Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just like the did with smartphones. Maybe that's why most Android phones aren't that good.
Galaxy series phones are fantastic.
at exploding
Google has reportedly stopped developing its own self-driving car
141–150 of 232 posts
Re: Google has reportedly stopped developing its own self-driving car
#142I'm wondering what this pivot will do the morale in the Chauffeur team. There has been so much turbulence in the team with several key members leaving to form their own company because they were so frustrated with the pace. I can't imagine partnering with a traditional automaker will increase the pace.
I think this is the Android playbook. Partner with phone/car manufacturers and let them do what they do. You got to worry about customizations/fragmentation but I am not sure if that is going to be an issue for a 'behind the scenes' technology. You got to somehow tie this into Android Auto (license this?) for an integrated environment and integrations with phones or onboard maps (to get the search dollars).
[deleted]
Re: Google has reportedly stopped developing its own self-driving car
#143Earlier quoted context omitted.
Simple: everyone is looking for the next big platform. The smartphone revolution came by surprise to most and it has taken years for companies to catch up. Everyone is racing because they don't want to be caught with their pants down again.
Exactly that. If one company (especially one with high production capacity) would now release a fully functional self driving car, they could dominate the car market for the next decade. Orders for trucks, delivery vehicles, uber etc would alone max out production for several years. If done by a major player (e.g. Toyota, GM, VW), they could probably get legislation in some states changed quickly if they can proof th…
What you're suggesting is that the first self-driving car manufacturer (as long as its cars are rolling off the lines of one of the major players) will dominate (parts of) the fleet sales market. That's not insignificant, but it's not the car market. I think you're underestimating how resilient the existing driving paradigm will be among consumers (i.e. the people buying personal cars and driving fleet vehicles).
> Catching up isn't easy, you won't be able to just reverse engineer it.
No, but the California-based employees with an understanding of that system will be able to get a nice payday when they start working for a competitor.
Re: Google has reportedly stopped developing its own self-driving car
#144Earlier quoted context omitted.
I can see that during a relatively short transition period but hope it won't remain that way. Once all cars are autonomous we can do incredible things. For example traffic lights to regulate traffic between cars will be obsolete. Cars can just adjust their speed way before the intersection so that they just miss each other at the intersection. Likewise we can avoid congestion by cars registering for their route in ad…
Your description of how things would work with no traffic lights would scare me to death. One errant car (mechanical failure, software bug or hacked) could cause multiple fatalities. Systems need to be resistant to disaster from perturbations like these.
Not to mention the fact that non-autonomous cars will continue to exist en-masse. People value the experience of driving a car (especially sports cars or classic cars, but even just the every day sedan) and I don't think that the advent of autonomous cars will eliminate that for a very, very long time.
Re: Google has reportedly stopped developing its own self-driving car
#145Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, perhaps, but the counter to this is that they could "benefit from the closed system of vertical integration" that seems to be all the rage these days. I could envision a scenario where they partner with existing manufacturers for a couple years, then "courageously" break off and produce their own vehicle in order to "control the process".
That would be one hell of an ecosystem to bootstrap, even starting with a partnership with an existing company, even for Google. Building "a" car isn't that hard. Building a car that conforms with all regulations, has had all the testing done on it, can be manufactured at any useful scale, and, oh, also is something that people want to buy, is not a problem that should be underestimated. (Yes, props to Tesla. They di…
Large profitable businesses can't economically afford to take on new businesses that are significantly less profitable than their current businesses
Whoa there, isn't that completely backwards? Who can afford to invest in new businesses if not large, profitable companies?
because the rational business decision then is to reallocate the resources being given to the unprofitable sub-business and give them to the profitable sub-business to make more profits. [...] Obviously I'm simplifying a complex thing here. I understand that's a complicated topic, but details would be an unimportant-to-my-point waste of time for all.
(Edit to add: I think that apparent paradox is easily resolved by thinking in terms of long-term versus short-term investment.)
I agree there are complications, but fundamentally, big profitable companies are the ones which have spare resources to invest.
One problem is company culture and skill sets, and the difficulty of ramping up in a new area, but that's why big tech companies try things like internal "startup incubators" with lots of autonomy. Amazon in particular seems really effective at expanding into new areas.
Re: Google has reportedly stopped developing its own self-driving car
#146Why do you think Google want this information to be out?
A - Because they are lagging behind and don't want to look like they played and lost.
B - To seek partnerships through Techcrunch.
C - They don't want a non-working B2C product, but sell a B2B one instead, because they doubt their capacity of making it happen alone.
Re: Google has reportedly stopped developing its own self-driving car
#147Earlier quoted context omitted.
I can see that during a relatively short transition period but hope it won't remain that way. Once all cars are autonomous we can do incredible things. For example traffic lights to regulate traffic between cars will be obsolete. Cars can just adjust their speed way before the intersection so that they just miss each other at the intersection. Likewise we can avoid congestion by cars registering for their route in ad…
Your description of how things would work with no traffic lights would scare me to death. One errant car (mechanical failure, software bug or hacked) could cause multiple fatalities. Systems need to be resistant to disaster from perturbations like these.
"One errant car" already kills scores of people today. It really isn't that much different with autonomous vehicles. A stop light isn't going to prevent a distracted driver from entering an intersection. Mechanical or software problems already cause fatalities today.
That said I would still prefer to have a hands-on option with my car. Driving around an unfamiliar neighborhood looking for someplace to eat or maybe house hunting are examples of when you can't just pick a destination ahead of time. You want to drive slowly and decide where to go turn-by-turn.
Re: Google has reportedly stopped developing its own self-driving car
#148Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think most people would prefer no delays and a private ride. But the savings of pooling is too large for many to ignore.
Pool also appears to be the default option now, so I on a recent trip accidentally got a pool a couple times. I didn't know the first time, and forgot the second. Second time was also a 'pool' with no additional riders, so it was a happy accident for a cheaper ride. Perhaps people bet on that as well?
If we're imagining a pleasant future where self-driving cars have solved congestion, isn't some kind of car pooling going to be necessary?
It's fundamentally silly for millions of commuters to each travel in their own car, and robot cars aren't going to fix that. Buses make massively more efficient use of road space (when they're reasonably full, anyway).
Robot cars should reduce accidents, and parking problems will go away, but they won't magically reduce congestion on commuter routes. But car-pooling will.
Re: Google has reportedly stopped developing its own self-driving car
#149I don't think this is all that surprising to be honest. Google is (by and large) a software development and services company, not a car manufacturer. If they make their own autonomous vehicles, that means they then have to handle everything from safety testing to customer support and sales in addition to the self driving car technology itself. By working with existing car manufacturers, they can focus on their part o…
I suspect Google got cold feet when they started considering the liability issues once this goes mainstream. Even their millions of miles road tests were done at low speeds near their campus.
Re: Google has reportedly stopped developing its own self-driving car
#150Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think most people would prefer no delays and a private ride. But the savings of pooling is too large for many to ignore.
So you mean, most people absolutely do prefer no delays and a private ride, since the other ~80% of Uber riders don't do the POOL option. The market exists for both though. It's a smart move to offer this option. It's more energy economical and fiscally responsible. There's certainly even people who have the time but not the money.
a shared ride has to have at least two occupants. With 4 passengers on average, 20% shared rides would mean 50% of user.