Who is really behind the curtain when an autonomous vehicle decides to pull over under the guise of a “technical issue?” But, that “technical issue”, may indeed be a ruse set off by an alert and provide the the cover and time for the authorities to arrive on the scene and investigate.
I had my assumptions, but decided it was worth looking into further.
My first instinct told me this was a privacy nightmare, a case of false pretense, deceit, lies, or worse entrapment. I was having a visceral reaction of hell no, I’ll never set foot in a Waymo vehicle. I will not surrender any more of my privacy rights in the name of convenience in the surveillance economy.
I’m, of course, talking about the recent incident where Waymo stopped a vehicle and alerted local police because two teenage riders were acting suspiciously in the vehicle during their ride. The passengers were allegedly drinking and waving guns (that turned out to be toys). [1]
The story goes that suspicious activity was detected, alerted a Waymo employee who intervened telling the the passengers there was a “technical issue” with the car, advising that it was pulling over and that they should remain in the vehicle. Simultaneously, Waymo contacted the police, gave them the vehicle’s location, and kept it there until they arrived.
The police officers arrived on the scene and treated it like a high-risk traffic stop and proceeded to remove the passengers from the vehicle and ultimately took them home and didn’t arrest them.
After reading the article, I had questions and needed to research this further.
Did Waymo play judge, jury, and executioner?
Reading the article, that’s what every fiber in my body was screaming. But I’ve been known to overreact a time or two, and this was no exception.
As it turns out, no, not really.
Nearly a few dozen sensors are installed on each vehicle, both internally and externally. There are the obvious ones you’d expect any autonomous vehicle to have to drive safely, and there are the internal ones you might think about, but there are a few you may not consider. [2]
Internally, there are obviously the cabin cameras, seatbelt, door, and window sensors. Not so obvious are the weight sensors, smoke detectors, and microphones.
What is missing, though, is facial and voice recognition systems. [3]
And, according to the Waymo privacy statement and terms of service, the data collected is used to enhance the rider experience, improve vehicle operations, respond to emergency situations, and protect Waymo’s property. [4]
This data is not shared with law enforcement agencies unless requested through the normal judicial warrant process. They regularly receive and respond to these requests and assert that they follow the relevant laws of the jurisdictions in which they operate. No different of a stance than most technology companies take.
In the case of the two teenagers, the vehicle’s machine learning detected an issue from the data collected, involved a Waymo operator who decided there was enough concern to alert local police and suspend the ride so they could investigate.
So yes, Waymo alerted police, but they didn’t act as the judge, jury, and executioner. That was left to law enforcement and the district attorney.
What about privacy? Isn’t there a level of privacy you expect when riding in a taxi, ride-share, or autonomous vehicle?
At first glance, this screams of a privacy violation of sorts. People’s behaviors were monitored, someone was alerted, and action was taken.
But, as I thought through the situation, I found myself asking, what level of privacy do we expect when taking public transportation? Traditional taxi services? Or ride-share services?
In all of those cases, there is some level of human and autonomous observation, i.e., video recording, a driver, a conductor, an operator, and other safety sensors. So, you shouldn’t expect any specific level of privacy when using them.
Thus, I couldn’t see anything Waymo was doing that isn’t already being done through other modes of transportation. The primary difference is that the person isn’t in the same vehicle as you are; they are remote and interact with you in real time when required. But, they aren’t constantly monitoring the situation, AI is.
Take, for example, you jump into a cab and light up a cigarette; the cab driver is likely to turn around and tell you to put it out. Is that necessarily any different than an autonomous vehicle detecting the same behavior and asking you to refrain from smoking in the vehicle?
The more I thought about it, the more I couldn’t see any difference between the autonomous vehicle experience and other public transportation and taxi services when it comes to the level of privacy you should expect.
But, you have to admit the obvious, there is the layer of abstraction, filled by AI, that exists between the passenger and the Waymo employee that’s different.
When in a Waymo, are you aware that you are being monitored and recorded?
Yes-ish.
After watching a few different riders’ experiences on YouTube, you hear the car go through a series of instructions and disclosures when the passengers first enter the car and begin the ride.
The vehicles start with a confirmation of the destination, seat belt requirements, rider support button use, child seat safety, emergency protocol, no interference, and interior monitoring and microphones.
