5 ms·

Google Brings in Chief for Self-Driving Cars

edward 11y ago
Same story without paywall: http://www.ibloomberg.net/google-brings-in-chief-for-self-driving-cars/ http://www.ibloomberg.net/google-brings-in-chief-for-self-dr...
- jzwinck 11y ago
  I was excited to see a non-paywall link, but isn't that entire site blogspam? It's called "iBloomBerg" which is surely a lame riff on the name "Bloomberg" but has nothing to do with Bloomberg. And it doesn't seem to have an "About Us" page. They also wrongly attribute the entire article to Bloomberg when it seems to be originated by the WSJ.
  - mcintyre1994 11y ago
    They don't actually attribute the article to Bloomberg the publisher, it's the display name and links to the page[0] for one of their 'authors' who has apparently written over 100,000 articles in the last 2 months. :) [0] http://www.ibloomberg.net/author/thanhcong/ http://www.ibloomberg.net/author/thanhcong/
    - confluence 11y ago
      How is that even possible?
      - dexterdog 11y ago
        Because paywalls give a reason for piracy
- psbp 11y ago
  A Google redirect also works: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CCAQqQIwAGoVChMIwOLI4732xwIVBxGSCh3lDghZ&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.wsj.com%2Farticles%2Fgoogle-brings-in-chief-for-self-driving-cars-1442199840&usg=AFQjCNGAQcoV9poPqRTZNOkKL6E6S_pJsA&sig2=DwunLefna1TxYSjqq-xJdQ https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&c...
  - melling 11y ago
    Why is there so much discussion about paywalls on HN? Can someone create a FAQ? The first several comments so far are essentially about the paywall. It's all noise. We need to increase the signal.
    - mholt 11y ago
      Then they should remove the paywall. How are we supposed to discuss the article if we can't read it? This isn't a discussion "about the paywall" - it's just a link so the rest of us can read along.
      - melling 11y ago
        That why we need an FAQ. So everyone who can't figure it out for themselves can read it. I've already explained a couple of times that there are still advantages even if you can't read the original source. Can you figure out what one advantage might be?
    - rafamvc 11y ago
      From the FAQ: Are paywalls ok? It's ok to post stories from sites with paywalls that have workarounds. In comments, it's ok to ask how to read an article and to help other users do so. But please don't post complaints about paywalls. Those are off topic. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html
      - deleted 11y ago
        [deleted]
ClassyHacker 11y ago
Just yesterday I saw a silver ragtop Sebring hitting a kid on a scooter in my apartment complex, and immediately backed out of the street and sped away. The kid was fine but the earlier we bring these cars into mainstream the more lives we will save.
- peatmoss 11y ago
  30,000+ deaths annually in the U.S. alone is an awfully high price. Even marginal safety improvements would save many, many people. And that's not even counting the many more people who are mamed and left debilitated. Then, there's the economics of car ownership. Cars are the second most expensive capital asset most people have after their house. They sit idle, depreciating, taking up valuable land 95% of the time on average. A self-driving car is very complementary to services like Uber. If self-driving cars could be shared, increasing vehicle utilization past 5%, then we could repurpose vast swaths of unproductive urban land. Once fewer people are owning cars, and instead paying a la carte, it also restructures the choice architecture of driving. Without a default option sitting in the driveway, I suspect that people may opt to walk, bike, or take transit with more regularity as well. As a planner, I'm slightly more bullish on the potential of self-driving cars to remake transportation than my peers are. It was only a couple of years ago that I attended a demand management conference keynote in which the well-known (in planning circles) speaker was cracking jokes about how self-driving cars wouldn't change anything. I disagree--I just hope the future gets here soon.
  - fillskills 11y ago
    And dont forget the > 15% space occupied on average in cities by parking. If utilization of cars increase with Uber/self-driving etc, we could see a lot of space cleared up too
    - toomuchtodo 11y ago
      You'll still need parking, but you can put it underground in lights out parking facilities.
dpflan 11y ago
I wonder why they chose to use the word 'Chief' versus 'CEO' when the article uses CEO to describe the situation. At first I thought Sebastian Thrun would be the subject of this article...
Theodores 11y ago
In the article there is this idea that Google will get auto makers to actually make cars that use Google technology - a bit like the 'Android' model in a way, co-opt everyone except 'Apple' and 'Microsoft'. This contrasts with the Elon Musk attitude where the auto makers can be consigned to the dustbin of history - there isn't going to be some hideous GM/Chrysler/Ford effort 'powered by Tesla technologies' because at heart Elon Musk really does not want to do business with them. As I understand it there are many companies working on the self driving car with all of Google's rivals going for an iterative approach, e.g. a car that can stay in lane, park, not go over the speed limit or hit the car in front. However, this is not 'driving', i.e. in a city with lots of pedestrians around. Only Google are going for the everything always automated being the product, the rivals are going for just the 'easy' bits with a view to adding the features later. The problem with this later approach is that people expect the car to do all of the driving, they get their phones and laptops out, hence, when they have to take the wheel they are not exactly prepared for it. So the Google approach is better. If I was CEO of Hyundai (or any other manufacturer) I would just wait for Google to launch 'Android for cars' and go with that rather than do the Volvo/BMW/Mercedes iterative approach.
- jfoster 11y ago
  Why not take both approaches? Volvo, BMW and Mercedes will presumably be welcomed by Google if they opt to use the Google technology in the future.
mattcornell 11y ago
Google really needs to be thinking further ahead. Since they're not interested in decreasing car-based transportation (imagine if they spent all that money on a first world train system), then with climate change and rising sea levels, I suggest they get into self-driving boats. And nanotech sunscreen.

