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

How the failed deal with Waymo left Ford in the lurch

autonews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 42 posts

Re: How the failed deal with Waymo left Ford in the lurch

#31

Post by Eridrus »

skywhopper wrote: post #26

"At the time, none of the major automakers had spelled out a serious plan for getting fully self-driving cars on the road." Even if it had worked out, a deal with Waymo would not have been a "serious plan". This deal only amounted to throwing money at a hype factory in order to gain credibility in an imaginary market. Waymo hasn't proven it's even on track to create a workable product in the next decade. Google in pa…

I don't know how you can accuse Google of having a short attention span when it comes to self-driving cars. They've been working on this since 2009.

Google does launch experimental projects and does kill them off if they fail, but I don't see why you think this would be true with Waymo.

Re: How the failed deal with Waymo left Ford in the lurch

#33

Post by cryptonector »

jacquesm wrote: post #22
segmondy wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"move fast and break things" is not suppose to be taken literally, it's tongue in cheek. It means, "while you move fast, you can make mistakes, break things, learn from those mistakes, correct and deliver faster." This is more understandable in software which is more disposable, but the same concept can still apply in other industries. It applies more in the research phase before development of the actual product.

Yes, I'm sure the first manufacturer of ABS systems figured that was the way to go. Really, the only branch of industry where this kind of attitude makes sense is infotainment. Everywhere else - when there is money by paying customers on the line - it is as good as handing your customers to the competition.

There have been a lot of problems with software/firmware in the auto industry. Each instance has not been the end of the particular company in that case.

Software is hard, and firmware is harder. Every modern car has computers to handle a number of very important systems (ignition, diagnostics, ABS, traction control, throttle, speed plate, and so on). Break-fix cycles are almost unavoidable in today's world. It happens with lowly kitchen appliances, and it happens with cars, trucks, airplanes, boats...

Re: How the failed deal with Waymo left Ford in the lurch

#34

Post by jacquesm »

cryptonector wrote: post #33
jacquesm wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, I'm sure the first manufacturer of ABS systems figured that was the way to go. Really, the only branch of industry where this kind of attitude makes sense is infotainment. Everywhere else - when there is money by paying customers on the line - it is as good as handing your customers to the competition.

There have been a lot of problems with software/firmware in the auto industry. Each instance has not been the end of the particular company in that case. Software is hard, and firmware is harder. Every modern car has computers to handle a number of very important systems (ignition, diagnostics, ABS, traction control, throttle, speed plate, and so on). Break-fix cycles are almost unavoidable in today's world. It happe…

Yes, but those were mistakes that were not part of the operational attitude of those companies, they did not see them as 'normal' but rather as 'abnormal and to very much be avoided'.

It's the normalization of failure that's the problem here.

Re: How the failed deal with Waymo left Ford in the lurch

#35

Post by curiousreader »

jacquesm wrote: post #34
cryptonector wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There have been a lot of problems with software/firmware in the auto industry. Each instance has not been the end of the particular company in that case. Software is hard, and firmware is harder. Every modern car has computers to handle a number of very important systems (ignition, diagnostics, ABS, traction control, throttle, speed plate, and so on). Break-fix cycles are almost unavoidable in today's world. It happe…

Yes, but those were mistakes that were not part of the operational attitude of those companies, they did not see them as 'normal' but rather as 'abnormal and to very much be avoided'. It's the normalization of failure that's the problem here.

I disagree. R&D in any industry needs to encourage risk taking. The key is to contain the risks within R&D and never allow them to leak into production.

R&D that is not willing to break things will stagnate.

Re: How the failed deal with Waymo left Ford in the lurch

#36

Post by jacquesm »

curiousreader wrote: post #35
jacquesm wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but those were mistakes that were not part of the operational attitude of those companies, they did not see them as 'normal' but rather as 'abnormal and to very much be avoided'. It's the normalization of failure that's the problem here.

I disagree. R&D in any industry needs to encourage risk taking. The key is to contain the risks within R&D and never allow them to leak into production. R&D that is not willing to break things will stagnate.

> The key is to contain the risks within R&D and never allow them to leak into production.

Then you're out of touch. The whole 'move fast and break things' refers to production.

Re: How the failed deal with Waymo left Ford in the lurch

#37

Post by slededit »

cinquemb wrote: post #17
greglindahl wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tesla has had repeated success raising money by going to the financial markets, so, it appears that enough fools are willing to invest to sustain them until now and for a while longer.

And the Big 3 have had big success in getting large near zero interest rate loans and liens of liquidity provided by tax payers directly and the issuance/sales of t-backs on behalf of tax payers. Financially speaking, the shenanigans of Tesla and the Big 3 aren't too dissimilar…

Ford didn't get a bailout, nor did they need the cash for clunkers assistance.

Re: How the failed deal with Waymo left Ford in the lurch

#38

Post by Judgmentality »

slededit wrote: post #37
cinquemb wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And the Big 3 have had big success in getting large near zero interest rate loans and liens of liquidity provided by tax payers directly and the issuance/sales of t-backs on behalf of tax payers. Financially speaking, the shenanigans of Tesla and the Big 3 aren't too dissimilar…

Ford didn't get a bailout, nor did they need the cash for clunkers assistance.

This isn't true. Ford actually took out a bigger loan than GM. In fact, Ford still owes the government over $6 billion when the other automakers have repaid their debts.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/joannmuller/2011/09/19/ford-loo...

Re: How the failed deal with Waymo left Ford in the lurch

#39

Post by true_tuna »

dboreham wrote: post #23

Reading this article my conclusion is that "autonomous self-driving vehicles don't work at present". Ford management had the belief that they do work and therefore wanted to press ahead with a go-to-market plan. Google management knows they don't work and so back-pedaled. Deal fell apart as a result.

That conclusion is almost certainly incorrect. Internal communications at Google indicate strong confidence in the approach and viability of the cars. There was constant crowing about hundreds of thousands of miles driven autonomously (with the only at fault accident being the car committing the egregious sin of expecting an overtaking public bus to yield for an indicated merge). A recurring internal criticism is that they have been ready to go to market for a while, but are proceeding with extraordinarily caution. Google probably wants a repeat of the Personal Computer market: open, agile, competative. There's a hint of this in the way they structure deals (quietly helpful, non-exclusive). "You want the technology? Sure. You want exclusivity? Nope." If Uber had asked for a technical partnership instead of straight up stealing the tech they'd probably have gotten what they stole and more with a smile and a high five.

Re: How the failed deal with Waymo left Ford in the lurch

#40

Post by true_tuna »

Eridrus wrote: post #32
dosgonlogs wrote: post #20

This article makes Google look really bad.

Does it? The article made it sound like Ford's main goal was to appease Wall St, whereas Google was focused on actually building the damn thing.

That's my take on the situation too.
Post reply on HN