took a turn as pressure mounted against Musk, with Tesla suffering significantly due to his role in the Trump administration, and ultimately Musk left his post to return to the private sector. Musk, who called himself Trump's "first buddy," also publicly criticized the administration-backed "One Big Beautiful Bill," which aims to extend tax cuts, increase immigration enforcement, and end consumer incentives for electric vehicles. Trump and Musk then started to taking shots at each other—through the press and via their respective social media platforms—culminating in a very public falling out in June. Musk accused Trump of withholding the release of the Epstein files because he was allegedly named in them, and Trump threatened to cut Musk's contracts with the federal government. Tesla CEO Elon Musk speaks is seen in the Oval Office of the White House on May 30 in Washington, D.C. Tesla CEO Elon Musk speaks is seen in the Oval Office of the White House on May 30 in Washington, To Know Following their public feud, which occurred in the first week of June, Musk appeared to try and make amends with the president by donating $5 million to each of three super PACs related to Trump and the Republicans. The Daily Mail first noted the donations in a report on Friday, but Newsweek verified through Federal Election Commission (FEC) filings that Musk donated $5 million each to MAGA Inc., the Senate Leadership Fund, and the House Leadership Fund. All three donations were made on June 27, which is about a week before he then declared he would create his own political party—the America Party. Musk's last donations were made to the AMERICA PAC, which included a roughly $27 million donation on June 30, according to the filings. He has also donated to the reelection campaign for Republican Representatives Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia and Barry Moore of Alabama, although those were only a few thousand dollars each. This was also around the time that Musk heavily criticized the "One Big Beautiful Bill," which he said was "political suicide" to pass and warned it would add trillions to the national debt. Musk decided to create the America Party after holding a poll on X on July 4, in which he asked users: "Should we create the America Party?" as a way of creating "independence from the two-party (some would say uniparty) system." The poll received 1.25 million votes, with 65.4 percent saying "Yes," which Musk greeted with enthusiasm, writing: "By a factor of 2 to 1, you want a new political party and you shall have it! When it comes to bankrupting our country with waster & graft, we live in a one-party system, not a democracy." As a foreign-born U.S. citizen, Musk cannot run for president, but he could bankroll other candidates, which he could do with a third party. He wrote in a separate X post that if he did make a new party, he would focus on capturing two or three Senate seats and eight to 10 seats in the House of Representatives in order to have impact on legislation. Trump criticized Musk's decision to start a third party, writing on Truth Social at the time, in part: "I am saddened to watch Elon Musk go completely 'off the rails,' essentially becoming a TRAIN WRECK over the past five weeks. He even wants to start a Third Political Party, despite the fact that they have never succeeded in the United States - The System seems not designed for them. The one thing Third Parties are good for is the creation of Complete and Total DISRUPTION & CHAOS." What People Are Saying President Donald Trump in his last Truth Social post to mention Elon Musk, which was on July 24, wrote: "Everyone is stating that I will destroy Elon's companies by taking away some, if not all, of the large scale subsidies he receives from the U.S. Government. This is not so! I want Elon, and all businesses within our Country, to THRIVE, in fact, THRIVE like never before! The better they do, the better the USA does, and that's good for all of us. We are setting records every day, and I want to keep it that way!" Elon Musk in his last X post to mention Donald Trump, which was on July 8, wrote: "How can people be expected to have faith in Trump if he won't release the Epstein files?" What Happens Next? It remains unclear if Trump and Musk have had any direct communication following their war-of-words in June. This article includes reporting by The Associated Press.
