Resolved YES. Background During Tesla's Q4 2024 earnings call, CEO Elon Musk announced plans to launch what is called unsupervised Full Self-Driving (FSD) service in Austin, Texas. The service will operate as a paid ride-hailing option, with vehicles operating autonomously without human drivers inside the car. Resolution Criteria This market will resolve YES if Tesla launches a paid ride-hailing service in Austin, Texas in June 2025 where vehicles operate without human supervision inside the car. The market will resolve NO if: The launch is delayed beyond June 2025 The service requires human supervision/safety drivers in the car The service is canceled or not launched at all The definition of no human driver is clear. The Sawyer merritt and Tesla statements are what they are promising in June. If they launch a paid service without the supervised driver then that counts. Yes the service must be: A commercial, paid service Unsupervised/ no safety driver It is still YES even if they have the ability to take remote control. Waymo can take remote control but they are considered by the media as a robotaxi service. Apollo Go in China, Cruise are considered robotaxi services. The standard is no human driver in the car and a paid service. Others can debate their definitions but other questions can be created. Update 2025-04-30 (PST): - Public access requirement: the service must be bookable by ordinary (non-Tesla employee) customers. If only Tesla employees can book it, the market resolves NO. (AI summary of creator comment) Update 2025-05-15 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): - Remote monitoring does not count as supervision. The determination of 'unsupervised' focuses on the absence of a human driver in the car. Update 2025-05-17 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): - Access for non-Tesla employees can be limited by invitation. Paid rides must still be provided to these invited non-employees for the service to qualify. Update 2025-05-17 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): - Remote driving or human remote supervision is not a disqualifying factor for the service to be considered unsupervised. The standard for unsupervised is the absence of a human driver inside the vehicle. This corrects a previous AI-generated summary from 2025-05-15 which incorrectly stated that human remote supervision would be a disqualifying factor. Update 2025-06-20 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): - A safety monitor in the passenger seat is not considered a safety driver. The presence of a safety monitor in the car would not, on its own, cause the market to resolve to NO. Update 2025-06-20 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): - A safety monitor will be considered a safety driver (leading to a NO resolution) if there is proof they have a second set of physical controls, such as brakes or a steering wheel. Verbal commands or safe words used by a monitor are not considered driving and will not cause the market to resolve to NO. Update 2025-06-20 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): - The term 'human supervision' as used in the criteria is clarified to mean the presence of a safety driver. The primary standard for a YES resolution remains that the service is paid and operates without a human driver in the car. Update 2025-06-20 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): - A brief, promotional launch (a so-called "dog and pony show") is sufficient for a YES resolution, even if the service is canceled shortly after launching. The service is not required to operate for any minimum duration. Update 2025-06-20 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): A single paid ride to a non-employee is sufficient for a YES resolution. During this ride, the safety monitor must remain in the passenger seat and not intervene in a way that would classify them as a safety driver (per previous clarifications).