Autonomy Insiders

Daniel Abreu Marques

Autonomy Insiders is the weekly podcast for people who need a clear view of autonomous driving, not recycled takes. Each episode features interviews with leaders across the autonomy ecosystem: robotaxi operators, OEMs, platform players, regulators, and investors. We go deep on Europe and China, markets that are often under-covered, and we always connect back to the US so you can compare playbooks. We talk about what changes outcomes: deployment constraints, unit economics, partnership strategy, safety cases, regulation, and the real work of scaling fleets and operations. You will hear what leaders are optimizing for, where they are stuck, and what they think is coming next. If you follow autonomous vehicles, this is built for you.

  1. 4 days ago

    beti: The French AV Operator Behind WeRide's First European Robobus | Benjamin Beaudet, CEO beti

    Europe's first fully driverless commercial robobus runs in France. beti is a French operator of automated mobility networks, and a spin-off from Bertolami, a family coach business that has moved people around rural France for 75 years. CEO Benjamin Baudet explains the layer of the autonomous driving industry nobody photographs: the people and software that keep a driverless bus service running once the driver is gone. Before beti existed, the family studied its own routes and asked a simple question — if the driver is no longer on board, who does everything else? They counted 421 daily tasks that had nothing to do with driving. Autonomous driving technology replaces the driving task. It does not replace the operator. That finding became the company. What beti sells is people and software: field teams trained to deploy someone else's autonomy, plus two in-house platforms — OperaVision for the ground crew and HyperVision for remote monitoring. The conversation gets into the fleet operations numbers this layer rarely publishes: four vehicles per hypervisor on two-hour rotations, roughly 20% of operating effort spent on cleaning, charging, depot work and roadside recovery, and around 30% lower operating cost than a service with a driver — but only above eight hours a day and seven days a week. In October 2024 beti flew to Guangzhou to argue it was the right size of European partner. Four months later the Valence TGV robobus line launched with WeRide and Renault. Adapting a robobus designed for the Chinese market took a year of closing gaps on language, interfaces and data protocols. Plus: how French driverless permits came through in three months, why Keolis, Transdev and RATP are customers rather than competitors, how beti is preparing for robotaxi and goods transport alongside public transport, and the 2030 target Benjamin uses to measure success. This show is the interview half. The analysis lands every Monday in the newsletter. Free: https://avmarketstrategist.substack.com/?utm_source=youtube&utm_medium=description&utm_campaign=ep27 TIMESTAMPS 0:00 - open: the gap in the leading pack is narrowing 0:59 - The service layer nobody photographs 1:53 - What beti actually sells 2:24 - Why a family coach operator started an autonomy company 3:32 - The 421 tasks that are not driving 5:01 - What transfers from a 75-year-old bus business 6:00 - The turnkey offer: people plus two software platforms 7:37 - Hypervision vs. teleoperation, and who owns the driving 8:52 - Why the control room sits in the same country 9:16 - Training customers to not need you 10:16 - What operators underestimate 11:12 - Four layers, and the two beti refuses to enter 12:13 - How many vehicles one hypervisor can handle 13:38 - What caps the ratio: human attention 14:18 - The ground crew: 20% of operating effort 14:54 - What stops WeRide or Renault building this themselves 15:55 - Valence 2025: how the WeRide deal came together 17:00 - Why that route, and the riders who became ambassadors 18:59 - Driverless permits in three months 19:59 - Rebuilding a Chinese robobus for Europe 22:02 - Navya, EasyMile, WeRide: a 20-criteria operator framework 23:31 - Roland-Garros 2026: a 100% beti operation 25:00 - Who the customer is, and who writes the cheque 26:11 - 30% below a driven service, with conditions 27:18 - When your supplier goes under 28:58 - Keolis, Transdev, RATP: customers, not competitors 30:13 - The 2030 target: 2,000 hypervision licences

  2. 9 Sept

    Robot Pit Stops for Robotaxis | George Kalligeros, CEO Aseon Labs

    Everyone measures robotaxi progress in miles driven. Almost nobody measures the hours the vehicle spends not driving. George Kalligeros, co-founder and CEO of Aseon Labs, is building a robot that compresses a depot into a single parking space. When a robotaxi drops below its charge threshold, it leaves the zone it is earning in, drives three to five miles to a depot, queues, gets serviced, and drives back. In San Francisco, a compact city with unusually good infrastructure, that is roughly two hours out of service, and it happens several times a day. The driving stack is fully autonomous. Everything around it is still humans, real estate and deadhead miles. Aseon's answer is a six-metre box that occupies one charging bay, holds two six-axis robotic arms, and completes a reset in twenty to thirty minutes: inspection, charge, interior clean, item retrieval, data sync and reboot. George is unusually direct about what version one does not do. No exterior wash. No sensor detailing. Anything genuinely unpleasant goes back to the depot. Daniel Abreu Marques presses on the parts that decide whether this is a business or a demo: why Aseon operates a network instead of selling boxes, how the project-company and asset-backed financing model is designed to pull AV operators into owning part of their own infrastructure, and why a pod needs only about five resets a day — roughly 10% utilisation — to break even. The wider argument is the one this show keeps returning to. If more than half the cost of a robotaxi service sits in infrastructure and operations rather than in the driver, then autonomy economics are settled off the road, not on it. And once cities start tendering licences with a cap on vehicle numbers, "drive somewhere cheaper to charge" stops being a strategy. As George puts it: the infrastructure has to meet the vehicle, not the vehicle be taken to the infrastructure just because it drives itself. Plus: what four years at Tier taught him about who you can actually incentivise, why Europe's density makes it the natural market for this product, and why he is building the company in California anyway. TIMESTAMPS 0:49 - Introduction 1:26 - What Aseon is, and what an operator actually buys 1:52 - Inside the box: one bay, two robotic arms 2:41 - A 20-30 minute reset, bounded by charge rate 3:29 - What it replaces: two hours out of service, several times a day 4:50 - What they found inside real AV depots 5:31 - A third of the fleet offline at any given time 6:44 - Four years at Tier, and who you can actually incentivise 7:50 - Which jobs version one does, and which it refuses 9:47 - Interior resets: the 90% a robot can close out 10:55 - Getting power into a dense-city parking bay 12:00 - One pod, many platforms: ID Buzz down to Cybercab 13:55 - Orchestration: no queuing, just-in-time only 14:51 - When the pod fails with a vehicle inside 15:52 - Why Aseon runs a network instead of selling boxes 18:07 - How operators pay, and what makes it bankable 19:08 - Five resets a day: the utilisation math 21:02 - Where the $10M goes, and what 2027 has to prove 21:38 - $50M a metro: from venture equity to asset-backed debt 22:48 - Movable, permittable, live in eight weeks 23:55 - Lyft, Avis, Move: why route into a third-party network 25:20 - What stays in-house 26:14 - Are AV depots the new data centres? 27:39 - Is the cost really decided off the road? 28:55 - Curb space, cities and the traffic externality 30:53 - Europe: why build in the US, and when Aseon arrives here 32:52 - The one metric for the next twelve months

  3. 26 Aug

    France's Driverless Transport Rules, Explained by the Assessor

    France already has a working legal framework for approving driverless public transport. Most of the industry has never heard of it. Aryldo Russo of GESTE Engineering takes it apart piece by piece. Getting a vehicle type approved in Europe is one problem. Getting a driverless service running on a specific street, with a control room behind it and a city that has to agree, is a completely different one. France solved the second problem by writing its rules into the transport code rather than vehicle law, and handing the job to the national technical service that already oversaw metros and tramways. That inheritance shapes everything. The system is assessed as a whole, not as a vehicle: six domains covering onboard safety, connectivity and positioning, cybersecurity, road infrastructure, vehicle behaviour and operations, plus a seventh that consolidates them into a single verdict. Three sequential dossiers carry a project from generic capability to a specific route. And the safety bar is inherited from rail: globally at least as safe as the service being replaced, measured against national statistics rather than one bus route. Aryldo explains what happens when an operator calls, what counts as evidence, and why a million kilometres of driving proves less than teams expect. We also cover why the law refuses to name a vehicle-to-operator ratio for remote supervision, whether French cybersecurity rules duplicate UN R155, how you assess an end-to-end driving system you cannot decompose, where the seam sits between EU type approval and national authorisation, whether Brussels should use the French model as its template, and whether Europe's assurance layer is a safety asset or a competitive handicap against Waymo and Chinese operators. Plus the number nobody publishes: roughly what the whole safety demonstration costs as a share of the project. TIMESTAMPS 0:00 - Type approval is one problem. Running a service is another 1:09 - The French technical service, and its metro and tram origins 2:46 - What rail engineers see that automotive teams miss 3:45 - What actually happens when a project calls you 5:19 - The seven domains of the assessment 6:56 - Independence: assessor and engineering support at once 8:29 - What counts as an automated road transport system 9:35 - Built through the transport code, not vehicle law 10:46 - The remote intervener and the service organiser 12:02 - Predefined routes, zones, and whether Paris fits 13:36 - GAME: at least as safe as what it replaces 14:54 - National statistics, or one specific route 15:26 - Who signs: the operator, the mayor, the assessor 16:23 - Three dossiers: DCST, DPS, final safety case 19:17 - When to call an assessor, and the cost of calling late 20:45 - Remote supervision: why the law names no number 22:10 - Do remote operators have to sit in France 22:47 - French cybersecurity rules vs. UN R155 24:17 - Why a million kilometres proves very little 26:49 - Traceability when behaviour comes from data 28:26 - The seam between EU type approval and French rules 29:51 - Should Brussels use the French model 31:07 - What changes when it is a truck, not a shuttle 32:14 - How long it takes and what it costs 33:26 - Waymo, China, and whether assurance is a handicap 34:36 - The one thing he would change LINKS The AV Market Strategist (my weekly AV analysis) - https://avmarketstrategist.substack.com Aryldo on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/aryldogrussojr/ #AutonomousDriving #Robotaxi #DriverlessVehicles #MobilityPolicy #AutonomyInsiders

  4. 19 Aug

    How WeRide Built a Global Robotaxi Business in 9 Years | Tony Han, CEO WeRide

    WeRide CEO Tony Han on where robotaxis actually break even, how the Uber partnership works in Abu Dhabi, and why Europe could be profitable from day one. Most robotaxi conversations cover one city, maybe one country. Tony Han runs a company that has tested or operated in more than 60 cities across 13 countries and holds autonomous driving permits in eight of them. Daniel Abreu Marques sits down with the co-founder and CEO of WeRide — the Nasdaq and Hong Kong dual-listed operator behind robotaxis, robobuses, robovans, robosweepers and a fast-growing ADAS business — to get specific about the numbers. This is a conversation about business models, not demos. Where each product line makes money, how deployment decisions actually get made, what regional break-even means in practice, and why Tony believes almost none of his L2 competitors qualify as robotaxi companies at all. You'll discover: Where WeRide is at or near break-even today, and why Europe's higher taxi fares change the math from day oneHow the three-way Abu Dhabi structure works, and who actually decides how many vehicles run on a given dayWhat happened to rider behavior after Uber launched a dedicated autonomous category — and why the surprise wasn't what you'd expectWhy more than 80% of last quarter's new vehicles went to robotaxis rather than the other four product linesThe "qualification process" Tony proposed a year ago, and why he argues no L2 competitor has passed the reverse version of itWhy WeRide refuses to build robotrucks or mining trucks despite the obvious adjacencyHow WeRide selects European launch cities — population, taxi density, regulator openness, and one factor most operators ignore entirelyWhy he calls the L4-to-L2 move a "projection" and the L2-to-L4 climb a "lifting" problem Tony also gets into the parts of the story that rarely make the earnings call: the sabbatical that turned into a Baidu AI Lab role, why he left a tenured professorship for a company with no business plan, what Taoism and Bertrand Russell have to do with building autonomous systems, and why a live connection hiccup during the recording turned out to be the best possible illustration of the physical AI reliability problem. For anyone tracking where autonomy goes next — from the Middle East build-out to Spain, Slovakia, Denmark and the open question of Germany — this is the operating picture behind the headlines. Timestamps 0:56 - Introduction 1:58 - Leaving a tenured professorship 2:15 - Baidu AI Lab, Andrew Ng, and an unexpected desk mate 6:36 - What philosophy has to do with autonomous driving 9:05 - Five product lines, five business models 15:15 - Why WeRide won't build robotrucks 17:52 - Inside the 3,400-vehicle fleet 18:46 - How WeRide decides what gets deployed where 21:19 - Who owns the vehicles: asset-light vs. own fleet 22:32 - The Middle East doubled in one quarter 23:13 - Abu Dhabi: how the Uber partnership actually works 24:50 - What changed when riders could choose a robotaxi 26:48 - Business class at taxi prices 28:44 - Europe: Spain, Slovakia, Denmark and what comes next 30:26 - How WeRide picks a European city 32:44 - Germany, Wittgenstein and a robotaxi in Stuttgart 34:01 - Unit economics: where WeRide breaks even 36:22 - Physical AI vs. digital AI 39:03 - L4 to L2: projection, lifting and the qualification test 42:45 - What separates the long-term winners 44:31 - Closing: a live lesson in reliability

