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

Loon’s final flight

blog.x.company

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 264 posts

Re: Loon’s final flight

#121

Post by asutekku »

scotcha1 wrote: post #59
gonehome wrote: post #3

I’m going to say I called this one at least 8 months ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23419270 Loon is not competitive in a world with Starlink (even without Starlink it seems). The business didn’t make strategic sense. I still really liked their original goal of loon for all and the first video they made for it: https://youtu.be/m96tYpEk1Ao It’s a little sad they had to downsize and give up. I guess Licklid…

Wouldn't this be considered 'strategic' to Google b/c it had the potential to provide additional eyeballs & ad revenue to users outside of their normal markets (US/EU)?

Users who don’t spend are almost worthless to the advertisers. So google most likely will not receive any meaningful amount of money from countries with data coverage but without the customer base willing to pay for products advertised.

Re: Loon’s final flight

#122

Post by jessriedel »

gonehome wrote: post #3

I’m going to say I called this one at least 8 months ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23419270 Loon is not competitive in a world with Starlink (even without Starlink it seems). The business didn’t make strategic sense. I still really liked their original goal of loon for all and the first video they made for it: https://youtu.be/m96tYpEk1Ao It’s a little sad they had to downsize and give up. I guess Licklid…

Loon can (could) handle normal LTE mobile phones. Starlink requires a phased array antenna the size of a pizza box which, to my understanding, cannot be fully miniaturized. That's not to say they aren't somewhat competing against each other, but Starlink doesn't strictly dominate as you imply.

Re: Loon’s final flight

#124

Post by throwawayzRUU6f »

rorykoehler wrote: post #86
refulgentis wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

_The_ moonshot, Waymo. People are sleeping on that you can hop in a perfectly safe robotaxi today, the ride along videos are stunning.

I don’t understand people saying full self driving is decades away. We have it always albeit in a very restricted geo fence.

Barring some radical breakthrough, progress usually follow an asymptote. Waymo has reached their asymptote after perfecting their autonomous driving for over 10 years, and is still not confident enough to launch it even in their spherical-cow geofence.

The real world is full of edge cases - cameras fogging up, proximity sensors confused by ice buildup, thick fog limiting visibility, sun low on the horizon blinding the cameras, badly marked construction sites, black ice, line markers under snow, potholes, slush, contradictory traffic signs, deep puddles, worn out ruts, suicidal wildlife, road debris, etc. etc.

Re: Loon’s final flight

#125

Post by gonehome »

jessriedel wrote: post #122
gonehome wrote: post #3

I’m going to say I called this one at least 8 months ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23419270 Loon is not competitive in a world with Starlink (even without Starlink it seems). The business didn’t make strategic sense. I still really liked their original goal of loon for all and the first video they made for it: https://youtu.be/m96tYpEk1Ao It’s a little sad they had to downsize and give up. I guess Licklid…

Loon can (could) handle normal LTE mobile phones. Starlink requires a phased array antenna the size of a pizza box which, to my understanding, cannot be fully miniaturized. That's not to say they aren't somewhat competing against each other, but Starlink doesn't strictly dominate as you imply.

I honestly think SpaceX could give those away in developing areas if they had to.

But yes, you’re right that being able to use LTE and existing phone radios was a point in loon’s favor.

Re: Loon’s final flight

#126

Post by Judgmentality »

aetherson wrote: post #80
solarkraft wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe they are, but their service is super constrained and retains human supervision - just remote controlled.

The actual thing that self driving cars get you is "not paying for a taxi driver." If one remote operator can supervise 10 mostly autonomous vehicles, you've gotten 90% of the economic value of full autonomy.

This ignores the cost of sending data wirelessly over cellular networks so remote operators can see the vehicle, the cost of maintaining the software and hardware on the vehicle itself, the cost of maintaining the vehicle fleet, the cost of creating and operating a consumer-facing support system (!!! for Google), the cost of dealing with the enormous amounts of data those vehicles create (even for Google this is not trivial), the cost of maintaining the special HD maps necessary for the vehicles, not to mention the sunk cost of billions spent developing it.

That's not to say you shouldn't dream big (it's a moonshot after all). But there are plenty of reasons to think it won't be viable even if they can solve the technical challenges, and that much still isn't even clear yet.

Re: Loon’s final flight

#127

Post by dr_dshiv »

antupis wrote: post #30
ogre_codes wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the days of Google Moonshots are coming to a close. In general Google hasn't been very good at shooting for the moon. They've lost their leadership and vision and all that's left is a giant advertising behemoth. Did any of their moonshots really hit the mark or even come close?

Brain is doing great and Waymo probably at least hits close.

Wing?

Re: Loon’s final flight

#128

Post by xyzzyz »

scottLobster wrote: post #94
stickfigure wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The internet says: "The Apollo program's total cost was about $25.4 billion, about $152 billion in today's dollars." That's about Google's entire revenue for 2020. I don't think even Google could put a man on the moon at those rates. Literal moonshots are expensive.

That's the total cost over the decade+ the program was in existence. Divide by 10 and it becomes roughly 10% of Google's revenue. So it wouldn't be insubstantial, but they could fund a similar effort if they really wanted to. Shareholders would have a thing or two to say about that though, which is why Elon Musk is keeping SpaceX private.

Sending 2nd rocket to the moon was much cheaper than the first one, so you can’t just divide by 10.

Re: Loon’s final flight

#129

Post by sixti60 »

Sorry to be this guy, but I am quite happy this will not happen.

The sky - our sky - is not a playground for tech companies.

Imposing a mesh-grid of thousands of balloons in the sky is an incredible intrusion for people around the world who have not asked for anything.

It's the same for mega constellations of satellites (Starlink).

Would you be willing to have a company come and put unsolicited electronic equipment in your backyard? Probably not. It's the same for our sky - I don't want that Facebook or Google impose thousands of electronic devices in our sky. Or maybe ask "the owner" before you start, i.e. the citizens of the world.

What's more beautiful than watching stars in the sky in a July/August warm night?

Do you really want to lose this landscape forever and have 100 times more satellites than we already have? and have series of white dots one behind the other?

OK, companies and states have done it the past, but it's not a valid argument to justify the acceleration with a factor 10 or 100 of this process with thousands of Starlink satellites for example.

Re: Loon’s final flight

#130

Post by [deleted] »

ogre_codes wrote: post #48
Mistri wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Waymo seems like it's nearing its final stages. I have high hopes!

I think it's generous to say it's in its final stages. They haven't even left Phoenix have they? And even in Phoenix, it's still largely a beta project in a few predefined areas. It certainly seems like Google's most likely moon shot to take off. But considering only a few thousand people have used it, it's not exactly a big success.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN