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

GM exits robotaxi market, will bring Cruise operations in house

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

441–450 of 692 posts

Re: GM exits robotaxi market, will bring Cruise operations in house

#441

Post by lucianbr »

Mashimo wrote: post #433
logifail wrote: post #417

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you look at the lifecycle analysis of ICE cars, burning the fuel is the major contributor (Genuine question, not whataboutism...) what about the environmental aspects of manufacturing and distributing a vehicle other than CO2 emissions ? > old and set in their ways I fear I may be approaching this stage myself! :)

EVs have a way higher initial CO2 footprint. The crossover depends on car and where you get the energy from. I think it's often around the 100 000 km mark where an EV gets the smaller footprint. But like I said, many variables factor in.

Is battery manufacturing that bad for the environment? I mean, ICE cars still have wheels, drivetrains, chassis, doors, windows, chairs, electronics, paint and many other things, same as the EVs. The electric motor I can't imagine its worse to produce than a combustion motor. So that leaves batteries as the cause of this huge disparity on day one, that takes 100,000km of fuel consumption to overtake.

Is this with the battery tech of today, december 2024? So for EVs built in 2020 let's say, it was worse? I think there is some advancement in battery making, isn't there?

Re: GM exits robotaxi market, will bring Cruise operations in house

#442

Post by lm28469 »

standardUser wrote: post #19

Waymo needs competition. Who else is even close to being able to provide it? I'd hate to think Tesla is next in line because they haven't even started a commercial pilot program yet.

Didn't Waymo's CEO admit self driving cars were a pipe dream a few years ago ?

Re: GM exits robotaxi market, will bring Cruise operations in house

#443

Post by melodyogonna »

datadrivenangel wrote: post #325
oceanplexian wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tesla has data from 5 million vehicles in real world conditions. What does Waymo have, a few hundred cars in San Francisco and Phoenix? In a field where data matters more than anything else, Tesla has an insane advantage.

And yet waymo appears to be ahead commercially?

Because Tesla is yet to start commercial operations in this area.

Re: GM exits robotaxi market, will bring Cruise operations in house

#444

Post by rcxdude »

Mashimo wrote: post #433
logifail wrote: post #417

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you look at the lifecycle analysis of ICE cars, burning the fuel is the major contributor (Genuine question, not whataboutism...) what about the environmental aspects of manufacturing and distributing a vehicle other than CO2 emissions ? > old and set in their ways I fear I may be approaching this stage myself! :)

EVs have a way higher initial CO2 footprint. The crossover depends on car and where you get the energy from. I think it's often around the 100 000 km mark where an EV gets the smaller footprint. But like I said, many variables factor in.

That seems like an overestimate. A quick search is showing up numbers more in the 15-20,000 km region, and that's comparing a large EV running off of a mostly fossil fuel grid against a much smaller ICE (i.e. quite a conservative estimate).

Re: GM exits robotaxi market, will bring Cruise operations in house

#445

Post by antupis »

friendzis wrote: post #397
antupis wrote: post #363

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yup, there is zero chance that the market is too small. The only issues are whether a company can the technology to work and obtain regulatory approval.

Size of the market is for all practical purposes function of price. The competition to robotaxis is first and foremost humans. The major question is if robotaxi companies can provide the service at the cost of ubers *profitably*.

This has a strong vibe of the past:

"In the early 1980s AT&T asked McKinsey to estimate how many cellular phones would be in use in the world at the turn of the century. The consultancy noted all the problems with the new devices—the handsets were absurdly heavy, the batteries kept running out, the coverage was patchy and the cost per minute was exorbitant—and concluded that the total market would be about 900,000. At the time this persuaded AT&T to pull out of the market, although it changed its mind later. "

Re: GM exits robotaxi market, will bring Cruise operations in house

#446

Post by rcxdude »

thfuran wrote: post #436
Shawnj2 wrote: post #398

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As long as your old cars are like Toyota corolla/camry’s and not like giant gas guzzling SUV’s or trucks keeping them on the road is better than buying a new EV IMO. I think the current EV gen is kind of doomed because of the fact the next EV gen is going to have massive QOL features the current one doesn’t and waiting for a more compelling car is worth doing IMO

>the next EV gen is going to have massive QOL features the current one doesn’t Like what?