The announcement also covers the use of interior cameras to check on riders, analyze for product improvements, and more (see the next section). That’s the ‘ish’ in yes-ish, b/c what is more? The weight sensors? Door sensors? Window sensors? Other sensors?
The microphones remain off unless you activate them via a support request or when a situation requires them for two-way dialog with a Waymo operator.
The disclosure doesn’t get into how your data is collected and managed, or what your rights are regarding data privacy. For that, you have to use the app or go to their website.
So technically, you may hear that you are being recorded and monitored, but most people who sit down believe there is a level of privacy because a human is not present. Which is obviously different than when taking a taxi or other ride share service who have humans operators in the vehicle with you.
Is it an algorithm or human making the decision on what is suspicious activity?
Both.
Business Insider reports that “...Waymo hasn’t publicly disclosed the full range of behaviors its systems can recognize or exactly what prompts an employee to access a live feed.” [5] Nor will they disclose a full list of sensors they have.
But, Waymo does disclose that they leverage machine learning from the behavior detecting sensors, which trigger alerts to employees.
Only after anomalous events are detected will the vehicle engage with human operators from Waymo. These operators have access to all the sensors and internal camera feeds and can engage with passengers using the microphones and the car’s sound system.
In other videos I’ve watched, though, it doesn’t appear that these operators can remotely operate the car per se, like with a remote control car. [6] From the video, you can see and hear the operator clearly explaining to the passenger that they are sending recommendations to the car on how to proceed when it became stuck in a parking area. And when finally faced with the fact the vehicle would not continue, the operator had to ask the passenger to exit the vehicle and look for alternative transportation.
This was a startling finding. So, not only is an algorithm making the initial decisions on anomalous behaviors its sensing inside the car. The remote operators have limited abilities to take control of the cars driving. But, they have every tool available to monitor, observe, and communicate with the passengers, up to suspending the service.
Where does this leave me with my thoughts on autonomous vehicles?
After looking through the Waymo website, it’s clear that safety is a top priority. And this makes sense: if the vehicles and service aren’t perceived as safe, there is no way people will set foot in the vehicle.
But, for me, this is just as much about trust as it is about safety. There is a level of trust that has to be developed. And feeling save requires trust.
A vehicle that is instructed to pull over under the pretense of a technical issue when, in fact, authorities are alerted and en route to investigate doesn’t build trust. Especially when Waymo doesn’t fully disclose what behaviors or actions will trigger such escalations.
While the algorithm engages a person, that person hasn’t been like a driver interacting with you. They step in and review the preponderance of evidence in near real time AND after the fact, making a quick decision without any obvious direct engagement with you about the circumstances.
I’ve read enough of Waymo’s policies and watched plenty of videos to feel they are working with positive intent to build a safe and reliable product. But they are falling short in building a brand you can trust.
It’s naive to expect there not to be incidents involving riders in their vehicles, no different from incidents we’ve heard about with taxi drivers and ride-share services. But the major difference is an algorithm and AI sitting between the passenger and the operators: no dialog or interaction, sensors and an AI model deciding how to proceed. Sure, a human is introduced in the middle. For now. Will that remain the case as the service scales to more markets and the number of daily trips increases? Only time will tell.
And that makes riding in a Waymo vehicle or other autonomous vehicle service a hard pass for me. What about you?
References
Original incident coverage — NPR, “Waymo called the cops on teen riders, raising privacy concerns” July 10, 2026: https://www.npr.org/2026/07/10/nx-s1-5886113/waymo-police-privacy-driverless-autonomous-vehicles
Sensor/camera count — Waymo, “Self-Driving Car Technology for a Reliable Ride” (”There are 29 cameras on our Jaguar I-PACEs”): https://waymo.com/waymo-driver/
No facial/voice recognition; interior camera/microphone policy — Waymo Help Center, “Cameras, microphones, and related data processing”: https://support.google.com/waymo/answer/9190819?hl=en
Data use / privacy statement — Waymo Privacy Policy: https://waymo.com/privacy/
ML flagging + Waymo’s declined comment on full trigger list — Business Insider, Lloyd Lee, “Kids, rowdy riders, don’t forget: Waymo could be watching,” July 2026: https://www.businessinsider.com/waymo-cabin-cameras-monitor-teens-police-san-mateo-incident-2026-7
Sawyer Merritt, “I rode a Waymo robotaxi in Nashville. It didn’t go as planned...” July, 2026 — YouTube: