Boomers did take a lot. They burned a lot of cheap fossil fuels and did very well out of it, leaving the mess for younger generations to clean up, for example. They enjoyed massive increases in wealth due to house prices going from 2-3x average income, to 12-13x. That won't be repeated, we won't have houses costing 30-50x average income in another few decades, it was a one-off benefit for them.

Mistakes were made. The assumption was that every generation would be bigger and wealthier than the last, but the opposite happened. In the UK we went from 14 working age people per pensioner in the 60s to 4 today, while the value of the state pension and the amount of healthcare they receive greatly increased. Because of at faulty assumption, it has become unsustainable and unaffordable.

I understand why they feel entitled now. They did what they were told was the right thing to do, and it worked well for them. They didn't vote out of malice to screw younger generations, they were just sold a fantasy. The problem is that they passed on the bad advice and it didn't work for their kids, and they are now unwilling to correct these mistakes out of their own pockets.

Unfortunately young people don't vote, at least not in high enough numbers for politicians to care. In any country where the system doesn't account for that, through things like mandatory voting or proper proportional representation where every vote counts, young people get screwed.

For example, in the UK the state pension has a "triple lock". It goes up by the higher of inflation, average wages, or 2.5%. Often that means it goes up more than wages, and the tax burden on working age people is now becoming unsustainable. It's politically impossible to get rid of it though, because pensioners vote in large numbers and most of them won't vote for it to be fairer.

Only if we can adjust our economies to cope with population decline. Otherwise the only people who will benefit are the already super wealthy.

At this point most of the population growth is people living longer, not births. More people alive at the same time, even as the birth rate declines.

The driver monitoring system is mandatory in new cars now, I think. Or at least it is if they want the highest safety rating. And they have to be on every time you start the car.

The better ones allow you to turn it off or tone it down, and the same with other safety features. MG, for example, lets you save which ones you want disabled, and turn them off with a couple of taps when you start the car. A physical button would be preferable, but I'm not sure if that is allowed.

I really enjoyed Coyote, it was funny and actually quite biting towards corporations at times.

Maybe next time they try to get a tax write off the taxman can challenge it on the basis that the movie actually would make more money than it cost to produce.

Tesla sells FSD, cars, meaning the driver is required to supervise and intervene if needed.

These are fully automated, but are in such small numbers, in only a few geo-fenced locations. I strongly suspect that at least initially there's someone supervising/intervening in the 'driverless' cybercabs.

They couldn't count on passengers not just 'grabbing the wheel' and causing a problem.

Tell you what, why don't you put out your own "redundant taxi" to compete with "Roboraxis"? Instead of NO driver controls have a driver and give the passenger their own accelerator, brake, shifter, and steering wheel - just for those edge-case scenarios when the taxi driver is not capable of safely driving?

What could possibly go wrong?

Firemen don't move cars...

https://www.firerescue1.com/fi...

Don't be an ass.

They absolutely, positively, train and prepare for every TYPE of car, not each model.

They train on ICE, Hybrid EV, Plug-in EV, and EVs

One of the many, many reasons to limit the rollout of cybercabs is to ensure local first responders are trained to handle them in an emergency.

Firemen don't move/drive cars, so the lack of steering wheel/pedals isn't really a problem they need to figure out - they are more concerned about kill switches, battery locations, identifying the high voltage wires for the battery, etc.

Uh, the F150 is a TRUCK, not a "car".

The most popular car last year (2025) was the Toyota Camry priced between $25-34K

So they should roll-out 10,000 cyber cabs all at once, across the 10 or 20 largest metropolitan areas, to really 'launch' the robotaxi business?

Starting small - 45 cars in one city, similar numbers in a few other cities - seems prudent to me. They've been driving the damn things all over Dallas for a couple months, training the AI I assume, seems like a responsible roll-out to me - keep the numbers small enough that you can have a human operator overseeing a couple cybercabs from a remote facility as you let the public ride in the cabs.

Tesla auto insurance is variable, priced each month based on your driving profile the Tesla shares with the insurer.

FSD costs $100/month, I think it would be hard to save enough money each month to cover the cost of FSD, but I'm sure there are some edge use cases that could workout...

For now, they aren't available for purchase by private citizens.

If the tech proves safe(?), theoretically the cyber can would qualify for cheaper auto insurance than say a Model 3 of similar value, since 100% of miles driven is autonomous.

What's the difference between the front seat and the back seat in a conventional taxi?

The front seat has access to the vehicle controls, the back seat does not.

If you rip out the back seat and also rip out the vehicle controls, then voila! Your front seat in your cyber cab is just like the backseat in a taxi cab with a driver...