ROBOTAXIS...ROBOTAXIS


LONDON ROBOTAXI PUSH SPARKS ALARM OVER HIDDEN AI BIASES & PASSENGER SAFETY DEFICIENCIES


Plans to launch driverless taxi services across London later this year have come under intense scrutiny after AI experts warned the vehicles might fail to spot pedestrians depending on what they are wearing. The revelations emerged during a recent London Assembly meeting, raising serious doubts about whether the automated tech- nology is truly ready for the capital’s complex streets. Safety specialists have flagged alarming blind spots in how these AVs recognise people. Professor Siddartha Khastgir, Head of Safe Autonomy at the University of Warwick,


experimental evidence


revealed that shows


sensors can easily fail based on a person’s appearance. “We have experimental evidence from our collaborators in Canada who have shown that, depending on a pedestrian’s clothing, the sensors may or may not detect them,” Khastgir said, noting that thick winter clothing is a known trigger. Further academic data under- scores systemic biases within the software. Research from King’s College London reveals that AVs are c. 20% more likely to detect adults than children, and just over 7.5% more likely to spot white people than ethnic minorities. This discrepancy stems from flawed training data, as the open-source image galleries used to programme the vehicles do not accurately represent a diverse public. Professor Khastgir stressed that training data must include variables ranging from skin tone and hair colour to


reflective PHTM AUGUST 2026


clothing and summer shorts so that “this bias is not part of the detection process.” Beyond external road hazards, the assembly meeting exposed sharp disagreements regarding in-cabin passenger security. When asked how a driverless car would protect a passenger from assault or harassment, Ben Loewenstein, Waymo’s UK Head of Policy, suggested that cabin movement or an undone seatbelt would alert a remote


team


member to “beam into the car” and check on passengers or call emergency services. Labour’s Transport Spokesperson on the London Assembly, Elly Baker AM, argued that a remote monitor cannot replace


the


intuition of a human driver who can spot uncomfortable, quiet interactions that do not involve major thrashing or seatbelts being undone, adding: “I’m not hearing


the level of concern about how serious this is at this stage.” Baker also voiced strong concerns about the lack of transparency regarding the tech’s broader impact on public transport and the livelihoods of professional human drivers. “What we heard raises serious doubts about whether this technology is actually ready for London,” she stated. A Waymo spokesperson strongly denied any suggestion that the company is dismissing the threat of abuse. “Safeguarding is critically important, and strong protections and support for passengers are at the core of our operations,” the spokesperson said. The company maintained that any reports of threatening behaviour are met with robust protocols, including 24/7 human rider support and direct emergency service access, promising to ensure strict protec- tions are established from day one.


ZOOX GAINS GROUND ON WAYMO IN 2026 ROBOTAXI RACE


Amazon-owned Zoox is picking up speed in the robotaxi market, increasing its share of monthly active users from 15% to 25% during the first half of 2026. According to app tracker Apptopia, Zoox roughly doubled its active rider base over the six-month period. This growth comes as the company expands its footprint in Austin and Miami and widens services areas in San Francisco and Las Vegas. Meanwhile, market leader Waymo saw its dominant share of monthly


active users dip from 79% in January to 69% in June. While it still grew its total active users by 15% on a larger base across 11 US cities, it faced temporary service pauses in May due to flooding and construction hurdles. Despite los- ing some market share to Zoox, Waymo “grew several times over” with those aged 17 to 25. This is seen as an encouraging sign for Waymo as “younger riders age into the highest-value years for a category built on habit.”


11


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74