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

Google's Driverless Car Is Worth Trillions

forbes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 204 posts

Re: Google's Driverless Car Is Worth Trillions

#31

Post by jmspring »

vecinu wrote: post #22
jmspring wrote: post #17

The next several years should prove "interesting" for the car market. Driverless cars and assorted state DOT departments pushing for black boxes in cars on the basis of tracking milage are both going to see pushback from the general public. I've bought two new cars (and 1 used) in the last 15 years. The oldest lasted 11 years and 256000 miles. The used was a truck when I bought my house. The newest is a diesel wagon…

The above is in addition to the "independence" baked into the American culture about the open road and the automobile. Do you think there is something inherently wrong with the feeling of independence and happiness attained from the car culture in the US? I am still dubious that self-driving and non-self-driving cars will be able to share a road in the future. If this doesn't happen, I doubt Americans will freely giv…

"Do you think there is something inherently wrong with the feeling of independence and happiness attained from the car culture in the US?"

Not at all. Note, I had a car that in 12 years, I put 256000 miles on, while I had a second vehicle during that time that had many miles put on it as well. I personally love road trips. One area where modern vehicles (hybrids and eventually self-driving) have no place (for now) is off roaring. Every year or two, I do road trips that include up to (and sometimes exceeding) 1000 miles off road -- not just dirt, but jeep trails, high clearance, having one person act as a spotter kind of stuff.

Where my comment was directed is that all the technology in the world isn't going to do away with the car culture you point out anytime soon (probably not in my lifetime).

Re: Google's Driverless Car Is Worth Trillions

#32

Post by sliverstorm »

vecinu wrote: post #22
jmspring wrote: post #17

The next several years should prove "interesting" for the car market. Driverless cars and assorted state DOT departments pushing for black boxes in cars on the basis of tracking milage are both going to see pushback from the general public. I've bought two new cars (and 1 used) in the last 15 years. The oldest lasted 11 years and 256000 miles. The used was a truck when I bought my house. The newest is a diesel wagon…

The above is in addition to the "independence" baked into the American culture about the open road and the automobile. Do you think there is something inherently wrong with the feeling of independence and happiness attained from the car culture in the US? I am still dubious that self-driving and non-self-driving cars will be able to share a road in the future. If this doesn't happen, I doubt Americans will freely giv…

I am still dubious that self-driving and non-self-driving cars will be able to share a road in the future

How exactly do you figure? You don't think regular drivers can handle a road with computer cars? Or you don't think computer cars can handle a road with people?

Re: Google's Driverless Car Is Worth Trillions

#33

Post by spc476 »

Hmm, no mention of the disruptions in employment due to driverless cars. There go taxi drivers, bus drivers and a big segment---truck drivers, so I would expect a large push back from the various unions (I'm extrapolating from _The Box_, a history of container shipping).

Re: Google's Driverless Car Is Worth Trillions

#34

Post by warfangle »

vecinu wrote: post #22
jmspring wrote: post #17

The next several years should prove "interesting" for the car market. Driverless cars and assorted state DOT departments pushing for black boxes in cars on the basis of tracking milage are both going to see pushback from the general public. I've bought two new cars (and 1 used) in the last 15 years. The oldest lasted 11 years and 256000 miles. The used was a truck when I bought my house. The newest is a diesel wagon…

The above is in addition to the "independence" baked into the American culture about the open road and the automobile. Do you think there is something inherently wrong with the feeling of independence and happiness attained from the car culture in the US? I am still dubious that self-driving and non-self-driving cars will be able to share a road in the future. If this doesn't happen, I doubt Americans will freely giv…

Not the parent, but I do think there is something inherently wrong about it.

I grew up around cars, driving cars (heck, my college job was the stereotypical pizza delivery guy). I live in a metropolitan area where I can go just about anywhere I need to with the swipe of a card and waiting a few minutes on a train platform. The feeling of independence that I didn't need to worry about the CV boots on my axles screwing up and costing me hundreds in a replacement axle. The feeling of independence that I'm not contributing significantly to pollution. The feeling of independence that _getting out and walking somewhere_ gives me. The feeling of independence that I get to read a book on my commute instead of staring at the ass-end of an SUV jettisoning metric tons of fumes while in stop-and-go-traffic.

Do I wish I had a car for getting out of the city and into the countryside sometimes? Well, sure.

That's what zipcar is for.

I _do_ admit that the feeling of driving is exhilarating. Pushing the pedal down, feeling the engine rev, connecting with the road through the tires.

For the majority of uses, I can see driverless cars completely taking over. And for those who want to drive endless country roads? Well, driverless cars will probably be built to drive with the expectation that every other car on the road is being driven by a drunken teenager on a methamphetamine binge. For liability purposes.

And in certain parts of the country, you can still see horse-drawn carriages clopping along the shoulder.

So you'll [the quintessential driver, who just wants to drive because of some ass-backwards ideal of freedom which is actually more crippling than freeing] will be just fine.

