This needs to be blocked
Amazon to pay $1B+ for Zoox
181–190 of 200 posts
Re: Amazon to pay $1B+ for Zoox
#182Earlier quoted context omitted.
Disclaimer up front: I work for GM, this is solely my opinion and it is my opinion alone. I think the tech press doesn't believe that Tesla is building a self-driving product. I don't know if camera based computer vision by itself will ever be enough for full self driving. I think we can demonstrate that it is not enough at this time, and we can also demonstrate that human vision also fails at times; human vision has…
"I don't know if camera based computer vision by itself will ever be enough for full self driving." Rebuttal: If you had a 3D camera sitting in the driver's seat of a car and hooked up the control to a remote controller, I believe that car could be drive-able. A sufficiently advanced perception/control system could theoretically use the same 3D camera feed and replace the driver. Not saying it's easy, just that all t…
I think it's a mistake to think that binocular or 3D vision is 'enough'. The visual cortex does a LOT of processing.
Re: Amazon to pay $1B+ for Zoox
#183Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sorry for the naive question, how is this not illegal? I would understand if you get 2X after all the capital raised has been cleared, but in this case? You get 2x while other people lose their shirts off?
Freedom of contract. Think about this situation: a company is in dire straights, and will likely go bankrupt and be worthless. The founders and the employees still believe they can turn it around, however. As an investor, you may be unwilling to invest with a 1x liquidation preference, given the high likelihood you lose all your money. So the company and the investor may negotiate a 2x liquidation preference as a way…
I understand the general point, but that surely can justify any practice cloaked in pseudo-legal parlance.It is exactly the same thing that led us to the derivatives disaster.
Re: Amazon to pay $1B+ for Zoox
#184Earlier quoted context omitted.
To me, it seems someone from Zoox wrote the article. There are many tech and non-tech press which didn't believe in anything posted on the "master plans" published by Tesla, and they are still in denial. Meanwhile, Tesla has been making huge leaps of progress and collecting billions of miles worth of data to improve their systems. What is available right now, and has been so for a couple of years, is unmatched by any…
Tesla has millions of miles of experience with a level 2+ self driving system. Waymo has comparable experience with a level 4 system. Thus it makes no sense to claim that Tesla is closer to shipping a level 5 self-driving car than Google.
Billions of miles of actual data from real world scenarios. I am talking about the data they collect from the cameras and sensors, not how their system works or what level it is.
The data from real world is far more important than simulations.
Re: Amazon to pay $1B+ for Zoox
#185Earlier quoted context omitted.
As someone who owns a Tesla, I think a lot of people want level 3 even if they don't realize it. Obviously if level 4 was available, people would go for it, but perfect is the enemy of good, and even with Tesla's L2 technology, it makes driving significantly easier. Continuously being ready to take over control vs controlling is a huge leap already.
I think a lot of people would use and enjoy level 3, but some people would have a real bad time .
Right, so why do you think consumers wouldn't want level 3 if you think a lot of people would use and enjoy it?
I definitely agree it won't be perfect, some people would indeed have a real bad time, but that still doesn't mean an improvement over the current status quo wouldn't be a seller. Perfect is the enemy of good, after all.
Current level 1 and 2 systems wouldn't have been nearly as popular as they are if consumers didn't want them. Honda wouldn't have made it standard on all their cars, etc.
Re: Amazon to pay $1B+ for Zoox
#186Earlier quoted context omitted.
SOME truck drivers (the ones that keep their jobs) will get a lifestyle "increase" because it will be local, but demand will drop substantially. Even so, these "lifestyle increase" jobs would only exist until autonomous driving gets better. Even if that's two decades it's not something you'd want to rely on as an occupation. Not saying it's the wrong way to go - it absolutely is the right way to move logistics forwar…
A truck driver's job is more than, uh, driving the truck. Inspection of the cargo and the conditions of the truck are things unlikely to be automated any time soon even if feasible (there will be regulation resistance at the very least). Yard maneuvers too, or you would have seen fully automated airport ground traffic management by now. The job would pay less, not sure by how much, but my take is that the job will no…
Right. There will be fewer jobs that will be more commoditized, therefore driving down wages and reducing hours so the outcome of that CDL may not pay as much as it otherwise would with human drivers. Companies aren’t just going autonomous for safety benefits - they want labor gone, which is where the real costs are these days.
Re: Amazon to pay $1B+ for Zoox
#187Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s particularly applicable to startups that burn through a bunch of cash and then exit for a pittance.
Sure, I wasn't trying to make any point about your comment. I just thought it was a really fascinating example of how language spreads and evolves,slowly at first then all at once. Please excuse the musing haha
You point is interesting how speech patterns catch on and become the phrase 'du jour'. I think the internet has changed that dynamic, it used to be only withing people you saw face to face. Now we're exposed to a much wider range of people and styles.
Anyhow, I haven't seen the trend of calling out an entity as being a LARPer. But I have to admit, it's kind of funny. It does make me giggle :)
Re: Amazon to pay $1B+ for Zoox
#188Earlier quoted context omitted.
Investors get their money back, employees get their wages, and Amazon gets their non depreciated capital goods and work product
Employees do get their wages, but most were probably working on depressed wages in lieu of equity compensation -- which will now be zero. Further, if anyone left/laidoff, and they forcibly exercised options due to windows, they are underwater.
I'm assuming that Amazon is offering retention packages to the employees, otherwise, why would they bother acquiring the company?
Early employees who were dreaming of a windfall aren't going to get one I guess, and anyone who left the company or was fired and exercised is totally screwed.
Re: Amazon to pay $1B+ for Zoox
#189Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well years ago the joke was Amazon sold at a very small loss but made it up in volume, and we can see how that turned out... Maybe they're going to blow up this business model as well!
Amazon’s “losses” have mostly been a tax dodge. They would for example invest in software R&D without presenting it as an investment from profits but rather an operating expense.
Losses are negative income. If I paid you $100k and then paid you -$50k you would be rightfully upset if you were taxed like you made 100k
Re: Amazon to pay $1B+ for Zoox
#190Earlier quoted context omitted.
Amazon’s “losses” have mostly been a tax dodge. They would for example invest in software R&D without presenting it as an investment from profits but rather an operating expense.
Losses are negative income. If I paid you $100k and then paid you -$50k you would be rightfully upset if you were taxed like you made 100k
Maybe this speaks to a need to tie taxes to income AND revenue. Not that I think the tax code should get any more complicated (quite the opposite), but if Amazon is selling at a loss to decrease the amount of tax they pay, while they starve out other companies in the market, there should be at least some benefit to society.