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

At Google X, a Top-Secret Lab Dreaming Up the Future

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 98 posts

Re: At Google X, a Top-Secret Lab Dreaming Up the Future

#51

Post by marshallp »

nosequel wrote: post #43
marshallp wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

yeah, exactly. there has to be a management structure even at nsa, and management types are "networkers" who'll talk to people with money to invest.

NSA gets their money whether you like it or not. They certainly have people in charge who talk to the legislative branch, but they aren't MBA/marketing people. The are usually ex-generals. Other agencies might seek outside contractors, but the NSA is one of the few who do most of their work themselves. I didn't work there, but that was my understanding at the time I worked in other parts of the government.

Doesn't matter about their backgrounds, mba or ex-general, people who rise to executive levels rub shoulders with investors at cocktail parties and deals happen.

Re: At Google X, a Top-Secret Lab Dreaming Up the Future

#52

Post by munin »

nosequel wrote: post #41
marshallp wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I used to think they were all special genius places, until i see that it's not their people winning publicly open challenges like netflix, darpa grand challenge, x prize, or goldfarb.

People at those "special genius places" can't participate in any of the things you mentioned. They get paid for other, much more important jobs. Darpa grand challenge wasn't due to the government not being able to do something, it was due to it being much cheaper to just pay someone to do it for you. In the end, lots of teams competed and only a few got any money out of it, the rest of us ended up just volunteering f…

here's a good test: the ROSE framework is developed by LLNL. it's basically an LLVM also-ran. compare its code quality, its use experience, and its overall worth (the code for both is open source!)

Re: At Google X, a Top-Secret Lab Dreaming Up the Future

#53

Post by munin »

Juha wrote: post #26
waterlesscloud wrote: post #2

"It’s a place where your refrigerator could be connected to the Internet, so it could order groceries when they ran low. Your dinner plate could post to a social network what you’re eating. [...] These are just a few of the dreams being chased at Google X, the clandestine lab where Google is tackling a list of 100 shoot-for-the-stars ideas. " Those are shoot-for-the-stars ideas? I hope those are at the lowest end of…

I think Google is perfect company to make those future products that have been 5 years away for the last 15 years. Intelligent fridge probably comes to mind first, but there are a lot. Some of those ideas just need clever people to work on it (check), resources for research (check) and ability to produce it in scalable way (check). Maybe we'll finally see an affordable house robot that helps more than disturbs.

have you considered that we don't have an internet fridge because not enough people want it?

Re: At Google X, a Top-Secret Lab Dreaming Up the Future

#54

Post by brown9-2 »

munin wrote: post #50
brown9-2 wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You seem to have cut off the quote right before the shoot-for-the-stars ideas begin: "... Your robot could go to the office while you stay home in your pajamas. And you could, perhaps, take an elevator to outer space."

a telepresence robot you say? looks like they've been scooped by bell labs: http://www.itnews.com.au/News/278794,bell-labs-builds-telepr... (among MANY others)

Perhaps these latter ideas are simply large/hard problems, not "ideas so strange no one has even ever considered them before".

However, if you were a hush-hush R&D lab investigating some ideas that were so far out there no one has ever heard of them, would you really tell them to the NYT so they can include them in their profile of your lab? I doubt it.

Re: At Google X, a Top-Secret Lab Dreaming Up the Future

#55

Post by marshallp »

nosequel wrote: post #41
marshallp wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I used to think they were all special genius places, until i see that it's not their people winning publicly open challenges like netflix, darpa grand challenge, x prize, or goldfarb.

People at those "special genius places" can't participate in any of the things you mentioned. They get paid for other, much more important jobs. Darpa grand challenge wasn't due to the government not being able to do something, it was due to it being much cheaper to just pay someone to do it for you. In the end, lots of teams competed and only a few got any money out of it, the rest of us ended up just volunteering f…

I don't believe that's true. The military's been trying to develop self driving vehicles for decades and one of their teams did compete in the darpa challenge and lost. And I don't see self-driving vehicles being unimportant now that the wars are fought against civilian combatants. The military is (or should be) desperate for them, they would avoid almost all military deaths that occur now (ied's blowing up humvees transporting things from the greenzone in baghdad for example).

What are the more important stuff that government scientists deal with that academic/industrial scientists are not up to? Don't believe the hype the military-industrial complex sells about itself.

