• Tesla Waymo Tesla admits it still needs drivers and remote operators - then argues that’s better than Waymo Tesla filed new comments with the California Public Utilities Commission that amount to a quiet admission: its “Robotaxi” service still relies on both in-car human drivers and domestic remote operators to function. • Rather than downplaying these dependencies, Tesla leans into them - arguing that its multi-layered human supervision model is more reliable than Waymo’s fully driverless system, pointing to the December 2025 San Francisco blackout as proof. • The filing, submitted February 13 in CPUC Rulemaking 25-08-013, reveals the massive operational gap between what Tesla calls a “Robotaxi” and what Waymo actually operates as one. • Tesla’s system: drivers in the car, operators on standby The filing makes clear just how many layers of human involvement Tesla’s ride-hailing service still requires. • Tesla operates its service using TCP (Transportation Charter Party) vehicles equipped with FSD (Supervised), a Level 2 ADAS system that, by definition, requires a licensed human driver behind the wheel at all times, actively monitoring and ready to intervene. • On top of that in-car driver, Tesla describes a parallel layer of remote operators.
Article Summaries:
- Tesla’s latest filing with the California Public Utilities Commission acknowledges that its “Robotaxi” service still relies on licensed human drivers in the car and remote operators in Austin and the Bay Area. The company argues that this dual‑layer supervision is more reliable than Waymo’s fully driverless fleet, citing the December 2025 San Francisco blackout where Waymo’s remote assistance team was overwhelmed. Tesla claims its vehicles, equipped with Level 2 FSD, completed rides uninterrupted because human drivers could navigate darkened intersections. The filing highlights the operational gap between Tesla’s driver‑assisted model and Waymo’s autonomous system.
Sources: