News
Waymo kicks off initial tests in Japan with launch event
Waymo launches early tests in Japan, as Tesla and others look to roll out their own commercial robotaxi services.
Commercial robotaxi company Waymo held a launch event in Japan last week, as the company prepares to enter early manual testing on its first international roads.
After Waymo shared plans to start testing vehicles in Japan in December, the Google-owned firm detailed the launch event in a press release on Monday. The event featured officials from project partners GO, a taxi platform, and Nihon Kotsu, the largest taxi company in Tokyo, along with featuring one of the company’s camera-, lidar-, and radar-outfitted Jaguar I-Pace units, expected to begin manual testing around Tokyo in the weeks to come.
Ichiro Kawanabe, Board Director at Nihon Kotsu and Chairman at both GO and the Japan Taxi Association, said that Waymo’s U.S. operations “demonstrated significant safety benefits,” along with thanking the company for hosting the event at the newly developed Takanawa Gateway City complex.
“I took my first ride with Waymo in Phoenix a year and a half ago and was amazed that there was really no one in the driver’s seat,” the chairman said. “That was the moment I was convinced that autonomous driving technology could absolutely benefit Japan. It will help ensure mobility service in the future of Japan, with the growing aging population and labor shortage.”
Credit: Waymo
Credit: Waymo
This spring, Nihon Kotsu taxi operators will start driving Waymo vehicles across several Tokyo wards this spring, including Chiyoda, Chūō, Kōtō, Minato, Shibuya, Shinagawa, and Shinjuku. The tests will utilize 3D maps of the city, along with utilizing experienced drivers to generate data about traffic laws, patterns, and other road systems ahead of fully autonomous operation.
“After months of strong collaboration with Nihon Kotsu and GO, Waymo has reached a historic milestone— our first venture on international public roads,” said Nicole Gavel, Waymo Senior Director and Head of Business Development and Strategic Partnerships.
“Our partnership demonstrates how Waymo’s 15 years of operational expertise can adapt to new environments through strategic initiatives with industry leaders,” Gavel adds. “In Tokyo, we are abiding by the same steadfast principles that guide us in the U.S. — commitment to safety, dedication to earning trust in communities where we operate, and collaboration with local officials and community groups here in Tokyo.”
The news comes as Tesla, Amazon-owned firm Zoox, and still others are racing to enter the commercial robotaxi business throughout this year. It also comes amidst widespread speculation and debate about the emerging market, and as Tesla and Waymo both aim to begin operations internationally.
READ MORE ON WAYMO: Waymo study analyzes collisions with vulnerable road users
Tesla’s FSD in China, Mexico, commercial robotaxis still incoming
Waymo is already operating paid autonomous ride-hailing services around the U.S., and it said in December that it was giving more than 200,000 autonomous rides per week.
The company currently offers Waymo services in San Francisco and Los Angeles, California, Phoenix, Arizona, and, through a partnership with Uber, in Austin, Texas, where Tesla has a Gigafactory and plans to launch initial robotaxi services. The Alphabet-owned company is also aiming to launch services in Atlanta, Georgia and Miami, Florida this year, alongside its early tests in Tokyo.
Although Tesla doesn’t currently operate driverless ride-hailing in any capacity, individual owners in North America can purchase or subscribe to its Supervised Full Self-Driving (FSD) system, on which the company’s forthcoming robotaxi platform will be based. In October, the company unveiled the two-seat Cybercab vehicle, which has no steering wheel or pedals and will be used for the upcoming commercial robotaxi system.
Additionally, the company is aiming to launch its first unsupervised rides commercially in Austin in June, and it recently debuted Supervised FSD in China and Mexico, marking the company’s first international markets.
🎥: Our FULL first ride in the @Tesla Cybercab pic.twitter.com/6gR7OgKRCz
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) October 11, 2024
Waymo vs. Tesla vs. the competition
While Tesla hasn’t quite gotten a commercial robotaxi service to market yet, Waymo, Amazon-owned company Zoox, and still many others have begun their own paid ride-hailing services or early tests. Meanwhile, Tesla’s approach to the technology is vastly different than that of Waymo and others, utilizing a camera-only, AI-trained neural network system, rather than 3D geomapping.
For one, the company can generate a larger pool of training data from real-time driving behavior of its individual owners, for instance as compared to Waymo’s use of a more-limited fleet of taxi drivers. Many argue that this, along with the cost-effectiveness of producing a system that’s built into every vehicle and utilizes only cameras, make the system more scalable than those of Waymo and others.
Still, some support the use of more than just camera systems and building in sensor redundancy as a way to maximize safety, especially as the technologies are still fairly new. Former Waymo CEO John Krafcik, who was a part of the company until 2021, criticized the FSD system in December for not including enough safety measures to support a realistic commercial robotaxi business, and he went on to call Tesla “a car company with a driver-assist system.”
“If a company were serious about building a safe and accessible robotaxi business, it would look nothing like what was shown,” Krafcik said during an interview. “The cost of a robust sensor set, including lidar, is trivial on a per-mile basis. Even more so for mapping. And the safety benefits measured in human harm reduction are real and verifiable.”