  5. 13 Aug

    The Hidden Human Layer Making Autonomous Vehicles Scalable | Nick Allen, TaskUs

    This video is sponsored by TaskUS. Autonomous fleets do not scale on software alone. The hidden advantage is the human layer and Nick Allen reveals how TaskUs powers the remote assistance, safety, validation, and emergency response that keeps robotaxis moving when the real world gets messy. If you think autonomy is just about removing people, this conversation flips that script. Daniel Abreu Marques sits down with Nick Allen, Head of Autonomous Vehicle Mobility and Logistics Solution at TaskUs, to unpack why the most successful AV operators are building human support into the stack from day one, not bolting it on after launch. You'll discover: Why the best AV fleets treat humans as the "central nervous system" of the operationHow remote assistance differs from remote driving, and why that distinction matters for safety and scaleThe cost math behind human-in-the-loop operations, including how teams can shrink cost per mile by 30% to 50%What a healthy vehicle-to-operator ratio looks like in commercial AV today, and why it changes by city, weather, and ODDHow edge cases, emergency response, and rider support actually work in the first 60 seconds of a real incidentWhy Europe's regulatory patchwork is creating both friction and opportunity for AV expansion Nick also breaks down the less visible but essential parts of the job: high-fidelity sensor labeling, scenario reconstruction, fleet management, training and recertification, resiliency support for operators, and the hybrid model TaskUs uses across customer sites and its own facilities. We also get a look at the next wave. From Manchester to the broader UK and Europe, Nick explains why localization, GDPR, and country-by-country compliance are reshaping deployment strategy, and why AV is becoming a direct on-ramp to robotics and humanoid systems. Find Nick here: https://www.linkedin.com/in/nicholasjallen/ TaskUs here: https://www.taskus.com/services/autonomous-vehicle-operations/ Timestamps: 01:39 TaskUs in the AV Ecosystem: From Data Annotation to Operations Coordination 03:30 Why Autonomous Vehicles Still Need Human Support 04:18 Cost per Mile and the Right Operator-to-Vehicle Ratio 05:30 When AV Companies Should Bring in Operational Support 06:36 Data Annotation and Training for Complex Edge Cases 07:47 Remote Assistance Explained: How the Command Center Works 09:01 Remote Driving vs. Remote Assistance 10:41 Latency, Safety, and Commercial Operator Ratios 13:09 Training and Qualification for Remote Assistance Teams 14:15 Own Sites or Customer-Side Operations? 15:21 Edge Cases and Emergency Response on the Road 17:47 Training, Compliance, and “Learning as a Service” 19:21 Business Models, Customers, and the Path to Commercialization 21:26 The Biggest Challenges in Scaling Autonomous Mobility 23:10 Global Teams, Quality, and Resilience in AV Operations 28:29 TaskUs’ Europe Strategy and Market Entry 31:40 Localization, Regulation, and Data Privacy in Europe 35:09 The Future of Human-in-the-Loop and Robotics 38:32 Closing #AutonomousDriving #Robotaxi #AutonomousVehicles #RemoteAssistance #FleetOperations #AutonomyInsiders

