Sign of the times
How will FSD and robo taxi impact the Insurance industry and all of us.
I never thought about it, but this is going to be an amazing change. Here’s a link from Berkshire Hathaway, which owns Geico. They see it transitioning to a product liability issue. I wonder how that’s going to affect our cost.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=PTZX8kFiosc%3Fsi%3DpxZQ4MrkB-4Ms01u
Here is GEICO’s take on it.
Here is a nice guide for today’s drivers https://eugenecyates.com/insurance-articles/comprehensive-guide-to-auto-insurance-part-19-self-driving-vehicle-auto-insurance/
The advent of robo-taxis is poised to bring about significant transformations in the car insurance industry, fundamentally altering how risk is assessed, liability is determined, and policies are structured. The core impact stems from the shift away from human drivers to autonomous systems controlling the vehicle.
Here’s a breakdown of the key ways robo-taxis are expected to affect car insurance:
- Shift in Liability: In the traditional insurance model, liability for accidents primarily rests with the human driver. With robo-taxis, this is expected to change dramatically. In the event of a collision, the focus of liability will likely shift towards the technology – specifically, the vehicle manufacturer, the software developer behind the autonomous driving system, or the operator of the robo-taxi fleet. This means that insurance will increasingly resemble product liability insurance rather than personal auto insurance.
- Potential Reduction in Accident Frequency: A major promise of autonomous vehicles is the significant reduction in accidents attributed to human error, such as distracted driving, speeding, or impaired driving. As robo-taxis become more prevalent and the technology matures, the overall frequency of car accidents is expected to decrease. This could lead to a long-term reduction in the number of insurance claims.
- Emergence of New Risk Factors: While human error may decrease, autonomous vehicles introduce new potential risks. These include:
- Software Malfunctions and bugs: Errors in the complex algorithms and software that control the vehicle could lead to unpredictable behavior and accidents.
- Cybersecurity Threats: Robo-taxis could be vulnerable to hacking, potentially allowing malicious actors to take control of the vehicle or access sensitive data, leading to accidents or other issues.
- Sensor and Hardware Failures: Malfunctions in the cameras, lidar, radar, and other sensors that the autonomous system relies on to perceive its environment could result in accidents.
- Interaction with Human-Driven Vehicles: The transitional period where both autonomous and human-driven vehicles share the road may present unique challenges and accident scenarios.
- Changes in Risk Assessment and Pricing: The factors used to calculate insurance premiums will need to evolve. Traditional factors like a driver’s age, driving history, and traffic violations will become less relevant for the autonomous operation of robo-taxis. Instead, insurers will need to focus on data related to the safety record of the autonomous technology, the specific model of the vehicle, the fleet operator’s maintenance practices, and potentially even real-time data on the vehicle’s performance and any system “disengagements” (instances where the autonomous system required human intervention).
- Evolution of Insurance Products and Policy Structures: The current model of individual car insurance policies may become less dominant. We are likely to see a rise in:
- Commercial Fleet Policies: Insurance for the companies operating large fleets of robo-taxis will become crucial. These policies will need to cover the unique risks associated with autonomous operation and potentially higher liability limits.
- Product Liability Insurance: Manufacturers of autonomous vehicle technology will require robust product liability coverage to protect against claims arising from system failures.
- Cybersecurity Insurance: Policies specifically designed to cover risks associated with cyberattacks on autonomous vehicles will become essential.
- Increased Complexity in Claims Processing: Investigating accidents involving robo-taxis will be significantly more complex than with human-driven cars. It will require in-depth technical analysis of the vehicle’s data logs, sensor inputs, and decision-making processes to determine the cause of the accident and assign liability. This may involve collaboration between insurers, manufacturers, and technology providers.
- Potential for Lower Premiums in the Long Term (with caveats): If autonomous technology delivers on its promise of significantly reducing accidents, the overall cost of claims for the industry could decrease over time. This could eventually lead to lower insurance premiums, although the initial costs of insuring complex autonomous technology and the potential for high-severity, low-frequency events (like a mass system failure) might keep costs elevated in the early stages of adoption.
- Regulatory Adaptation: Insurance regulations will need to catch up with the advancements in autonomous vehicle technology. Governments and regulatory bodies will need to establish clear guidelines regarding liability, insurance requirements, and1 data sharing for autonomous vehicles.
In summary, robo-taxis will fundamentally reshape the car insurance landscape by shifting the focus of risk and liability from the human driver to the technology and its operators. While the potential for fewer accidents offers a long-term benefit, the emergence of new and complex risks will necessitate the development of new insurance products, sophisticated risk assessment methods, and streamlined, albeit technically involved, claims processes. The transition will require significant adaptation from insurers, regulators, and the legal system.
From Gemini
Posted in Uncategorized
Comments Off on How will FSD and robo taxi impact the Insurance industry and all of us.
Is $11,000 less enough to have you order a new Tesla Model Y
According to Forbes, this new model may just be the ticket to get you to jump into the new juniper version of the model Y there are than other incentives as well. Check out this article to see if this is you.
