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

Predictions Scorecard, 2025 January 01

rodneybrooks.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 190 posts

Re: Predictions Scorecard, 2025 January 01

#181

Post by sashank_1509 »

mortehu wrote: post #121
Denzel wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Analyzing Alphabet’s capital allocation decisions gives you all the evidence necessary. It’s safe to assume that a company’s ownership takes the decisions that they believe will maximize the value of their company. Therefore, we can look at Alphabet’s capital allocation decisions, with respect to Waymo, to see what they think about Waymo’s opportunity. In the past five years, Alphabet has spent >$100B to buyback thei…

To be clear, buying back stock is one of the ways they can invest in Waymo (and other business units). Since Alphabet buybacks mostly just offset employee stock compensation, the main thing they are getting for this money is employees.

I would prefer if they just give employee bonuses rather than this indirect form of compensation

Re: Predictions Scorecard, 2025 January 01

#182

Post by sashank_1509 »

jsnell wrote: post #113
davedx wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a very hand wavy argument. How about starting here: > Mario Herger: Waymo is using around four NVIDIA H100 GPUSs at a unit price of $10,000 per vehicle to cover the necessary computing requirements. The five lidars, 29 cameras, 4 radars – adds another $40,000 - $50,000. This would put the cost of a current Waymo robotaxi at around $150,000 There are definitely some numbers out there that allow us to estimate w…

(That quote doesn't seem credible. It seems quite unlikely that Waymo would use H100s -- for one, they operate cars that predate the H100 release. And H100s sure as hell don't cost just $10k either.) You're not even making a handwavy argument. Sure, it might sound like a lot of money, but in terms of unit profitability it could mean anything at all depending on the other parameters. What really matters is a) how long…

I know for a fact Waymo uses TPU’s not GPU, maybe it is equivalent to 4 H100’s but TPU vs GPU is somewhat apples vs oranges

Re: Predictions Scorecard, 2025 January 01

#183

Post by sashank_1509 »

michaelbuckbee wrote: post #141

One interesting prediction category in the Venn diagram overlaps of Rodney's predictions that is missing is drone deliveries. Where I live (in suburbia Virginia), we now can get items from the local WalMart grocery via DroneUp, which kind of blows mind.

Wow I had no idea progress was being made in this front

Re: Predictions Scorecard, 2025 January 01

#184

Post by mvdtnz »

jdminhbg wrote: post #36
mvdtnz wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No one said scam (although in the case of Tesla it absolutely is). It's just not a solved problem yet.

> It's just not a solved problem yet. Human driving isn't a solved problem either; the difference is that when a human driver needs intervention it just crashes.

Irrelevant.

Re: Predictions Scorecard, 2025 January 01

#185

Post by _yb2s »

xarope wrote: post #74
_yb2s wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the difference is that a helicopter is extremely technical to fly requiring complex and expensive training, and the eVTOL is supposed to be extremely simple to fly. Also the eVTOL in principle is really cheap to make if you just consider the materials and construction costs- probably eventually much cheaper than a car. I was curious so I looked up how much you can buy the cheapest new helicopters for, and the…

But I'm sure running costs (aviation fuel), hanger costs, maintenance costs, cost to maintain pilot license are far more expensive, compared to driving a car.

I'm talking about buying the absolute cheapest possible used experimental helicopter- homemade by a stranger from a cheap kit. I would posit that if I were willing to take that risk- probably buying a model with know design and reliability issues to save money- I'd also just park it in the backyard, skip the maintenance and run it on the cheapest pump gas I can find!

The ones I'm seeing in the 20k range are mostly the "Mini 500." Wikipedia suggests that maybe as few as 100 were built, with 16 fatalities thus far (or is it 9- which it says in a different part of the article?). But some people argue all of those involved "pilot error."

I suppose choosing to fly the absolute cheapest homemade experimental aircraft kit notorious for a high fatality rate is technically a type of pilot error?

