Whistleblower Claims GM’s Cruise Robotaxi Service Wasn’t Ready For Launch20
A whistleblower sent an anonymous letter to the California Public Utilities Commission in May claiming that the GM Cruise self-driving robotaxi technology was not ready for commercial deployment, according to a new report from The Wall Street Journal, further calling into question the safety of the company’s unmanned Chevy Bolt EV test vehicles.
WSJ viewed a copy of the anonymous letter, which was penned by an unnamed individual who describes himself as a long-time employee of the company and a father. The letter claims Cruise’s Chevy Bolt EV-based test vehicles “had regularly experienced incidents where vehicles stopped and were stranded individually or in clusters,” and had also been observed blocking traffic. The person also expressed concern over the company’s internal safety reporting system, noting that they once filed a complaint that was not addressed for more than six months.
The WSJ says it was unable to independently verify the claims in the letter, which also said that other employees had expressed sentiment Cruise was not ready to begin a commercial launch.
Cruise received a permit from the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) in March to begin charging passengers for rides in its driverless test vehicles in certain areas of San Francisco. A Cruise spokesperson told WSJ that it’s required to report all unsafe behavior from its robotaxis in order to retain the permit and that CPUC can suspend or permanently revoke the permit at its own discretion.
“Our safety record is tracked, reported, and published by multiple government agencies,” the spokesperson said in an emailed statement. “We’re proud of it and it speaks for itself.”
Subscribe to GM Authority for more Cruise news and around-the-clock GM news coverage.
- Sweepstakes Of The Month: Win a 2023 Corvette Z06 Convertible. Details here.
Well that’s stating the obvious.
I could have told them this a year ago. Time to shut this fiasco down, cut your losses, and spend the money updating mainstream product.
And be left behind when everyone else is selling self driving?
Who cares? So what if gm is first to offer tech that a vast majority of the population has zero interest in. Let someone else blaze the trail and waste the billions of dollars. Gm, like other automakers will, can just buy the tech from a supplier when and if it becomes perfected.
Sadly in the mega cities people want this.For the majority if the suburban, rural PopUlation they are not practical or desired.
No one here in New York City want this . When polls are taken, they only go to the most progressive anti car folks they can find . I’m in Brooklyn . The questions in the poll also imply it will be cheaper and faster . Vey bias selection of responds and very leading questions
No pal. Sorry self driving is the future of transportation wake up and smell the coffee.
It’s good that Cruise is finding these problems in the test phase – that’s the purpose of a test phase.
With millions of vehicles on the road, innumerable different road configurations, weather, lots of bad drivers out there making unpredictable decisions/actions, it will be a long time before we see a “perfect” AV system.
What we will see very, very, soon is an AV system that is vastly safer than a human driver. An AV system has constant 360-degree vision, is never distracted or impaired, and can respond to situations (e.g., emergency stops) virtually instantly – much faster than a human driver. The standard for an AV system is not perfection – the standard is better than a human (we’re all safer when the AV is better than a human driver), and a process that quickly channels improvements into the system, over time.
These drones have proven to be no more safer than a human driver. The standard for these drones must be perfection. The public (and lawyers) will not accept that these drones are “better than humans” in driving when people are injured/killed. They will just see$$$$$$ and sue accordingly.
If Cruise is covering up defects it shows you they could care less about safety and are just looking to make a buck.
The number of aircraft carrier sized holes in your logic and unfounded/unproved assertions in your arguments is astounding.
I don’t have a pro or con position on this issue. But I know the message above is a bunch illogical drivel.
Well if you don’t have a pro or con on the issue, than perhaps you best not comment on it.
Uh pal these self driving cars will be better than humans drivers you must be stupid. Humans are zoned off in la la land or are on their phones robotaxis are the future in the next 5 to 10 years you’ll see. It’s happening. Watch.
Remember when Patton shot the donkey blocking the bridge?
Until reckless, feckless engineers at GM are held criminally responsible for their actions involving driver less vehicles the danger will exist. They need an attitude adjustment. Like charging them with manslaughter the first time someone dies from the actions of a driver less car when they knew they were flawed.
….and this one too.
There will always be push back on new technology. Hydraulic brakes were considered as dangerous by many who wanted to hold on to mechanical brakes. Autonomy is coming and the best way to test it is under real on road situations. What Cruise is experiencing simply is not discovered on test tracks. The challenge is to minimize the risk. and chance of injury. The issues that do show up get a tremendous amount of scrutiny and coverage by the media.
This isn’t about what the consumer wants. This is government driven. They want average consumers (aka the downwardly mobile drooling masses) moving away from car ownership and into corporate-government owned transportation. Duh.
And to make an omelette, you gotta break a few eggs
Of course, humankind can simply crawl back into a cave and hide because it’s all just “too dangerous and scary”. Is it any wonder how the nanny state took hold?
Well you title says it all.
What’s your excuse?
Anyone who now has personal transportation and turns it in for this mode of transportation is ignorant.
I agree with you. If government wants to discourage personal transportation, what else are they going to do “for our own good.”
What people do not realize is that self-driving cars are not about saving lives. The developers of this wayward technology are interested about one thing and one thing only- $$$$$$$$$.