The bombshell is that Google uses SVN.
The Uber Bombshell About to Drop
171–180 of 542 posts
Re: The Uber Bombshell About to Drop
#172Yeah, this is a big deal. Uber has gambled everything on self-driving cars, what with their absurd burn rate and all. If that gets shut down because of trade secret injunctions, I don't think they have time to pivot to another strategy, especially after their reputation has nosedived.
I'm honestly amazed that anybody bought "pivot to self-driving cars" as a strategy. Even if it did work and they built perfect working autonomous vehicle software, right now, legitimately, what's the next step? Were they going to buy and operate a fleet? Have random people sign up to rent their unused cars out as taxis?
Re: The Uber Bombshell About to Drop
#173Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am reminded of an HN comment from 206 days ago that seemed prescient, even then: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12315888 This is from the big Bloomberg article/interview that came out today: 'Kalanick began courting Levandowski this spring, broaching the possibility of an acquisition during a series of 10-mile night walks from the Soma neighborhood where Uber is also headquartered to the Golden Gate Bridge. T…
Here's another comment from an HN discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12558078 "Otto was designed to be sold to Uber before it was created, there's a reason it was self-funded despite having nearly 100 employees by the time it was acquired. Anthony Levandowski met Travis Kalanick years ago and had been planning something like this for a while. It's basically an open secret."
What is the illegal part of this? This happens all the time in the Valley. Did they actually steal source code?
Re: The Uber Bombshell About to Drop
#174Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's 41% of the driver's cut of the ride (So closer to 12% of the trip cost).
That is also not correct. Uber's cut of the ride (which is a bit under 20% of the fare) is covering 41% of their total corporate expenses (which are not the costs of delivering rides).
So, they are losing 12%/ride, but some of these costs will scale with the number of rides, and some will not.
Re: The Uber Bombshell About to Drop
#175I actually think this might be a blessing in disguise for Uber. I always argued self-driving cars would destroy Uber should Apple or Google want to enter this space. Why? Because self-driving cars are basically a fleet service driven by a software. Once you remove the driver (where Uber spent so much acquiring) The only differentiator is the consumer facing experience. Neither Uber or Lyft will have as much power as…
Uber's drivers aren't really fans of them though, nor are they loyal to a single company. Uber could disappear tomorrow and all its drivers would be fine on Lyft.
Re: The Uber Bombshell About to Drop
#176Yeah, this is a big deal. Uber has gambled everything on self-driving cars, what with their absurd burn rate and all. If that gets shut down because of trade secret injunctions, I don't think they have time to pivot to another strategy, especially after their reputation has nosedived.
I'm honestly amazed that anybody bought "pivot to self-driving cars" as a strategy. Even if it did work and they built perfect working autonomous vehicle software, right now, legitimately, what's the next step? Were they going to buy and operate a fleet? Have random people sign up to rent their unused cars out as taxis?
Yes, and then these "private contractors" who own the car and buy the self-driving hardware box from Uber take all the risk.
Re: The Uber Bombshell About to Drop
#177Earlier quoted context omitted.
They're not. Every major car company plus competitors are focusing on self-driving cars. Why pay a human what a machine can do for cheaper? Uber's future depends on being first with self driving cars. Being a good taxi company in the 21st century will mean good at self-driving cars.
If self-driving cars become the norm, if you can just buy one at will, Uber's business model is junked.
I disagree. Uber's transportation-as-a-service model is likely to be far more cost effective when applied to self driving cars than car ownership is. Self driving cars will initially be quite expensive, making outright buying one cost-prohibitive. By the time costs come down transportation-as-a-service will have taken over the industry, and few people will have any particular desire to own their own car anymore.
Not to mention that transportation-as-a-service would also be a lot more convenient than car ownership. No need to refuel, repair, or otherwise maintain your vehicle; just grab whichever one happens to be nearby. You can have as many or as few cars as you need at any particular moment, and get a car of any model or paint color you want at the push of a button.
Re: The Uber Bombshell About to Drop
#178Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even at the time, knowing none of the characters or background I found Otto a very odd startup, one I almost didn't believe looked legit, and their rapid acquisition by Uber was one more "huh, strange" moment - how could they have bootstrapped out of nowhere and had tech worth that kind of money so fast? It's almost hard to believe Uber would be so brazen as to put something like this together, except that breaking t…
> except that breaking the law has been Uber's business model since day 1. So tired of hearing this. It's just parrots talking in the echo chamber. Show me a court verdict that Uber broke the law.
"Uber, suspension is definitive: service forbidden across all of Italy"
http://mobile.ilsole24ore.com/solemobile/main/art/tecnologie...
This is about UberPOP.
Re: The Uber Bombshell About to Drop
#179Earlier quoted context omitted.
It was a stupid moonshot play. They should have just focused on being a really good taxi company.
I disagree. They were in a prime position to be "the" self driving car company, if anyone was. Instead, hyper aggressive business tactics (which were largely unwarranted) has backfired.
Prime candidates for sure but I don't know about prime position as they clearly had a lot of ground to make up on the tech. I agree with you on the hyper-aggressive business tactics, I bet there was an Aha! moment where they were like..wait, what if we get rid of the drivers?!
Re: The Uber Bombshell About to Drop
#180Earlier quoted context omitted.
Their "taxi" business model was completely unsustainable. A moonshot was/is the only thing that'd save them. That's why they did this (the self-driving part we know for sure, and the alleged stuff, if proven).
Taxi services are a centuries-old profitable business model (London had first laws regulating "taxis" in the 1600s). Dispatch via app is a solid improvement over the old phonecalls or street pickup, automatic credit card billing is an improvement over cash, and in cities with shady taxi drivers, GPS tracking is an improvement over potentially hacked taxi meters. So there is an obviously valuable business model for "t…
Exactly and not to mention, people aren't the only thing that needs to be taxied around.