Re: At Google X, a Top-Secret Lab Dreaming Up the Future

#56

Post by marshallp »

nosequel wrote: post #44

One nitpicky-type thing for me in the article is saying that Sebastian Thrun invented the first driverless car. Yes, he was the head of the Standford team who won in 2005, but he was on the CMU team the competition before where Red Whitaker was the team lead. The fact that these teams were quite huge also prevents someone from saying that one person invented the driverless car. Being team lead on a team who wins the…

It's important to put some face to tech/science breakthroughs otherwise the general public doesn't relate. Also, in that vacuum you'll get politicians gaining credit. Kennedy gets a lot for credit the moon landings because their wasn't a clear face to put it to, while in the manhattan project at least oppenheimer gets credit.

Re: At Google X, a Top-Secret Lab Dreaming Up the Future

#57

Post by nosequel »

marshallp wrote: post #55
nosequel wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People at those "special genius places" can't participate in any of the things you mentioned. They get paid for other, much more important jobs. Darpa grand challenge wasn't due to the government not being able to do something, it was due to it being much cheaper to just pay someone to do it for you. In the end, lots of teams competed and only a few got any money out of it, the rest of us ended up just volunteering f…

I don't believe that's true. The military's been trying to develop self driving vehicles for decades and one of their teams did compete in the darpa challenge and lost. And I don't see self-driving vehicles being unimportant now that the wars are fought against civilian combatants. The military is (or should be) desperate for them, they would avoid almost all military deaths that occur now (ied's blowing up humvees t…

No one from the government competed in the Darpa Grand Challenge. It was all private companies or universities. I was there, DARPA sponsored it and oversaw it, that's all. Check the wiki link below and tell me which team listed was from the DoD?

They wanted self-driving cars for military transport into dangerous locations. The first DGC there were only a few competitors and none of us did very well. In 2005 there were quite a few (listed here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DARPA_Grand_Challenge_(2005)) with lots of teams making it through to the desert final stage.

I was part of the military-industrial complex, and yes there is a lot of wasteful B.S. only there to make more things to make more money, but there is stuff there that is not being done at all (or at least not well) outside of the government. Those things are the things that are labelled Secret or Top Secret in most cases. Like all governments, if the US government has an advantage in any little way, it likes to keep it that way.

Re: At Google X, a Top-Secret Lab Dreaming Up the Future

#58

Post by marshallp »

nosequel wrote: post #42
marshallp wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree that dod has the best tech already in "top secret". The best tech is often dod sponsored, but is made public by the university researchers who usually create it. And it's not costly, you can go read it and use it, often the stuff is released as open source software on the researchers' website.

How would you know if it is top secret? Most top secret tech never gets seen outside of the top secret circles. Unless you have a TS/SCI clearance, the best you can do is speculate on what exists now. Obviously not all fields are covered in the government, but things that are very important to them (signal intelligence, networking, logistical management, satellite communication) are all very well ahead of the consume…

I've got doubts about their logistical and abilities, now that they increasingly use private companies to get their stuff around.

Re: At Google X, a Top-Secret Lab Dreaming Up the Future

#59

Post by nosequel »

marshallp wrote: post #51
nosequel wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

NSA gets their money whether you like it or not. They certainly have people in charge who talk to the legislative branch, but they aren't MBA/marketing people. The are usually ex-generals. Other agencies might seek outside contractors, but the NSA is one of the few who do most of their work themselves. I didn't work there, but that was my understanding at the time I worked in other parts of the government.

Doesn't matter about their backgrounds, mba or ex-general, people who rise to executive levels rub shoulders with investors at cocktail parties and deals happen.

Seriously, what are you talking about? What investors? You have proven you don't know what you are talking about in this thread, but I am curious what you think is true? Who are the heads of the NSA meeting with who would be considered investors? The NSA meets with the Armed Services board and the Senate intelligence board, and that's about it. I get it, you think the government is b.s., but groups like the NSA don't seek outside investment.

Re: At Google X, a Top-Secret Lab Dreaming Up the Future

#60

Post by marshallp »

nosequel wrote: post #57
marshallp wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't believe that's true. The military's been trying to develop self driving vehicles for decades and one of their teams did compete in the darpa challenge and lost. And I don't see self-driving vehicles being unimportant now that the wars are fought against civilian combatants. The military is (or should be) desperate for them, they would avoid almost all military deaths that occur now (ied's blowing up humvees t…

No one from the government competed in the Darpa Grand Challenge. It was all private companies or universities. I was there, DARPA sponsored it and oversaw it, that's all. Check the wiki link below and tell me which team listed was from the DoD? They wanted self-driving cars for military transport into dangerous locations. The first DGC there were only a few competitors and none of us did very well. In 2005 there wer…

Wouldn't you consider the mitre entry basically a government entry (it's a non-profit funded by the government).
Post reply on HN