81–90 of 135 posts
Not mentioned here, but in this Techcrunch article, is Ford’s expensive flip-flopping on AV: https://techcrunch.com/2023/03/02/ford-forms-automated-drivi... > Argo AI burst on the scene in 2017 stacked with a $1 billion investment from Ford — and Iater an investment from VW. The startup shuttered suddenly in October 2022 after Ford and VW determined they would no longer pursue AV technology, at least not under the Ar…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Does it follow the car in front's speed on the highway while keeping you in the lane? I would absolutely love a car that could do that well while I still paid attention while listening to podcasts/audiobooks. I haven't tried any newish midtier cars, only been in a friends Tesla which is beyond my needs. These niche applications are 100% what car companies should have focused on from the beginning rather than robotaxi…
My Jetta GLI can do this. ACC is good, if there’s a hard stop it will beep at me to brake, or brake itself hard later. The lane centering worked great in WA (with a tweak to the options to enable stronger centering) and works pretty good in CA (lane lines aren’t always as clear). Basically I only have to give a very light touch on the steering wheel, the car mostly just follows the road. The system overall is not per…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No problem with it on ioniq 5. The equivalent on the Kia was disastrous implementation. The one on Toyota is simple but robust as well
> The one on Toyota is simple but robust as well This sounds like everything Toyota does.
> Latitude AI – a Ford subsidiary – is developing new automated driving technology with an initial focus on a hands-free, eyes-off driver assist system for next-generation Ford vehicles Not that every company should follow Tesla's approach, but I think it would be great if other companies don't get too focused on their production systems being eyes-off, hands-off. I'd much prefer more people having access to these sy…
I'd be happy if they'd just make a drop-in replacement EV for my existing ICE options. I don't need it to be a robot. I just want it to not use gasoline. Unfortunately, manufactures seem to think it has to be all or nothing.
Not mentioned here, but in this Techcrunch article, is Ford’s expensive flip-flopping on AV: https://techcrunch.com/2023/03/02/ford-forms-automated-drivi... > Argo AI burst on the scene in 2017 stacked with a $1 billion investment from Ford — and Iater an investment from VW. The startup shuttered suddenly in October 2022 after Ford and VW determined they would no longer pursue AV technology, at least not under the Ar…
Wait, so they killed the 550 person AV startup they were funding, took 2.7B loss, and 4 months later hired those same 550 people to resume the same work? Something looks seriously wrong here.
So:
1) they get a tax rebate
2) they get a large marginal rebate on their loss
3) they end up with the business anyway, possibly while making a net profit because
4) there are state level incentives for taking on those 550 workers.
They’re just working the corporate welfare system, like all the others.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What's the difference in keeping the same 550 people working under the old name with a $2.7bn cost sunk into it, and just acknowledging the $2.7bn as a loss and moving the 550 people to work under a different name. It's not like the name was a significant part of their product and they'd now have to spend a similar amount to get to a similar stage in their research and development, is it?
Firing them hiring is a long way from free. Then add in the company start up costs and legal fees etc. Maybe I’m the mug, but that seems wasted money. When you are burning billions, the costs listed above seem to be treated as a rounding error.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What's the difference in keeping the same 550 people working under the old name with a $2.7bn cost sunk into it, and just acknowledging the $2.7bn as a loss and moving the 550 people to work under a different name. It's not like the name was a significant part of their product and they'd now have to spend a similar amount to get to a similar stage in their research and development, is it?
Firing them hiring is a long way from free. Then add in the company start up costs and legal fees etc. Maybe I’m the mug, but that seems wasted money. When you are burning billions, the costs listed above seem to be treated as a rounding error.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think he meant buying VW’s stake in Argo AI. Not buying VW itself.
I do kinda love that they interpreted it that way though. I’m picturing some coked out Ford exec screaming at his vp of finance “do we or do we have enough money to buy VW??!”
All of that is reflected in VWs share price. Without all this ‘socialism’ VW could probably easily buy Ford itself, maybe even GM.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe but there's got to be a less expensive way of doing that. Buying VW's stake?
I doubt they can buy VW. The German government has an interest and Porsche most of the rest.
Not mentioned here, but in this Techcrunch article, is Ford’s expensive flip-flopping on AV: https://techcrunch.com/2023/03/02/ford-forms-automated-drivi... > Argo AI burst on the scene in 2017 stacked with a $1 billion investment from Ford — and Iater an investment from VW. The startup shuttered suddenly in October 2022 after Ford and VW determined they would no longer pursue AV technology, at least not under the Ar…
Wait, so they killed the 550 person AV startup they were funding, took 2.7B loss, and 4 months later hired those same 550 people to resume the same work? Something looks seriously wrong here.