  6. 5 Aug

    The Robotaxi Industry's Real Bottleneck Is Not AI. It's the Curb

    Everyone in autonomous driving argues about sensors, foundation models and remote assistance ratios. Almost nobody argues about the last ten meters. Bern Grush, CEO of Pudocity, on why the robotaxi industry's real constraint is not the AI. It is deciding where the vehicle stops. Safety is an engineering problem, and engineering problems eventually get solved. Pickup and drop-off is not. It is a spatial management problem, and every robotaxi competes for a fixed resource at the curb against every other vehicle in the city. Which produces the prediction at the center of this conversation: as the industry scales, it will get safer and more congested at the same time. A fleet of 1,000 robotaxis generates roughly 25 million pickup, drop-off and staging events per year. Even a small failure rate becomes a million annual opportunities for a blocked bike lane, a blocked bus lane or a blocked fire truck. We cover what actually goes wrong at the curb, why better AI cannot fix a conflict that is fundamentally social, why five vehicles at one address can break a street, and what happens when three competing fleets surge to the same stadium curb with no coordination layer. We also get into how Pudocity's Curb Reserver works, who licenses it, who pays and who owns the data, why Bern drafts the ISO standards and builds the product at the same time, and the part that matters most for Europe: US states have preempted their own cities out of curb management, EU urban density is three to four times higher, and the window to write one clause into deployment permits is open right now. TIMESTAMPS 0:00 - Safer and more congested at the same time 0:55 - Nobody is debating the last ten meters 1:52 - The claim: the Achilles heel is not the AI 3:40 - But Waymo does hundreds of thousands of rides a week 5:11 - Why AI cannot replicate human improvisation at the curb 6:19 - Hard problem, or just an unglamorous one 8:16 - What actually goes wrong at the curb today 10:04 - When annoyance becomes a systemic problem 11:09 - Vans, buses, bikes: new problem or exposed problem 12:43 - Accessibility, and why it is also a commercial issue 14:05 - Public space for private fleets: reservation is not ownership 15:32 - Three fleets, one stadium, no coordination layer 17:04 - Inside Pudocity: how the Curb Reserver works 18:33 - Why the orchestration layer has to be independent 19:56 - Who actually pays for it 21:06 - Beyond robotaxis: goods, charging, staging, personal AVs 23:11 - Selling to cities vs. operators, and the biggest surprise 25:13 - The moat: patents, standards, network effects 26:41 - ISO 4448 and ISO 25614 without the jargon 29:24 - Why standards, not lobbying, are the leverage point 30:33 - Do standards freeze immature technology too early 31:59 - Inside the WEF Global Future Council on Autonomous Systems 34:13 - Is the curb problem worse in Barcelona than in Phoenix 35:45 - The one clause every transport minister should write into permits 39:02 - Who should own the curb data 39:58 - The AV belief Bern says is simply wrong 41:42 - Next steps for operators, cities and investors 43:48 - Closing thoughts LINKS The AV Market Strategist (newsletter) - https://avmarketstrategist.substack.com

  7. 29 Jul

    Public Trust in Autonomous Vehicles: What Europeans Actually Fear

    Europe's autonomous vehicle problem is not the technology. It is that almost nobody outside the industry knows what is coming. Guido Di Pasquale, Managing Director of PAVE Europe, on trust, education, and what actually decides whether Europe becomes a player or a market. Most AV coverage tracks the technology, the funding rounds and the deployment maps. This conversation covers the layer underneath all of it: whether the European public and European policymakers are anywhere near ready for what is being built. Guido Di Pasquale runs PAVE Europe, the nonprofit coalition Partners for Automated Vehicle Education, whose members span AV developers, insurers, certification bodies, public transport operators and public authorities. He has spent more than a decade inside the European debate on autonomous mobility. We get into the uncomfortable structural questions first: how a coalition funded by the industry stays a neutral educator, and why PAVE Europe's founding mix of insurers and testing organizations, rather than carmakers, tells you something real about how Europe approaches autonomy. From there we cover what the survey data actually says about European trust, why the European concern is governance and jobs rather than crash safety, and the chicken and egg problem of building trust in a continent with almost nothing to try. We also cover accessibility as a design requirement rather than an afterthought, why Europe's collaboration framework is a genuine and defensible edge, what Europe is really missing beyond capital, whether Europe should restrict Chinese AV players the way Washington has, and what a realistic 2030 looks like TIMESTAMPS 0:00 - Why public readiness is the AV story that gets no airtime 0:30 - What PAVE Europe is, and what it deliberately is not 2:20 - The neutrality question: the members pay the bills 3:58 - What "education" actually looks like month to month 6:52 - Why PAVE Europe was founded by insurers and TÜV, not carmakers 8:26 - Policymakers now, citizens later: where the energy goes 10:36 - The study visit that changed a national regulation 12:51 - What Europeans actually fear, and what they get wrong 15:45 - The chicken and egg problem: trust requires trying 17:46 - Accessibility: repairing the mistakes of the old mobility system 20:43 - Is European acceptance uniform? Exposure vs. acceptance 22:28 - Europe's real and defensible edge 24:14 - The single biggest thing Europe is missing 26:16 - The talent Europe educates and then exports 26:47 - Regulate first vs. deploy first: strength or excuse? 28:31 - What Europe can learn from China, and what it cannot copy 30:01 - Should Europe restrict Chinese AV players? 32:09 - Setting standards instead of building walls 32:52 - Europe in 2030: what meaningful deployment looks like 35:09 - The missing players: where are the OEMs and Tier 1s? 35:23 - Closing thoughts Connect Newsletter: https://avmarketstrategist.substack.comLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/daniel-abreu-marques-/