Waymo valued at over $45 billion following latest financing round: report
Tesla has launched a direct campaign targeting its customers in New Jersey, sending emails that warn of pending legislation that could effectively block true driverless technology in the state.
The email focuses on Senate Bill S.1677 and Assembly Bill A.3968, measures intended to create a three-year autonomous vehicle pilot program but laden with requirements that Tesla argues make unsupervised Robotaxis impossible.
Tesla is sending out this email to New Jersey Tesla owners, warning them that NJ could block autonomous vehicles, and to take action.
“Proposed legislation moving through Trenton right now would impose restrictions so severe that true driverless deployment would remain illegal.… pic.twitter.com/2bmY646AUL
— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) June 16, 2026
According to the email, the bills impose “restrictions so severe that true driverless deployment would remain illegal.” Specific hurdles include mandates for human safety drivers during operations, multimillion-dollar insurance minimums, reportedly $5 million, and thresholds like 100,000 miles of demonstrated safe autonomous driving before any driverless approval.
Tesla contends these are arbitrary barriers that ignore real-world performance data and favor entrenched competitors over innovative technologies like its Full Self-Driving (FSD) system.
The push comes as Tesla has started expanding Robotaxi operations in states like Texas, where unsupervised vehicles are already providing rides in several cities. New Jersey, by contrast, risks falling behind. The company highlights in the email communication that more than 94 percent of serious crashes result from human error, meaning impairment, distraction, or fatigue. These are all problems that Robotaxis eliminate entirely.
In 2025, New Jersey recorded 582 traffic deaths, underscoring the human cost of delayed adoption.
Tesla’s outreach stresses the transformative potential of robotaxis. For families, they could offer safer school runs without drowsy or distracted drivers. For seniors and people with disabilities, robotaxis promise independence and reliable mobility.
In areas with limited public transit, they could deliver affordable, on-demand transportation, reducing congestion, emissions, and overall transportation costs. Economically, the company warns that restrictive rules could cost New Jersey jobs, innovation investment, and billions in potential growth as autonomous ride-hailing scales elsewhere.
Supporters of the legislation, including Sen. Andrew Zwicker, describe the pilot as a cautious framework with strong safety oversight, including incident reporting, expert task forces, and restrictions in sensitive zones like school areas. They view it as balancing innovation with public protection.
Tesla and pro-AV advocates counter that the bill lacks technology neutrality, creates insurmountable entry barriers for commercial deployment, and prioritizes process over outcomes — effectively functioning as a de facto ban on services like Robotaxi.
This latest clash echoes Tesla’s past battles in New Jersey over direct vehicle sales. The email directs owners to Tesla’s advocacy platform, where they can send customized messages to legislators calling for amendments: outcome-based safety standards, open competition, and clear pathways for fully driverless commercial operations.
As hearings approach, Tesla’s campaign frames the issue as a choice between protecting the status quo and embracing life-saving progress. With robotaxi technology already proving itself in permissive states, New Jersey owners are being asked to ensure their state doesn’t lock out the future of transportation.
Turn-by-turn navigation is not new technology.
For over two decades, drivers have relied on Garmin, TomTom, and later smartphone apps like Google Maps and Waze to receive precise, reliable directions. These systems have guided millions safely through unfamiliar cities, highways, and backroads with remarkable effectiveness. They handle real-time traffic, construction detours, and complex intersections with minimal fuss.
Yet Tesla, the company that promised revolutionary Full Self-Driving (FSD), continues to struggle with this foundational capability. As FSD (Supervised) v14.3.4 has started rolling out to cars this week, navigation remains its glaring Achilles’ heel, undermining the entire autonomous vision.
Tesla Summon got insanely good in FSD v14.3.2 — Navigation? Not so much
Tesla’s FSD excels in many driving behaviors—smooth acceleration, confident lane changes in ideal conditions, and responsive handling of visible obstacles. However, when it comes to following a route accurately, the system falters repeatedly.
Owners report wrong turns, missed exits, inefficient routing through local roads instead of highways, phantom speed limit errors, and even directing vehicles to building rear entrances. Interventions for navigation issues often outnumber those for core driving maneuvers. Tesla has begun surveying owners specifically about these errors, acknowledging the problem after years of complaints.
Navigation is perhaps my biggest complaint when it comes to FSD, because sometimes, we do know better. Some of us have been living in our areas for our entire lives, but even those who have not have years or even decades of experience driving on local roads. We might know a little better about routing.
But the navigation mistakes are more than just FSD potentially taking a slightly different route that may or may not save you a few minutes. Sometimes, they’re genuinely mind-boggling.
This isn’t just annoying; it cascades into broader failures. A flawed route plan confuses the AI’s decision-making, leading to hesitant behavior, unnecessary disengagements, or dangerous maneuvers like attempting impossible U-turns or ignoring clear ramps. In a system meant to operate with minimal supervision, unreliable navigation erodes trust.
