Self-driving EVs are not a solution to most of the externalities of personal automobiles. No means of transport is that requires twenty square meters of space and 2000 kg of matter to move 1.4 persons at a time on average.

It’s not even clear as of now whether they have a net positive effect on the society, even if they ever become viable in climates that aren’t always sunny.

> Self-driving EVs are not a solution to most of the externalities of personal automobiles.

Why do you think self-driving cars are meant to solve automobile externalities? I don't view them in that way. I view them as solving personal problems with driving - attention, safety, comfort, utilization rate, cost, etc..

> It’s not even clear as of now whether they have a net positive effect on the society

Why not? Personal automobiles have a utilization rate of around 5%. If Waymo can get that to even 40% that means you can reduce the number of vehicles by 8x (let's be conservative and say 4x to account for potentially higher use of them a la Jevon's Paradox). They're also infinitely safer and it's likely that they'll get to the point where there are no automobile related deaths. They'll replace the likes of Uber and taxis which have been known to be sources of assaults and other crimes. They'll unlock other opportunities too but regardless of how conservative you want to be with their effects, if they roll out to the point where one can forgo buying a personal automobile, it's very very hard to argue it won't be a huge net positive to society.

I bet your reason against it is that you believe something like trains and metros and bikes are better. And to an extent they are, I live in a city and prefer to ride the metro when I can. But it's pure hopium thinking they can ever fully obviate cars.