Posted in cars, Tesla
Tagged Cars, Pricing change
Comments Off on Is $11,000 less enough to have you order a new Tesla Model Y
Buick ELECTRA the future EV platform for GM?
Mike the Car Geek Does an amazing job of navigating the challenges facing the Buick Brand and how they intend to add the classic ELECTRA BRAND to move forward in both China and the US. It is interesting how the tariffs will impact the challenges as the bulk of the new approach does not appear to be based on Ultimatum. But, on the Xiao Yao Super Architecture. This allows for all the major types of propulsion. EV , PHEV, EREV. The tariff complicate things and sourcing from China. It’s amazing the battle that’s going on between the technology centers, Korea, China, and the US. I hope in the end to consumer wins. Are you old enough to know the Electra brand?
Posted in Battery Chemistry, Tariffs, Technology
Tagged Buick, Electra, Power train
Comments Off on Buick ELECTRA the future EV platform for GM?
The latest UX Design for Lucid Version 3.0
Looks very slick what do you think? Is brand going to make it?
Posted in Lucid, Technology, UX design
Tagged UX design
Comments Off on The latest UX Design for Lucid Version 3.0
Would Roaming Solve Many DC Fast Charging Problems In America?
Kyle discusses DC Fast Charging Roaming and how in Europe it has impacted the friction crossing the various charging networks without having tons of apps and key fobs. I feel we have a NACS moment here. We need a Visa / Mastercard approach that does not force us to clog our phones and brains with all these apps just to purchase a charge.
Take a listen to this Out of Spec BITS Conversation about the opportunities and challenges.
State of Charge breaks the news , Walmart plans expansive EV Charging network which will blanket the US within a few years.
Tom Moloughney does it again, he has been a thought leader for years and always brings the latest news and insights of the industry. He brings us exclusive details of the Walmart rollout of their national EV charging strategy.
He details the approach and has excellent onsite and interviews with the team leading the project.
He brings forth the questions and answers we all have of how this will impact the everyday experience of EV drivers.
Excellent coverage as usual.
Please follow Tom on Youtube and his web site https://evchargingstations.com
This is the video with the details.
For the life of me I can not understand why people think attacking Tesla Dealerships will make a difference
Here is an article with the details for the Kansas city fireboming of the dealer by a misguided person.
Current Events
Owen McIntire allegedly concocted two homemade incendiary devices and used them to destroy a pair of Cybertrucks, the Justice Department alleged.
Review of Market share for EV sales for the last three years.
| Company | 2022_Market_Share | 2023_Market_Share | 2024_Market_Share |
| Ford | 7.00% | 6.00% | 5.00% |
| GM | 6.00% | 7.00% | 8.00% |
| Hyundai/Kia | 7.00% | 9.00% | 10.00% |
| Others | 15.00% | 23.00% | 27.00% |
| Tesla | 65.00% | 55.00% | 50.00% |
But when you look at the ICE VS EV percentages. Tells another story on where we are.
**general estimate** based on trends and information available in various public reports, news articles, and analyses related to the electric vehicle market in the United States. These sources often provide directional information and overall market movements, which I synthesized to create the approximate figures. **To get exact and definitive market share data, you would typically need to consult:** * **Official sales reports from manufacturers.** * **Reports from market research firms** (like S&P Global Mobility, Canalys, Counterpoint Research, etc.). * **Industry associations** (like the Alliance for Automotive Innovation). Source Gemini
Posted in Adoption
Comments Off on Review of Market share for EV sales for the last three years.
What will happen to the Robo-Taxi / Cyber-Cab if some or most of the cameras get blocked? answers from Grok
At first Grok gave me the generic answer about how it might work in general but I pressed on.
My point I was asking as a follow-up to the cameras being blocked for fsd. How will cyber cab/ robo taxi handle when they have cameras blocked.
Apologies for missing the focus of your follow-up question! You’re asking specifically how the Tesla Cybercab (robotaxi) will handle situations where its cameras are blocked or obstructed, given that it relies entirely on a camera-based vision system for Full Self-Driving (FSD). Since the Cybercab is a purpose-built autonomous vehicle with no steering wheel or pedals, this is a critical issue. Based on Tesla’s current FSD behavior, official statements, and the Cybercab’s design as of March 9, 2025, here’s how it might address blocked cameras:
1. System Design and Redundancy
- Camera-Based Vision: The Cybercab, like other Tesla vehicles, uses a suite of external cameras (likely eight or more, similar to Hardware 4-equipped models) for 360-degree perception. It lacks LIDAR or radar, relying solely on cameras and AI to interpret the environment.
- Overlap and Redundancy: Tesla’s camera layout includes overlapping fields of view (e.g., front, side, and rear cameras), which could allow the system to compensate for a single blocked camera by relying on others. For example, if a side repeater camera is obstructed, the front or B-pillar cameras might still provide sufficient data for navigation.
