All the replies are missing an important point: It is
not the same work
They were trying to solve L4/L5 using an all out approach that wasn't aiming to scale for personal ownership (yet, actually in the Argo shutdown letter, Ford essentially states they were shut down for not having a path to personal ownership in a workable timeline)
They're now aiming to solve L3 primarily for personal vehicles.
To reform it in computing terms they're going from a "vertical scaling" approach to "horizontally scaling" approach
-
This is like Cruise vs GM's awkwardly named "Super Cruise":
Cruise exist outside of GM and is trying to solve L4/L5 by leveraging resources that won't scale to individual ownership for a long time
"Super Cruise" is an L2 product already in vehicles you can buy today.
"Ultra Cruise" builds on that product in newer GM vehicles, expanding where it works.
After that you'll expect some basic L3 functionality like Mercedes' new Drive Pilot
-
There's honestly some interesting subtext to this. When Argo launched, it's almost certain Ford wanted that tech to go into their vehicles at some point.
But organizationally, having Argo let them "hire" people who would not work at Ford due to their stuffy corporate nature. It also let them work on a more exciting problem than "enhanced cruise control".
I talked with engineers on BlueCruise (the in house L2 product) and it seems Ford is slowly getting better about being able to compartmentalize and shield innovation from the general malaise of traditional auto manufacturing culture
Latitude.Ai sounds like Ford having found a way to tie a quick moving business unit to themselves and hopefully not scare everyone off