I think proper V2H/V2G (vehicle to home/grid) is a big one that is very rare at the moment but is probably making a lot of people who could buy an EV at the moment (i.e. have a garage/driveway in a city) hold off until it's more common, because it makes the economics a lot more attractive.

(In general, because of cratering manufacturing costs, improving tech, and a still low trust for battery health, being an EV early adopter is an expensive option at the moment because even if an early EV is still at 80% functionality compared to new, the resale value is terrible, and I think this plus the lack of charging infrastructure is a big impediment to adoption growing to become dominant in the mainstream)

Re: GM exits robotaxi market, will bring Cruise operations in house

#447

Post by purplethinking »

fldskfjdslkfj wrote: post #429
purplethinking wrote: post #396

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tesla is a distant first. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iYlQjINzO_o https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hoZhER_-nhg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NeNKYRWGgBc

All those are channels that claimed that FSD was great 3+ years ago. Not exactly reliable sources of information.

Omar is a fanboy yes, but AIDRIVR and DirtyTesla have been openly criticizing FSD for years and show all the problems openly, now waxing lyric over the latest version. Omar, while sometimes cherrypicking videos, has reportedly had 1 safety critical intervention in over 1000 miles of driving in SF and LA.

Re: GM exits robotaxi market, will bring Cruise operations in house

#448

Post by 0_____0 »

fldskfjdslkfj wrote: post #429
purplethinking wrote: post #396

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tesla is a distant first. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iYlQjINzO_o https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hoZhER_-nhg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NeNKYRWGgBc

All those are channels that claimed that FSD was great 3+ years ago. Not exactly reliable sources of information.

Having been in a Tesla in FSD mode recently, it felt quite a lot like Waymo's car did about a decade ago. That's a purely subjective opinion taken off the cuff.

Re: GM exits robotaxi market, will bring Cruise operations in house

#449

Post by tialaramex »

Mashimo wrote: post #433
logifail wrote: post #417

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you look at the lifecycle analysis of ICE cars, burning the fuel is the major contributor (Genuine question, not whataboutism...) what about the environmental aspects of manufacturing and distributing a vehicle other than CO2 emissions ? > old and set in their ways I fear I may be approaching this stage myself! :)

EVs have a way higher initial CO2 footprint. The crossover depends on car and where you get the energy from. I think it's often around the 100 000 km mark where an EV gets the smaller footprint. But like I said, many variables factor in.

In particular, grid decarbonisation means that distance to break even moves after the car is manufactured.

If you live somewhere that mostly burns coal to make electricity, your break even is determined based on the higher efficiency of electric motors and of the (energy efficient but filthy) big stack coal generators compared to the relatively clean but inefficient gasoline ICE.

But if they start building wind turbines and solar farms, because those are just cheaper and easier - suddenly that distance shrinks rapidly (maybe half) even though for you as an end user nothing changed, because electricity is fungible so you charge a car from the solar farm just the same as from a coal power plant.

Re: GM exits robotaxi market, will bring Cruise operations in house

#450

Post by ForHackernews »

FabHK wrote: post #370
boshalfoshal wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes there are actual "legal" notions of driver assistance "levels," but out of those 3 companies Tesla seems to be taking it the most seriously. Elon has a high conviction in the product and has continued to pour billions of dollars in GPUs, talent, supply chains, etc to make it happen. Other manufacturers don't take it nearly as seriously, unfortunately. Sure you might not be able to legally claim that a Tesla is to…

> of those 3 companies Tesla seems to be taking it the most seriously. You call lying about it endlessly, misleading marketing, beta-testing on public roads, and not even having L3 properly in production "taking it the most seriously"?

Yes: Only Tesla is willing to sacrifice human lives today for the dream of robo-driving in the future.
Post reply on HN