- Limits of Redundancy: However, if multiple cameras or critical ones (e.g., forward-facing cameras) are blocked, the system’s ability to function degrades significantly, as it cannot “see” key areas like the road ahead or traffic signals.
2. Response to Obstructions
- Detection and Alerts: Current FSD-equipped Teslas detect camera obstructions (e.g., dirt, snow, glare) and display warnings like “Camera blocked or blinded” on the touchscreen. The Cybercab, designed for unsupervised autonomy, would likely have a similar detection mechanism but would need to act autonomously rather than prompting a human driver.
- Degraded Operation: If a non-critical camera is blocked, the Cybercab might continue operating in a degraded mode, adjusting its behavior (e.g., slowing down, avoiding lane changes) based on remaining camera inputs. Posts on X and user reports from FSD suggest that Tesla’s system can sometimes tolerate minor obstructions, but this is untested at scale for a fully autonomous vehicle.
- Full Disablement: If critical cameras (e.g., front-facing triad) are blocked, the Cybercab would likely stop safely and refuse to proceed. Tesla’s FSD currently disengages or won’t engage when visibility is severely compromised, and the Cybercab—lacking manual controls—would have no fallback beyond halting. Musk has emphasized safety, claiming autonomous vehicles will be “10-20 times safer” than human-driven ones, so stopping would align with that priority.
3. Autonomous Mitigation Strategies
- Self-Cleaning Systems: While not explicitly confirmed for the Cybercab, Tesla has explored camera-cleaning tech (e.g., patents for air jets or wipers). The Cybercab’s inductive charging hubs might include automated cleaning stations, as suggested during the October 2024 “We, Robot” event, where Musk hinted at robotic maintenance. If a camera is blocked mid-trip, however, no onboard cleaning solution has been detailed yet.
- Route Adjustment: The Cybercab could reroute to a hub or safe location if it detects persistent camera issues, using remaining functional cameras to navigate cautiously. This aligns with Tesla’s vision of a managed fleet, though real-time execution remains speculative.
- Remote Intervention: Posts on X from the Cybercab unveiling suggest Tesla employees used controllers during demos, hinting at a possible remote override or teleoperation fallback. For a blocked camera scenario, a remote operator could guide the vehicle to a safe spot, though this isn’t scalable for a large fleet and wasn’t officially confirmed as a feature.
4. Real-World Challenges
- Environmental Factors: Blocked cameras due to snow, mud, or vandalism pose a bigger challenge for the Cybercab than for supervised FSD vehicles, where a driver can intervene. Competitors like Waymo use LIDAR and radar as backups, giving them an edge in low-visibility conditions (e.g., fog, heavy rain), which Tesla’s camera-only system struggles with, per NHTSA investigations into FSD crashes.
- No Human Fallback: Unlike current FSD-equipped cars, the Cybercab has no driver to clean cameras or take over. If all cameras are obstructed (e.g., in a blizzard), the vehicle would be immobilized until externally cleared, a vulnerability Musk hasn’t publicly addressed for robotaxi operations.
5. Tesla’s Stated Approach
- Musk’s Optimism: At the Cybercab unveiling, Musk didn’t directly discuss camera blockages but emphasized AI’s ability to handle complex scenarios, trained on billions of miles of driving data. He suggested the system’s robustness would exceed human capability, implying confidence in managing partial failures.
- Unsupervised FSD Precedent: Tesla plans to roll out unsupervised FSD on Model 3 and Model Y in Texas and California in 2025, per the October 2024 earnings call. How these vehicles handle camera obstructions will preview the Cybercab’s approach. Current FSD halts or degrades when cameras fail, suggesting the Cybercab might follow suit but with automated recovery (e.g., stopping and signaling for help).
Likely Outcome
When cameras are blocked, the Cybercab will likely:
- Attempt to Proceed: Use overlapping camera data to operate cautiously if the blockage is partial and non-critical.
- Stop Safely: Halt in a safe location (e.g., roadside) if critical cameras are obstructed, awaiting external assistance (e.g., fleet maintenance or remote intervention).
- Seek Maintenance: Navigate to a hub for cleaning if feasible, though this depends on enough functional cameras to reach it.
Unanswered Questions
- Scalability: How will Tesla manage thousands of Cybercabs stopping due to blocked cameras in adverse weather? The infrastructure (hubs, remote ops) is still conceptual.
- Regulatory Hurdles: The NHTSA is probing Tesla’s camera-only FSD for low-visibility crashes (e.g., October 2024 investigation into 2.4 million vehicles). Regulators may demand backups like LIDAR before approving a robotaxi without controls.
Conclusion
The Cybercab’s handling of blocked cameras builds on current FSD logic—degraded operation or safe stopping—but its lack of manual controls and reliance on cameras alone amplify the stakes. Tesla’s betting on AI resilience and fleet management (e.g., cleaning hubs) to mitigate this, but real-world tests (beyond controlled demos) and regulatory scrutiny will determine its viability. Without detailed solutions from Tesla yet, it’s a known weakness competitors like Waymo address with diverse sensors, leaving the Cybercab’s approach promising but unproven.