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

GM self-driving tech unit Cruise laying off about 8% of staff

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 296 posts

Re: GM self-driving tech unit Cruise laying off about 8% of staff

#91

Post by kylec »

djsumdog wrote: post #86

It's still keeping the self-driving unit thought, even though there's a good chance it won't ever be successful. I don't think self-driving cars are realistic at all. I bet if you did a study and ran the numbers, it would be cheaper to put down rail on existing roads and make them rail-car only, automate those and subsidize rail cars. I feel in the minority in thinking self driving tech will ever be viable. I've work…

I think we're very far away from general-purpose self-driving that can drive in all locations, conditions, and handle all scenarios. But we don't necessarily need an all-or-nothing solution - I think we could be reasonably close to a self-driving system that can handle a whitelisted set of roads and highways, especially if those roads were augmented to accommodate that self-driving in some way.

Re: GM self-driving tech unit Cruise laying off about 8% of staff

#92

Post by dv_dt »

rtkwe wrote: post #84
nabla9 wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Almost 40 percent of those in households making less than $40,000 a year had lost a job in March. Tech sector has had it easy so far.

It's going to be a bit weird because a lot of those should come back because the underlying business didn't suddenly become nonviable.

Looking at past economic studies, there is a long run hysteresis effect after depressions and while the jobs should come back it may be on a time frame of a decade or longer.

Re: GM self-driving tech unit Cruise laying off about 8% of staff

#93

Post by Ididntdothis »

zelly wrote: post #39

Remember (approx. 6 months ago) when we were seriously, unironically worried that all menial labor jobs would be taken by AI? Now we're worried about all the AI jobs disappearing.

I would think that even at an AI company only a very small minority actually do AI.

Re: GM self-driving tech unit Cruise laying off about 8% of staff

#94

Post by kevindong »

djsumdog wrote: post #86

It's still keeping the self-driving unit thought, even though there's a good chance it won't ever be successful. I don't think self-driving cars are realistic at all. I bet if you did a study and ran the numbers, it would be cheaper to put down rail on existing roads and make them rail-car only, automate those and subsidize rail cars. I feel in the minority in thinking self driving tech will ever be viable. I've work…

Self driving cars don't have to truly autonomous to be genuinely useful.

Just level 3 or 4 autonomous vehicles would probably be good enough to be worth buying.

Re: GM self-driving tech unit Cruise laying off about 8% of staff

#95

Post by puranjay »

rtkwe wrote: post #84
nabla9 wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Almost 40 percent of those in households making less than $40,000 a year had lost a job in March. Tech sector has had it easy so far.

It's going to be a bit weird because a lot of those should come back because the underlying business didn't suddenly become nonviable.

I doubt the consumer confidence will be the same. Not to mention that some people will be staying at home much longer.

Re: GM self-driving tech unit Cruise laying off about 8% of staff

#96

Post by Ididntdothis »

FreedomToCreate wrote: post #26

Just a note, but this is a perfect time for companies to lay off low performers without getting a lot of flak. This is usually the case when you see companies lay off people while continuing to hire as well.

"lay off low performers "

From layoffs I saw as a contractor, layoffs of this size are often not based on individual performance. Usually it's whole departments or functions that get laid off. If you have a good network you may be able to jump somewhere else.

Re: GM self-driving tech unit Cruise laying off about 8% of staff

#97

Post by asdff »

rtkwe wrote: post #84
nabla9 wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Almost 40 percent of those in households making less than $40,000 a year had lost a job in March. Tech sector has had it easy so far.

It's going to be a bit weird because a lot of those should come back because the underlying business didn't suddenly become nonviable.

The demand is there, say for food, but the capital has evaporated and the restaurant no longer exists. To start a new one you would need investors to pay for up front costs, labor, food, and commercial rent, and who is feeling bullish enough to start a business notorious for it's razor thin margins at the start of a recession?

Re: GM self-driving tech unit Cruise laying off about 8% of staff

#98

Post by DethNinja »

djsumdog wrote: post #86

It's still keeping the self-driving unit thought, even though there's a good chance it won't ever be successful. I don't think self-driving cars are realistic at all. I bet if you did a study and ran the numbers, it would be cheaper to put down rail on existing roads and make them rail-car only, automate those and subsidize rail cars. I feel in the minority in thinking self driving tech will ever be viable. I've work…

In my opinion self driving cars far exceed the capabilities of current ML algorithms. I mean I guess you can spend couple of billions and implement some sort of expert system on top of that but it won’t be as simple as just training the ML algorithm.

Much better approach would be using ML as a safety sensor helper and let people drive the cars instead. For example, ML algorithm can detect if a pedestrian is on the road even on low vision conditions and might warn the driver, or check if there a car is acting weirdly on the road and warn the driver to be aware.

I think there is a catch 22 situation going on with self-driving cars. By the time we get to self driving cars at human level, we will already have cybernetic beings at human intelligence level and that will change the entire industries and the society itself, which might actually decrease the profits expected by self-driving car companies.

Re: GM self-driving tech unit Cruise laying off about 8% of staff

#99

Post by mikepurvis »

kylec wrote: post #91
djsumdog wrote: post #86

It's still keeping the self-driving unit thought, even though there's a good chance it won't ever be successful. I don't think self-driving cars are realistic at all. I bet if you did a study and ran the numbers, it would be cheaper to put down rail on existing roads and make them rail-car only, automate those and subsidize rail cars. I feel in the minority in thinking self driving tech will ever be viable. I've work…

I think we're very far away from general-purpose self-driving that can drive in all locations, conditions, and handle all scenarios. But we don't necessarily need an all-or-nothing solution - I think we could be reasonably close to a self-driving system that can handle a whitelisted set of roads and highways, especially if those roads were augmented to accommodate that self-driving in some way.

Yeah, I've always understood that to be the big initial play— get all those long-haul trucking miles autonomous, relegate human drivers to handling the in-city miles and cargo yards. I think Ottomotto (remember them?) might have even made a video years ago which pitched this exact scheme.

Of course, the environmentalist in me is saddened by the thought of further driving down the cost of that shipping mode which might be most compatible with being switched to rail freight.

Re: GM self-driving tech unit Cruise laying off about 8% of staff

#100

Post by notyourday »

nabla9 wrote: post #73
zelly wrote: post #39

Remember (approx. 6 months ago) when we were seriously, unironically worried that all menial labor jobs would be taken by AI? Now we're worried about all the AI jobs disappearing.

Almost 40 percent of those in households making less than $40,000 a year had lost a job in March. Tech sector has had it easy so far.

Tech sector had it easy because it is still early and exec suite is desperately clinging to a belief this will be a V recovery rather than a slow and painful crawl down followed by the same kind of slow and painful crawl up.
Post reply on HN