Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

G.M. Invests $500M in Lyft

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 402 posts

Re: G.M. Invests $500M in Lyft

#81

Post by samstave »

Shivetya wrote: post #56
danielbln wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't that just a marketing and PR problem, first and foremost? "The new [insert brand here], safer than any other vehicle ever developed [insert statistic here]. It will bring you where you want to go, fast, safe and while you can tend to the things in life that really matter [insert family/reading/working montage]." I'm no adman, but I think it won't be too difficult to sell this. And if all fails, lower insurance…

One area I haven't seen mentioned is the loss of human interaction. For many just having someone to talk to/at during the trip is needed.

Here's where it will be a showstopper for me; many many times the uber map has fucked up directions and so I tell the driver the route I want to take, or to pass a particularly slow driver in front, in addition I sometimes change my destination/add a stop.

How easily can I do any of this with a robot car?

Re: G.M. Invests $500M in Lyft

#82

Post by samscully »

InvisibleCities wrote: post #69
cmpaul wrote: post #23

The "short-term car rental hubs... where people who do not own cars can pick up a vehicle and drive for Lyft to earn money" is a nice idea in the short-term. I still think Uber has the right idea long-term with a completely autonomous fleet, but once those hit the market, there will still be a pretty large demand for NON-autonomous vehicles -- take my parents, for instance, who refuse to get into a car not driven by…

>I still think Uber has the right idea long-term with a completely autonomous fleet... I really disagree here. I think the biggest strength of Uber's business model is that they offload all of the maintenance, fuel, liability, registration, etc. costs (as well as the cost of managing all of that) to the drivers. In addition, local regulators have been treating Uber with kid gloves in a lot of markets because Uber "cr…

Uber could still offload maintenance, fuel, liability etc to other entities and license the self driving software to them. Those entities would still have much lower operating costs than human drivers. They could even open source the self driving software to commoditise their complements [1].

Personally I hope that regulators do a bait and switch on Uber by allowing them to build a temporary monopoly and then reintroducing competition by introducing the "right to be represented by a bot" [2].

[1] http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/StrategyLetterV.html [2] http://continuations.com/post/108912689660/big-and-bot-polic...

Re: G.M. Invests $500M in Lyft

#83

Post by samstave »

pbnjay wrote: post #9

So Google+Ford, Lyft+GM, Tesla on both sides software/hardware... Where is Uber's Hardware going to come from now? I wonder if this is an instance where the personalities involved with Uber are having a detrimental effect on these sorts of long-term needs. Or is there something yet to be announced?

Google invested $1 billion into uber a few years ago, didn't they?

Re: G.M. Invests $500M in Lyft

#84

Post by pc86 »

tbrock wrote: post #80

I'm glad we bailed them out so they could wildly speculate on tech startups.

Well they've paid back the money already (as of 2010 or so?) so I'm not sure that's totally relevant to what they're doing now.

Re: G.M. Invests $500M in Lyft

#85

Post by jegutman »

tbrock wrote: post #80

I'm glad we bailed them out so they could wildly speculate on tech startups.

This might be a bit technical, but the company that received a bailout went through bankruptcy and re-structuring.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_Chapter_11_reor...

So they didn't get a bailout that they are now using to "wildly speculate on tech startups" because all that capital has been restructured.

Many companies did get bailed out in a market where raising capital was near impossible and as a result recovered and are involved in investing in tech companies both equity and debt. Although I'm guessing your particular objection here is that they're a non-financial company and it doesn't seem to be part of their core business?

Re: G.M. Invests $500M in Lyft

#86

Post by tinkerrr »

tbrock wrote: post #80

I'm glad we bailed them out so they could wildly speculate on tech startups.

So you're saying a stagnant company in a stagnant industry that almost died should remain stagnant and not try anything risky at all?

It's not wild speculation for GM. They most likely have ways to work together. It's unlikely a completely passive investment.

Re: G.M. Invests $500M in Lyft

#87

Post by mandeepj »

woody223 wrote: post #55
sjm-lbm wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They will still need a chassis/engine before they have a viable car, and there's been no real external indication of them either developing that in house or partnering with/purchasing someone that can provide that expertise. .. at least I think that's what the question is about.

Uber planned to buy 2,500 driverless cars from Google (GX3200, investment of $375m), announced back in 2013 [1] [1] http://techcrunch.com/2013/08/25/uberauto/

And from Tesla too

http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1098997_uber-ceo-to-tesl...

Re: G.M. Invests $500M in Lyft

#88

Post by kbenson »

jegutman wrote: post #85
tbrock wrote: post #80

I'm glad we bailed them out so they could wildly speculate on tech startups.

This might be a bit technical, but the company that received a bailout went through bankruptcy and re-structuring. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_Chapter_11_reor... So they didn't get a bailout that they are now using to "wildly speculate on tech startups" because all that capital has been restructured. Many companies did get bailed out in a market where raising capital was near impossible and as a resu…

> I'm guessing your particular objection here is that they're a non-financial company and it doesn't seem to be part of their core business?

Although I'm pretty sure every major automaker is also a financial company, and has been for quite a while. All those special 0% down or cash back deals don't come from the dealer.

Re: G.M. Invests $500M in Lyft

#89

Post by morgante »

amyjess wrote: post #35
morgante wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, it's very telling that Lyft offers a suboptimal experience.

Not being pressured to carry cash is a suboptimal experience? I refuse to carry cash. If I were to take Uber, I'd have drivers one-starring me and giving me a bad reputation for not tipping them. With Lyft, I can tip in the app and avoid all that mess.

I've taken over a hundred Uber rides and literally never tipped. Nor have I ever had a driver who gave me a bad look for not tipping them. It's not expected and Uber actively discourages drivers from soliciting tips.

For the record, my rating was around 4.5 last time I checked so it doesn't seem like drivers are penalizing me for not tipping.

Not having to do the mental/social gymnastics of tipping is a big feature of the Uber experience for me.

Re: G.M. Invests $500M in Lyft

#90

Post by simonb »

sjm-lbm wrote: post #39
asafira wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Didn't Uber buy the Carnegie Mellon robotics division? Is it too much to think they might try for their own hardware platform? It might be, but why else do so?

They will still need a chassis/engine before they have a viable car, and there's been no real external indication of them either developing that in house or partnering with/purchasing someone that can provide that expertise. .. at least I think that's what the question is about.

Chinese automaker GAC recently invested in Uber. techcrunch.com/2015/12/21/uber-china-lands-strategic-investment-from-chinese-automaker-gac/

All eyes are on Silicone Valley, but I think China will be the first to allow fully autonomous cars on its roads (Chinese-made of course).

Post reply on HN