These robots cover Los Angeles’ walkable areas, because they’re the only places they work for delivery. I hate them— my understanding is oftentimes they’re piloted by someone overseas and not subject to all US Labor laws that even a contractor would be. To me, this seems like the worst of both worlds:<p>It takes up public space in the US, but the operator oftentimes doesn’t benefit from actually living and working in the US. At worst, it literally removes gig jobs from the US while still maintaining the physical presence a delivery person here could do, with no improvement to the delivery experience. So why do we allow it?
I have a friend who uses a wheelchair and he <i>hates</i> encountering these things in the wild. I know there's a couple different companies making these things and I'm not sure if they all behave like this, but they take up the whole sidewalk and won't backup or turn to get out of the way.<p>Instead they just sit there blinking and beeping at my friend, and of course in a wheelchair it's not easy (or safe!) to go over the curb or anything to get around them.<p>Automated delivery sounds cool at first glance but they probably shouldn't be on the sidewalk if they can't accommodate the humans who also need to get around.
Robots that cannot share sidewalks with humans, including humans in wheelchairs, should be banned from sidewalks. Full stop. End of discussion. They can use the streets proper if they want to.<p>I'm sure there is some way to formalize that using ADA sidewalk requirements or something similar.
Delivery robots also can’t come to the door. So for a person with a disability, or who simply ordered food because they didn’t want to leave the house for whatever reason (maybe they have the flu), it kills the value proposition.
This would seem like an easy ADA case.
Seeing this reminds me of a project I delivered in the past. A tram installation was being planned in my city, and a researcher conducting a feasibility study asked me to build a crawler that would submit data for their research materials. As part of the process, they explained the study to me, and I got the sense that a tram and a delivery robot are essentially the same thing in this context.<p>When I was organizing the results, the personal conclusion I reached was that this kind of design is ultimately about redistributing existing public space. And in that process, the first people to be pushed to the margins are, by and large, the transportation disadvantaged. This delivery robot is consuming the same public resource, public space, and the same dynamic plays out: the weakest end up being pushed out first. I think it's a similar issue.
This article captures the problem exactly. In Miami, there are areas where sidewalks are too narrow for a robot (from Serve Robotics) and a human to share simultaneously, so either the robot or the human goes first. If the human wants to go first, they have to step into the street and walk around the robot. The robot and its operator are never courteous enough to back up.<p>Which raises the question: why should these robots be prioritized over humans? Why can't they use the streets when there are pedestrians? Why should the SAFETY OF HUMANS be compromised for these profit-seeking corporations and their robots?
> Which raises the question: why should these robots be prioritized over humans? Why can't they use the streets when there are pedestrians? Why should the SAFETY OF HUMANS be compromised for these profit-seeking corporations and their robots?<p>That's a good start, now ask some of the same questions about cars vs pedestrians. Ultimately, big money will win as it always does. Get used to dodging robots.
Some of this does seem to stem from pedestrian infrastructure not exactly being great in the first place.
Those are not comparable at all, because cars also have humans inside.
Sure, and the delivery robots have people who want the things at the end, and the robots can't (apparently) go in the road.<p>Roads used to be for people and wagons, till cars showed up and kicked the people off. Now delivery bots are trying to do the same thing, kick the humans on foot off the sidewalks.
Good point. Just look up the invention of Jay-walking. It was a <i>marketing</i> campaign that called people "jays" (bozo, basically) for walking "improperly" in the streets when that used to be what everyone did. Eventually, cities came up with penalties for j-walking.
I’m really not convinced these serve a genuine purpose at all. Beyond them always being in your way, they seem to be incredibly inefficient. This is something that would work better in a large building like a hospital, a mall, or an airport, rather than city streets.
If you’re in a city with some density, order a Jimmy John’s sandwich. “Freaky Fast” is no joke. Their delivery people make the sandwich for you toss it in their backpack and ride a bike over within seconds after your order is placed. I think my record is 7 minutes from order placed to sandwich in my hand.<p>Delivery places like that, the ones that existed before Grubhub and DoorDash, those are the ones that know efficiency.<p>If you’ve ever seen the delivery robots in person or on video you’ll see that they are super clumsy, and unlike human DoorDash drivers they make the restaurant employees come outside and fill them up.
They are motorized vehicles, and as such should not operate on sidewalks or other pedestrian areas.
True but cyclists have already established a precedent of taking over pedestrian paths without consequence, at least in the CA Bay Area
What does this have to do with robots? What does a local government failure to provide cycling infrastructure have to do with private businesses co-opting public shared resources?
Post you're replying to: "motorized vehicles"
You: "cyclists"<p>I don't get it. Can you explain why humans on bicycles are relevant to a discussion of motorized robots? Are you talking specifically about e-bike users scooting along on the sidewalk at 40mph or something?
Absolutely. Let them fend for themselves in the streets.
They had these in Berkeley when I was there, my thought was always, why aren't the homeless hunting these for food?
The argument of proponents used to be that it removes a lot of large vehicles off the street for small local deliveries… yes and onto the sidewalk. Makes no sense.
[dead]