Yahoo
28 minutes ago
- Yahoo
If You'd Invested $3,000 in Nvidia (NVDA) Stock 20 Years Ago, Here's How Much You'd Have Today
Key Points The answer may make you want to kick yourself. Hindsight is 20-20, and few back then expected Nvidia to grow so quickly. You still may do well investing in the company now. 10 stocks we like better than Nvidia › Here's a question and answer that might make you kick yourself: If you'd invested $3,000 in shares of Nvidia (NASDAQ: NVDA) 20 years ago, what would it be worth today? The answer: $2.3 million. (It would be even better if you had reinvested your dividends in more shares of Nvidia along the way. Your stake would be worth around $2.5 million.) That's an average annual gain of 39.5%! The S&P 500 averaged a solid 9.22% in the same period. Don't be too hard on yourself if you missed the monster growth, though. Ask 100 people, and you may not find one who invested in Nvidia back in 2005 and held on. Holding on to great companies for many years, if not decades, is one of the best ways to build wealth, but it's easier said than done. For one thing, it's not always clear which companies will become long-term winners, and even some extremely promising companies fall on hard times occasionally, with their stock sinking. It can be hard psychologically to not sell shares `at those times. For a long time, Nvidia was a semiconductor company specializing in chips for gaming. It was very successful at that, but its explosive growth in recent years is largely due to its dominance in chips for data centers, which are in high demand due to artificial intelligence (AI) computing activities. Too late to buy? While it's too late to buy shares of Nvidia in 2005, it's not too late to buy shares in 2025, and they don't look terribly overvalued at recent levels, either -- despite the stock hitting an all-time high. Nvidia's recent forward price-to-earnings ratio (P/E) of 38 is roughly on par with its five-year average of 39. In its last quarter, Nvidia's revenue popped by 69%, with double-digit gains expected in the quarters to come. If you expect the use of AI to increase in the near future along with more demand for data centers and the chips on which they run, take a closer look at Nvidia. Do the experts think Nvidia is a buy right now? The Motley Fool's expert analyst team, drawing on years of investing experience and deep analysis of thousands of stocks, leverages our proprietary Moneyball AI investing database to uncover top opportunities. They've just revealed their to buy now — did Nvidia make the list? When our Stock Advisor analyst team has a stock recommendation, it can pay to listen. After all, Stock Advisor's total average return is up 1,036% vs. just 181% for the S&P — that is beating the market by 855.09%!* Imagine if you were a Stock Advisor member when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $625,254!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $1,090,257!* The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join Stock Advisor. See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of July 29, 2025 Selena Maranjian has positions in Nvidia. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Nvidia. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. If You'd Invested $3,000 in Nvidia (NVDA) Stock 20 Years Ago, Here's How Much You'd Have Today was originally published by The Motley Fool
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Meta chief AI scientist Yann LeCun says Elon Musk risks 'killing breakthrough innovation' at xAI. Here's why.
Meta's Yann LeCun disagrees with Elon Musk about the role of researchers at AI companies. Musk earlier said xAI is ditching the "researcher" job title in favor of "engineers." LeCun said ignoring the distinction between them could risk "killing breakthrough innovation." Meta's chief AI scientist, Yann LeCun, doesn't agree with Elon Musk's latest take on AI development. Like, at all. Musk sparked a conversation about the roles of researchers and engineers at tech companies on Tuesday in an X post. Musk said his AI startup, xAI, would ditch the "researcher" job title in favor of "engineer." "This false nomenclature of 'researcher' and 'engineer', which is a thinly-masked way of describing a two-tier engineering system, is being deleted from @xAI today," Musk said. "There are only engineers. Researcher is a relic term from academia." Two days later, LeCun shared a screenshot of Musk's X post on LinkedIn with a multi-paragraph response. "If you make no distinction between the two activities, if you don't evaluate researchers and engineers with different criteria, you run the risk of killing breakthrough innovation," LeCun said. "True breakthroughs require teams with a long horizon and minimal constraints from product development and management." Musk isn't the first person to question the distinction between AI researchers and engineers. Other leading AI companies have, too. In a 2023 X post, OpenAI President Greg Brockman said that the company didn't want to put its workers into such defined buckets. Instead, the ChatGPT-maker settled on the phrase "Member of Technical Staff." Anthropic, which makes Claude, also uses "Member of Technical Staff" as a job title. "While there's historically been a division between engineering and research in machine learning, we think that boundary has dissolved with the advent of large models," Anthropic says on its careers page. LeCun, however, says the research labs that shaped what the science and tech industries have become were all separate from engineering divisions. "The industry research labs of yore that have left an indelible mark on scientific and technological progress (Bell Labs Area 11, IBM Research, Xerox PARC, etc) were all research divisions that were clearly separate from engineering divisions," LeCun said. Read the original article on Business Insider