Re: Predictions Scorecard, 2025 January 01

#186

Post by VirusNewbie »

davedx wrote: post #106
VirusNewbie wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>believes their money is better spent buying back their stock, Alphabet has to buy back their stock because of the massive amount of stock comp they award.

> Alphabet has to buy back their stock because of the massive amount of stock comp they award. Wait, really? They're a publically traded company; don't they just need to issue new stock (the opposite of buying it back) to employees, who can then choose to sell it in the public market?

They could issue more stock, but Alphabet has decided to keep the number of outstanding shares the same, it's a thing they do for shareholders.

Re: Predictions Scorecard, 2025 January 01

#187

Post by telotortium »

dingnuts wrote: post #170
HenryBemis wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ..is a tiny part of a tiny market in a single nation in the world. Calculator was a small device that was made in one tiny market in one nation in the world. Now we all got a couple of hardware ones in our desk drawers, and a couple software ones on each smartphone. If a driving car can perform 'well' (Your Definition May Vary - YDMV) in NY/Chicago/etc. then it can perform equally 'well' in London, Paris, Berlin, B…

if you had read the F-ing article, which you clearly did not, you would see that you are committing the sin of exponentiation: assuming that all tech advances exponentially because microprocessor development did (for awhile). Development of this technology appears to be logarithmic, not exponential.

He's committing the "sin" of monotonicity, not exponentiation. You could quibble about whether progress is currently exponential, but Waymo has started limited deployments in 2-3 cities in 2024 and wide deployments in at least SF (its second city after Phoenix). I don't think you can reasonably say its progress is logarithmic at this point - maybe linear or quadratic.

Re: Predictions Scorecard, 2025 January 01

#188

Post by stouset »

stavros wrote: post #145
stouset wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. But this is the society we live in now. We don’t live in one where we take care of those whose jobs have been displaced. I wish we did. But we don’t. So it’s hard for me to feel quite as excited these days for the next thing that will make the world worse for so many people, even if it is a technological marvel. Just between trucking and rideshare drivers we’re talking over 10 million people. Maybe this will…

Yeah but it doesn't work to on the one hand campaign for not taking rideshare jobs away from people on an online forum, and on the other say "that's the society we live in now". If you're going to be defeatist, just accept those jobs might go away. If not, campaign for wealth redistribution and social safety nets.

I do?

Re: Predictions Scorecard, 2025 January 01

#189

Post by adgjlsfhk1 »

mgfist wrote: post #132
Teever wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The one thing I'm curious about with solid state batteries is if there's a path towards incremental improvements in power density like we've seen with lithium batteries? It would be unfortunate if we get solid state batteries that have the great features that you describe but they're limited to 2x or so power density. Twice the power density opens a lot of doors for technology improvements and innovation but it's sti…

For aircraft, hydrogen is the better option. Batteries are fine for very short hauls (100 miles). Beyond that hydrogen is quite good.

The big issues with hydrogen are volume and form factor. Hydrogen needs to be cryogenic or high pressure, and either work best with big spheroid-like tanks which don't naturally integrate into the wings where fuel is currently stored.

Re: Predictions Scorecard, 2025 January 01

#190

Post by tsimionescu »

jdminhbg wrote: post #153
tsimionescu wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not about crashes. By all accounts, the Waymo cars are mostly fully self driving, I beleive even the article author agrees with that. This includes crash avoidance, to the extent that they can. The remote operation seems to be more about navigational issues and reading the road conditions. Things like accidentally looping, or not knowing how to proceed with an unexpected obstacle. Things that don't really hap…

Ok, but crashes are much worse than navigational issues or accidentally looping. It’s only status quo bias that makes us think driving is more solved if you get the accidental looping fixed before the crashing.

Only true up to some extent. If a car can't get you anywhere, then crashing is almost irrelevant: you won't use it, because there's nothing to be gained from that. A car looping around in a parking lot is extremely safe, but completely useless.
Post reply on HN