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

Loon’s final flight

blog.x.company

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 264 posts

Re: Loon’s final flight

#91

Post by Aeolun »

stickfigure wrote: post #57
swirepe wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We put a man on the moon though? I thought a moonshot was hard but doable.

The internet says: "The Apollo program's total cost was about $25.4 billion, about $152 billion in today's dollars." That's about Google's entire revenue for 2020. I don't think even Google could put a man on the moon at those rates. Literal moonshots are expensive.

I think SpaceX could put a man on the moon for much less? We’re currently at a few billion to put a whole horde of them on Mars I believe.

Re: Loon’s final flight

#92

Post by supermatt »

IMHO, this is NO different from google closing down any other product. If, however, this news came with a grant of all the patents into the public domain, then it would be another story.

Could a startup set up a commercial balloon based mesh network without running into patents now held by google? Probably not.

THIS is the problem with these "skunkworks" type projects from megacorps. They suck all the air out of the room and prevent others from innovating.

Loon didn't fail, Google/Alphabet just decided they were going to discontinue funding. Now they hold a pool of patents they don't intend to do anything with. Now they will point that funding elsewhere and do the same.

Re: Loon’s final flight

#93

Post by tim333 »

ogre_codes wrote: post #25
Mistri wrote: post #4

People often make fun of Google/Alphabet for their graveyard of failed initiatives/products. While some of it might be warranted, projects like this—that strive to solve a large, global issue through somewhat charitable actions—are generous and have only increased my respect for the Google/Alphabet/X team. I hope they don't get flamed for this, and hopefully some of their research and donation funds can live on and s…

I think the days of Google Moonshots are coming to a close. In general Google hasn't been very good at shooting for the moon. They've lost their leadership and vision and all that's left is a giant advertising behemoth. Did any of their moonshots really hit the mark or even come close?

Depends how you define things but their work with Deepmind ('Our long term aim is to solve intelligence') is interesting. I'm glad we get breakthroughs in protein folding rather than just ads.

Re: Loon’s final flight

#94

Post by scottLobster »

stickfigure wrote: post #57
swirepe wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We put a man on the moon though? I thought a moonshot was hard but doable.

The internet says: "The Apollo program's total cost was about $25.4 billion, about $152 billion in today's dollars." That's about Google's entire revenue for 2020. I don't think even Google could put a man on the moon at those rates. Literal moonshots are expensive.

That's the total cost over the decade+ the program was in existence. Divide by 10 and it becomes roughly 10% of Google's revenue.

So it wouldn't be insubstantial, but they could fund a similar effort if they really wanted to. Shareholders would have a thing or two to say about that though, which is why Elon Musk is keeping SpaceX private.

Re: Loon’s final flight

#95

Post by Judgmentality »

jeffbee wrote: post #76
wutbrodo wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Huh, I used to work next to the Brain team, didn't realize that they started out as Google X. Per their wiki article: > Astro Teller has said that Google Brain paid for the entire cost of Google X even assuming that Waymo has zero expected future profitability.

It's kinda weird to think of brain as an X project. DistBelief was developed out in the open in the main source code repo by people you think of as googlers, like Jeff. So what makes it "X"?

A need to justify X's existence?

Re: Loon’s final flight

#96

Post by pnw_hazor »

ehsankia wrote: post #23
7thaccount wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does google have anything successful outside of: search, adsense, chrome, chromebooks, and android? Those are all large accomplishments to be sure, but it seems like they should have more products out there that people actually buy.

They have at least a dozen services that have over a billion users. Others not mentioned in your list: Youtube, Photos, Drive, Maps, Gmail, Docs. And probably slightly more trivial ones like translate, calendar, flights, news, finance, and other stuff that are kinda part of search. Their hardware/home line isn't doing that bad either.

Are any of those innovations?

It seems to me they are all boring, obvious, copied, or purchased products that complement their ad selling business.

Re: Loon’s final flight

#97

Post by ves »

stickfigure wrote: post #57
swirepe wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We put a man on the moon though? I thought a moonshot was hard but doable.

The internet says: "The Apollo program's total cost was about $25.4 billion, about $152 billion in today's dollars." That's about Google's entire revenue for 2020. I don't think even Google could put a man on the moon at those rates. Literal moonshots are expensive.

I don’t think anyone was alleging that google should be literally landing people on the moon, so invoking the economics of moon landings specifically is hardly relevant.

Re: Loon’s final flight

#98

Post by toast0 »

scotcha1 wrote: post #59
gonehome wrote: post #3

I’m going to say I called this one at least 8 months ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23419270 Loon is not competitive in a world with Starlink (even without Starlink it seems). The business didn’t make strategic sense. I still really liked their original goal of loon for all and the first video they made for it: https://youtu.be/m96tYpEk1Ao It’s a little sad they had to downsize and give up. I guess Licklid…

Wouldn't this be considered 'strategic' to Google b/c it had the potential to provide additional eyeballs & ad revenue to users outside of their normal markets (US/EU)?

Eyeballs without access to terrestrial networking probably don't make a lot of ad revenue.

But, even if so, look at Google Fiber. Google benefits from networking build out, regardless of if they're providing the network; it's just as good for them if someone else builds the network. If starlink can fill the niche that Loon filled, that works just as well for Google, on someone else's capex/opex.

Or if the freespace optics they worked on for Loon can reduce backhaul costs for traditional cell towers, that might help get more deployed in areas that don't have connectivity; which again works well for Google.

Re: Loon’s final flight

#99

Post by DaiPlusPlus »

Mistri wrote: post #29
ogre_codes wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the days of Google Moonshots are coming to a close. In general Google hasn't been very good at shooting for the moon. They've lost their leadership and vision and all that's left is a giant advertising behemoth. Did any of their moonshots really hit the mark or even come close?

Waymo seems like it's nearing its final stages. I have high hopes!

Waymo, like any and all software, will never be “complete” - but I assume you’re referring to Waymo being ready for it’s first “real” release somehow - but we still don’t know how exactly Waymo will be integrated into cars or which automakers will go with them.

That point of mine now has me wondering what Waymo will look like in 10-20 years’ time when autonomous vehicles become both ubiquitous and un-cool because it’s nothing new anymore (just like how Facebook is un-cool today). Will Waymo’s maintainers be adding new features that benefit the consumer, or will there be pressure to “monetise” it from every angle? And to what extent will brand-conscious automakers go to hide the fact they’re using Waymo, e.g. will they insist on rebranding it - not just for themselves, but between their own sub-brands (e.g. Ford vs Lincoln, or VW and Audi)?

Post reply on HN