31–40 of 231 posts
Because Uber's insane valuation is largely predicated on them being able to pivot out of expensive human "driver-partners" into cheap and compliant robots, and any sort of public acknowledgement that this is not going to happen would tank their stock.
I am not surprised. This is a competition between Tesla and Google, technology companies. I never saw Uber, a services company, as being part of this race.
That's a weird take. How come Tesla gets to be a technology company but Uber is a services company?
No one can read this article yet it is instantly upvoted to the very top of HN. Goes to show how discussion forums like this one just serve to amplify people's existing biases rather than actually educate them on anything new.
Didn't they lose a lawsuit against Waymo, which meant they had to build a lot of tech from scratch? From the point they got identified as IP thieves it became hard to believe they'd get anywhere.
That’s really interesting. Does anyone have a link to where this was stated?
The Information sometimes unlocks articles for HN readers, but for those that don't have access the biggest takeaway to me is that Uber has made relatively little progress towards fully autonomous cars despite a huge amount of investment. The most shocking detail: > Uber’s vehicles had also been having what the company refers to as a bad experience—such as a sudden jerk or a potentially dangerous movement—every one-t…
Thought Tesla was considered first, in part because Tesla's fleet collects an orders of magnitude of data greater than others.
I am not surprised. This is a competition between Tesla and Google, technology companies. I never saw Uber, a services company, as being part of this race.
But so far, Tesla is dead last in self-driving cars. They some cool driver-aid systems, but their self-driving tech is still being written and rewritten, and didn't even begin any tests on the roads.
This article is behind a subscribe wall, which isn't very conductive to sharing. But upon reading, it seems to be that the technology is just not capable of performing the task. The assumption that deep learning is sufficient to be able to drive a car may be a faulty one.
Didn't they lose a lawsuit against Waymo, which meant they had to build a lot of tech from scratch? From the point they got identified as IP thieves it became hard to believe they'd get anywhere.
> Didn't they lose a lawsuit against Waymo, which meant they had to build a lot of tech from scratch and, to add insult to injury, keep Waymo informed of the details? That’s really interesting. Does anyone have a link to where this was stated?
The settlement is discussed for example here, but no mention is made of Uber having to disclose future developments: https://9to5google.com/2018/02/09/alphabet-waymo-uber-trial-...