[wutbrodo]

That's my point. Presumably Detroit doesn't have winter driving conditions in the summer, in which case robotaxis are feasible seasonally, or when there hasn't been rain/freezing conditions for X # of days, etc. Determining a bound on operating conditions is a far easier problem than making a car that drives itself.

Before launching in any city, you have to validate that you can handle the idiosyncrasies of its driving environment. Perhaps the business side decides that Detroit isn't worth launching in, but <other snowy city> is drivable 200 days/yr and that's enough to warrant launching an intermittently-available service.

My ultimate point is that AVs can cover a lot of ground from a business perspective without getting to full universal-availability. This is helped along by a combination of validating each city independently[1], limiting operating conditions, and safe-fallback teleoperation for occasional use.

Validating a 2021 AV in a snowy environment isn't an inherently harder problem than validating a 2016 AV in a normal environment (with a safety driver), and a similar approach will be applicable.

[1] Presumably less and less narrowly each time

[bluGill]

I'm not sure a want a human driver who only drives in winter - they will be out of practice when we need them. The snow problems mentioned above are real - but it isn't all winter, it is a couple weeks scattered around the whole season. Then the plows get out (and things warm up enough for salt to work) and you can drive like summer for a few days.

[wutbrodo]

Right, and these companies are more than capable of running on a week to week or day to day basis (they already do this in the markets they test in).

> I'm not sure a want a human driver who only drives in winter - they will be out of practice when we need them

Do you feel similarly about making cities bike-friendly?