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

Hyundai to acquire Boston Dynamics

therobotreport.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 257 posts

Re: Hyundai to acquire Boston Dynamics

#91

Post by qchris »

souprock wrote: post #54
nwsm wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What reason would there be to disallow it?

ITAR or even classified The robots are practically weapons. Imagine the 4-legged one chasing you down like a large cat could, then pouncing on you. Imagine the 2-legged one with armor, relentlessly stalking you like Terminator.

In my (somewhat limited) experience, I'd be surprised is Boston Dynamics robots are, wholesale, on the list of export control. ITAR classification isn't usually an arbitrary designation, there's typically some aspect in particular that falls under the designation. For example, non-binary source code in the robots could have the potential for export control, but almost certainly not the physical robot itself.

As an example of this, many autonomous underwater vehicles (AUVs) are subject to export control laws. This isn't just because they can be used in an explicitly military manner (one of the most common uses is minesweeping), but because the Inertial Navigation System they use while submerged has enough sensitivity to be export controlled, since that tech can be adapted to be used in missiles. So it's not the robot that's export controlled, but the INS system inside the robot. If you took that out, most of them could be sold wherever. I believe the same thing goes for a lot of satellite technology that's export controlled.

The robots Boston Dynamics build seem to be solving a different problem, the (very hard) one of physical adaptive control in real-world environments, but imho what I've seen doesn't line up with what often seems to the reasoning for assigning an export control label, whether ITAR, EAR, or even CUI, to most of the technology.

Re: Hyundai to acquire Boston Dynamics

#92

Post by vaughnegut »

souprock wrote: post #54
nwsm wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What reason would there be to disallow it?

ITAR or even classified The robots are practically weapons. Imagine the 4-legged one chasing you down like a large cat could, then pouncing on you. Imagine the 2-legged one with armor, relentlessly stalking you like Terminator.

I'm not sure if this is what you're alluding to, but that's literally the plot to an episode of Black Mirror. The robots are even clearly inspired by Boston Dyanmics

Re: Hyundai to acquire Boston Dynamics

#93

Post by ogre_codes »

souprock wrote: post #54
nwsm wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What reason would there be to disallow it?

ITAR or even classified The robots are practically weapons. Imagine the 4-legged one chasing you down like a large cat could, then pouncing on you. Imagine the 2-legged one with armor, relentlessly stalking you like Terminator.

I'm far more worried about kamikaze drones with machine guns than I am about robot dogs. You can crank out 100 cheap and deadly flying drones for the cost of the smallest robot dog. The dog might be tougher, but it's much slower and easier to stop.

I imagine in the not-so-near future there will be fleets of mini drones seeking out soft targets.

Re: Hyundai to acquire Boston Dynamics

#94

Post by blackrock »

mandelbrotwurst wrote: post #27
Darmody wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We spend way more in software (also online services) than in hardware.

Do cars count as hardware? People spend a lot on those.

Maybe someone should make a company to turn cars to vehicle-as-a-service? VAAS

The first company to do this will own the market.

I think Tesla was trying to achieve this.

Re: Hyundai to acquire Boston Dynamics

#95

Post by T-A »

jamestimmins wrote: post #71
snemvalts wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Robots are the goal for Tesla - no labor laws needed for them (probably not for people that build them as well)! All jokes aside, Hyundai can probably do much more with Boston Dynamics than Tesla. Tesla has already failed to automate, using the exact same method as Ford in the 80s. Doubt that throwing more advanced tech at it solves a fundamental logistics problem.

Do you know if Tesla's challenges have been written up anywhere? I'm very curious what they tried and failed to automate.

The reference to Ford is reminiscent of this:

https://arstechnica.com/cars/2018/04/experts-say-tesla-has-r...

It's quoted, along with a bunch of other articles from 2018, here:

https://www.iqsdirectory.com/resources/teslas-big-problem-ex...

Re: Hyundai to acquire Boston Dynamics

#98

Post by 317070 »

forgotmysn wrote: post #64
317070 wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Word has it Marc Raibert is not the easiest person to work with as an acquiring company, in a sense that he will keep control of the company, and do whatever he wants with it. Good for him, I think.

Marc is no longer CEO

No, but will that stop him? Or will that allow acquiring companies to start asserting some control? Or will Boston Dynamics yet again use the US military as a counterbalancing force to do what they want?

The main point is that profitability is probably not the issue why BD is switching owners so often. Some of these owners did not need the cashflow from the sale in the first place.

Re: Hyundai to acquire Boston Dynamics

#99

Post by blackrock »

mywittyname wrote: post #59
jayd16 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its about the margin though isn't it? They cost a lot to buy but they also cost a lot to make. How much value can Apple and Microsoft extract from you over the lifetime of a single car.

> How much value can Apple and Microsoft extract from you over the lifetime of a single car. Probably less than Toyota has extracted from me in my lifetime already. Cars are lower margin, but they are expensive in absolute dollars, and their purchase almost always involves leverage. A $35,000 car will typically earn the manufacture $3-7k in direct profits, the financing arm gets ~$1800, the dealership gets ~$600 (plu…

Cars are a consumable product. They only last about 10 years. Before you get bored of it and buy a new one. Or before it breaks down so often, that you must buy a new car.

Software, like Microsoft Office, is also consumable, in the sense that your computer burns out, or Microsoft makes its operating system end-of-life after 5 years. This forces you to buy a new license.

So if Toyota makes $3,000 in profit per car. And you replace your car in 10 years, then this is $300/year. Or about $25/month in profits to Toyota.

If it’s $7,000, then the monthly profits goes up to $58/month for Toyota.

So it’s the equivalent to a Netflix or Cable TV subscription for Toyota. But with the entrenched benefit that being a car manufacturer is big business, and there aren’t that many players in it.

What Toyota did was to make perfect, their vehicles, that they have such a loyal following. That their customers go back to them for every new car, decade after decade.

And plus, they make more money from their luxury brand, Lexus, and from their trucks.

Re: Hyundai to acquire Boston Dynamics

#100

Post by dreamcompiler »

souprock wrote: post #54
nwsm wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What reason would there be to disallow it?

ITAR or even classified The robots are practically weapons. Imagine the 4-legged one chasing you down like a large cat could, then pouncing on you. Imagine the 2-legged one with armor, relentlessly stalking you like Terminator.

BD robots could be easily defeated by a 50-cal bullet or an EMP or a sandstorm or merely by preventing them from recharging their batteries. Reality is not like the movies.
Post reply on HN