If not? Well, we have four-wheeler specific mudding "roads" out there right now, don't we? I could see the blue ridge parkway, for example, being a driver-only road (it is incredibly fun to drive).

Re: Google's Driverless Car Is Worth Trillions

#35

Post by millstone »

coopdog wrote: post #15
moocow01 wrote: post #4

The market is worth trillions... not Google's solution. One thing tech reporters seem to have failed at recognizing is that this research has been taking place at every major car company out there - many many others are legitimately in the race. Ultimately its the manufacturers that get to pull the trigger on how driverless cars will become driverless.

Still, I can't help but feel that maybe Google have the final piece of the puzzle. We've had computers and sensors powerful enough for decades, only Google have all of that maps data, polished again and again by android users using maps (and now Ingress) to make it more reliable. Google almost specialise at crunching massive data into useful products, and building reliable supersystems from millions of unreliable sub…

Can you elaborate on how you think that map data is important? I would expect that mapping data at best gives you a route - something the user could supply. Naively, I would think that the hard problems are responding to obstacles in the road, cross walks, stop lights, etc., where map data won't help much.

Re: Google's Driverless Car Is Worth Trillions

#36

Post by [deleted] »

moocow01 wrote: post #4

The market is worth trillions... not Google's solution. One thing tech reporters seem to have failed at recognizing is that this research has been taking place at every major car company out there - many many others are legitimately in the race. Ultimately its the manufacturers that get to pull the trigger on how driverless cars will become driverless.

[deleted]

Re: Google's Driverless Car Is Worth Trillions

#37

Post by logn »

jlgreco wrote: post #27
wololo wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand. Why license it out? Isn't this like the iPhone?

All those other car companies? They are the ones with the brands and the cars people want. They are the iphones in this situation. Sure, if you're pushing a new powertrain you can do okay making one or two of your own cars (which will take years ) and you can shortcut the time to build up a brandname to a degree by being exclusive, but none of that effort is warranted because this technology does not require that sor…

Google has loads of money. They can buy a car company. Tesla has a $4B market cap. Or they could invest significantly in a car company. Or they can strike exclusive agreements.

Re: Google's Driverless Car Is Worth Trillions

#38

Post by mtgx »

moocow01 wrote: post #4

The market is worth trillions... not Google's solution. One thing tech reporters seem to have failed at recognizing is that this research has been taking place at every major car company out there - many many others are legitimately in the race. Ultimately its the manufacturers that get to pull the trigger on how driverless cars will become driverless.

There are other companies, but I think I've mostly seen this kind of tech from small companies and start-ups, rather than big auto-makers. Sure most of them have been working on "automization" of the car, but only for certain specific technologies, not "self-driving car" technologies.

The best Audi could show at CES was self-parking, and even that needed infrastructure put in place in the parking lot for it to work, so it's not even in the same class as Google's self-driving tech.

Also as others have said, Google might have the most accurate data in the future for such technology, which means cars using Google's self-driving tech will be the safest out there.

Re: Google's Driverless Car Is Worth Trillions

#39

Post by rsingel »

autarch wrote: post #12

I think the implications are huge, but I question the 90% reduction in cars figure. While it's true that most people don't drive their car most of the time, when they do drive, most of them are driving within a relatively small time window. I could imagine a 25-50% reduction in the number of cars, but I just don't see 90% happening unless it's accompanied by a huge increase in people working from home or working non-…

While I agree car culture is powerful, I've been persuaded that it'll be over 50% faster than you think. The cost saving of not owning a car will become apparent quickly. Cars that can be much smaller (since you no longer buy/rent a car for the biggest task you have a year), carpooling gets MUCH simpler.

It's going to reshape cities and entire industries. We'll get most of the best of cars (flexible mobility and independence) and get rid of most of the worst of them (cost, insurance, waste of public space, car-centric architecture, deaths, drunk driving, etc.).

I cannot wait.

Re: Google's Driverless Car Is Worth Trillions

#40

Post by mtgx »

millstone wrote: post #35
coopdog wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Still, I can't help but feel that maybe Google have the final piece of the puzzle. We've had computers and sensors powerful enough for decades, only Google have all of that maps data, polished again and again by android users using maps (and now Ingress) to make it more reliable. Google almost specialise at crunching massive data into useful products, and building reliable supersystems from millions of unreliable sub…

Can you elaborate on how you think that map data is important? I would expect that mapping data at best gives you a route - something the user could supply. Naively, I would think that the hard problems are responding to obstacles in the road, cross walks, stop lights, etc., where map data won't help much.

Even Google's own data isn't perfect. A couple of years ago someone even tried to sue Google for "getting her on a highway" and then having an accident. I think she was walking, and obviously she can't blame Google for not noticing the highway!

But with self-driving cars, it's different. A car landing on a highway, when it's not supposed to be there, and then getting into an accident, is not good news. So that's why I think accurate map data will be very important for this.

Post reply on HN