  8. 22 Jul

    EU Type Approval Explained: How Autonomous Vehicles Get Certified for European Roads

    Certification, type approval, homologation. Not the sexiest words in autonomous driving, but arguably the most decisive ones for whether AVs ever reach European roads at scale. The EU's Level 4 regulation (2022/1426) has existed for four years. As of today, not a single vehicle holds EU type approval under it. The common narrative blames slow regulation. My guest tells a different story: the framework is ready, the technical services are ready, and the real bottleneck sits inside the companies themselves. D**k Fratzke is Project Leader in the Autonomous Driving & ADAS department at TÜV SÜD, the independent testing organization that assesses AV companies across three continents, from Waymo and Aurora in the US to projects across Europe and Asia. He led TÜV SÜD's involvement in the EVA shuttle project in Karlsruhe, one of Germany's first SAE Level 4 deployments in public transport, and has co-authored academic research on systematically testing autonomous driving functions. In this episode, we cover: What homologation and type approval actually mean, and how Europe's independent assessment model differs from US self-certification The two-step approval process for Level 4: EU type approval for the product, then operating area approval from the "owner of the road" Why the 1,400-unit small series cap is a benefit for AV companies, not a showstopper What is really delaying Europe's first Level 4 approval, and why D**k says "maybe one year, maybe two" Why Mobileye's completed functional safety management assessment matters as a milestone Whether end-to-end AI systems can pass European certification at all Why Pony.ai, WeRide, and Momenta are entering Europe How TÜV SÜD approved shuttles without steering wheels by arguing from the regulatory framework for horse-drawn coaches The newly adopted UN global regulation for driverless vehicles, and the alcohol interlock absurdity that shows why updates were overdue Whether you build, operate, insure, or invest in autonomous vehicles, this episode explains the process that decides who gets to deploy in Europe and when. Timestamps: 00:00 – Cold open: why AVs need an independent set of eyes 01:18 – Intro: certification, type approval, homologation 03:07 – D**k's path: from car mechanic to TÜV SÜD 04:48 – Why a 160-year-old testing org jumped into autonomous driving 06:19 – What a "technical service" actually does 07:22 – Team size and how demand has shifted 09:24 – Homologation vs type approval vs US self-certification 11:10 – Level 3 vs Level 4: two separate regulatory tracks 14:00 – How UNECE regulation becomes binding law 17:05 – The EVA shuttle project in Karlsruhe (and Bad Birnbach first) 19:05 – Approving a vehicle with no steering wheel 21:09 – The two-step EU approval process (2022/1426) 23:30 – Operating area approval: the "owner of the road" 25:11 – Zero Level 4 approvals: what's really blocking it 27:32 – Vertical integration vs partnership: who applies? 30:21 – How long approval realistically takes 32:43 – The 1,400-unit small series cap, and why it's a benefit 35:12 – Why US and Chinese companies come to TÜV SÜD 36:46 – Waymo, self-certification, and the four-eye principle 39:15 – Chinese AV companies entering Europe: the Level 3 play 41:42 – Can end-to-end AI pass European certification? 44:16 – The new UN global regulation for driverless vehicles 47:00 – When can a passenger hail a driverless AV in Europe? 49:00 – The one thing D**k would change tomorrow

See All (28)

About

Autonomy Insiders is the weekly podcast for people who need a clear view of autonomous driving, not recycled takes. Each episode features interviews with leaders across the autonomy ecosystem: robotaxi operators, OEMs, platform players, regulators, and investors. We go deep on Europe and China, markets that are often under-covered, and we always connect back to the US so you can compare playbooks. We talk about what changes outcomes: deployment constraints, unit economics, partnership strategy, safety cases, regulation, and the real work of scaling fleets and operations. You will hear what leaders are optimizing for, where they are stuck, and what they think is coming next. If you follow autonomous vehicles, this is built for you.

Information

  • Creator
    Daniel Abreu Marques
  • Years Active
    2026
  • Episodes
    28
  • Rating
    Clean
  • Copyright
    © 2026 Daniel Abreu Marques
  • Show Website
    Autonomy Insiders

You Might Also Like