More often than not, false or plain incorrect navigation is what causes me to interrupt FSD operation. Unfortunately, I believe the latest FSD version is the worst example of it, and it leads me to believe that Tesla might be making some changes; they’ve just made them in the wrong direction.
It makes you wonder: Why is a company that has done so much with the progress of FSD and autonomy struggling so much with navigation, something that is not new and has been around a long time?
Multiple Data Sources
First, Tesla’s navigation relies on a fragile patchwork of multiple data sources—Google Maps, TomTom, OpenStreetMap, Valhalla, and its own fleet-derived data—stitched together rather than a single authoritative map. When these conflict on lane geometry, road status, or turn details, the system hesitates or chooses incorrectly.
Traditional GPS providers maintain centralized, regularly validated databases with professional curation and rapid updates. Tesla’s hybrid approach, while innovative in crowdsourcing, introduces inconsistencies that a purely vision-based or end-to-end AI approach may not easily reconcile in real time.
Persistent Learning
FSD seems to struggle with persistent learning from driver interventions.
Unlike consumer apps that quickly adapt to repeated corrections or user preferences (e.g., avoiding certain routes or remembering habitual detours), Tesla’s FSD often fails to internalize fixes on the same trip or across similar scenarios. Owners note making the same manual override multiple times without the routing engine updating its behavior meaningfully.
This stems from the neural architecture prioritizing real-time perception and control over long-term route memory and personalization, making navigation feel rigid and “opinionated” compared to the adaptive logic in Waze or Google Maps.
I noticed that when I asked Grok to try and get me home a certain way (a way that FSD routinely took in the past because it was the most efficient), it had to place a waypoint between my location at the time and my house. When I went to edit the waypoint out, as Grok had placed it for a way to get FSD to get off the highway at the right exit, it was stumped again, rerouted, and took a longer way home.
The next thing I’ve noticed, and this might be controversial, is that Nav has gotten even worse.
I think that might actually be a good thing; Tesla seems to be adjusting it. They just need to adjust it the opposite way.
The car is taking extremely strange routes to very… https://t.co/UHg3tVfNA2
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) June 16, 2026
Reasoning, Scaling, and Intuition
Third, scaling navigation for unsupervised or robotaxi ambitions requires not just accuracy but adaptability and user-like reasoning. Current FSD often defaults to single routes that ignore driver preferences or real-world nuances like time-of-day traffic patterns. It fails to match the intuitive, context-aware planning that traditional systems have refined over the years.
Resolving navigation is critical for several reasons. Practically, it is the backbone of any autonomous journey: without trustworthy routing, the car cannot reliably reach destinations, rendering FSD useless for robotaxis or hands-free commutes. Safety depends on it—mismatched plans create hesitation in merges or intersections, increasing accident risk.
Economically, Tesla’s valuation and future hinge on FSD delivering unsupervised driving; persistent navigation flaws delay regulatory approval and erode consumer confidence. For owners who paid premiums for FSD, these issues represent unfulfilled promises. While it is unlikely Tesla will lose too many customers due to bad navigation, some will be frustrated with the constant need for human input.
Tesla has achieved miracles in electric vehicles and battery tech. Mastering turn-by-turn—technology Garmin nailed in the early 2000s—should not be this hard. By investing in tighter data integration, faster learning loops from interventions, and more intuitive routing algorithms, Tesla could close this gap.
Until then, FSD’s navigation struggles highlight a humbling truth: even the most ambitious innovator must sometimes master the basics before conquering the future.
A Tesla Cybertruck driver in the United Kingdom had their all-electric pickup seized by local police in the Greater Manchester area after the department cited “legitimate concerns.”
Last Thursday, police saw the pickup on the roads and decided to pull the driver over. Greater Manchester Police said:
“Whilst this may seem trivial to some, legitimate concerns exist around the safety of other road users or pedestrians if they were involved in a collision with the Cybertruck.”
🚨 A Tesla Cybertruck, which is illegal to drive in the UK due to safety concerns, has been seized by police in Greater Manchester
“Whilst this may seem trivial to some, legitimate concerns exist around the safety of other road users or pedestrians if they were involved in a… pic.twitter.com/cqhdPok3DM
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) June 16, 2026
The Cybertruck in question was, according to the BBC, registered and insured abroad and was confiscated. The driver, who is a UK resident, was reported.
The Greater Manchester Police Department then added:
“The Tesla Cybertruck is not road-legal in the UK and does not hold a certificate of conformity.”
The Cybertruck cannot be legally driven in the UK because it has no UK Type Approval for operation in the country. This is due to some safety concerns, which are related to its angular shape and design. The stainless steel exoskeleton has sharp edges and projections that violate UK/EU rules on pedestrian protection.
Tesla has considered creating what it referred to as an “international version” that would be approved for operation in Europe. However, there has been no real movement on that front by the company, as it has been focused on the Robotaxi rollout primarily.
Tesla urges New Jersey owners to oppose new bill that could block Robotaxi
Tesla’s Navigation Nightmare: Why the easiest part of FSD might be the hardest