Same story without paywall: http://www.ibloomberg.net/google-brings-in-chief-for-self-driving-cars/ http://www.ibloomberg.net/google-brings-in-chief-for-self-dr...

jzwinck 11y ago
I was excited to see a non-paywall link, but isn't that entire site blogspam? It's called "iBloomBerg" which is surely a lame riff on the name "Bloomberg" but has nothing to do with Bloomberg. And it doesn't seem to have an "About Us" page. They also wrongly attribute the entire article to Bloomberg when it seems to be originated by the WSJ.
- mcintyre1994 11y ago
  They don't actually attribute the article to Bloomberg the publisher, it's the display name and links to the page[0] for one of their 'authors' who has apparently written over 100,000 articles in the last 2 months. :) [0] http://www.ibloomberg.net/author/thanhcong/ http://www.ibloomberg.net/author/thanhcong/
  - confluence 11y ago
    How is that even possible?
    - dexterdog 11y ago
      Because paywalls give a reason for piracy
psbp 11y ago
A Google redirect also works: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CCAQqQIwAGoVChMIwOLI4732xwIVBxGSCh3lDghZ&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.wsj.com%2Farticles%2Fgoogle-brings-in-chief-for-self-driving-cars-1442199840&usg=AFQjCNGAQcoV9poPqRTZNOkKL6E6S_pJsA&sig2=DwunLefna1TxYSjqq-xJdQ https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&c...
- melling 11y ago
  Why is there so much discussion about paywalls on HN? Can someone create a FAQ? The first several comments so far are essentially about the paywall. It's all noise. We need to increase the signal.
  - mholt 11y ago
    Then they should remove the paywall. How are we supposed to discuss the article if we can't read it? This isn't a discussion "about the paywall" - it's just a link so the rest of us can read along.
    - melling 11y ago
      That why we need an FAQ. So everyone who can't figure it out for themselves can read it. I've already explained a couple of times that there are still advantages even if you can't read the original source. Can you figure out what one advantage might be?
  - rafamvc 11y ago
    From the FAQ: Are paywalls ok? It's ok to post stories from sites with paywalls that have workarounds. In comments, it's ok to ask how to read an article and to help other users do so. But please don't post complaints about paywalls. Those are off topic. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html
    - deleted 11y ago
      [deleted]

ClassyHacker 11y ago

Just yesterday I saw a silver ragtop Sebring hitting a kid on a scooter in my apartment complex, and immediately backed out of the street and sped away. The kid was fine but the earlier we bring these cars into mainstream the more lives we will save.

peatmoss 11y ago
30,000+ deaths annually in the U.S. alone is an awfully high price. Even marginal safety improvements would save many, many people. And that's not even counting the many more people who are mamed and left debilitated. Then, there's the economics of car ownership. Cars are the second most expensive capital asset most people have after their house. They sit idle, depreciating, taking up valuable land 95% of the time on average. A self-driving car is very complementary to services like Uber. If self-driving cars could be shared, increasing vehicle utilization past 5%, then we could repurpose vast swaths of unproductive urban land. Once fewer people are owning cars, and instead paying a la carte, it also restructures the choice architecture of driving. Without a default option sitting in the driveway, I suspect that people may opt to walk, bike, or take transit with more regularity as well. As a planner, I'm slightly more bullish on the potential of self-driving cars to remake transportation than my peers are. It was only a couple of years ago that I attended a demand management conference keynote in which the well-known (in planning circles) speaker was cracking jokes about how self-driving cars wouldn't change anything. I disagree--I just hope the future gets here soon.
- fillskills 11y ago
  And dont forget the > 15% space occupied on average in cities by parking. If utilization of cars increase with Uber/self-driving etc, we could see a lot of space cleared up too
  - toomuchtodo 11y ago
    You'll still need parking, but you can put it underground in lights out parking facilities.

dpflan 11y ago

I wonder why they chose to use the word 'Chief' versus 'CEO' when the article uses CEO to describe the situation. At first I thought Sebastian Thrun would be the subject of this article...

Theodores 11y ago

In the article there is this idea that Google will get auto makers to actually make cars that use Google technology - a bit like the 'Android' model in a way, co-opt everyone except 'Apple' and 'Microsoft'. This contrasts with the Elon Musk attitude where the auto makers can be consigned to the dustbin of history - there isn't going to be some hideous GM/Chrysler/Ford effort 'powered by Tesla technologies' because at heart Elon Musk really does not want to do business with them. As I understand it there are many companies working on the self driving car with all of Google's rivals going for an iterative approach, e.g. a car that can stay in lane, park, not go over the speed limit or hit the car in front. However, this is not 'driving', i.e. in a city with lots of pedestrians around. Only Google are going for the everything always automated being the product, the rivals are going for just the 'easy' bits with a view to adding the features later. The problem with this later approach is that people expect the car to do all of the driving, they get their phones and laptops out, hence, when they have to take the wheel they are not exactly prepared for it. So the Google approach is better. If I was CEO of Hyundai (or any other manufacturer) I would just wait for Google to launch 'Android for cars' and go with that rather than do the Volvo/BMW/Mercedes iterative approach.

jfoster 11y ago
Why not take both approaches? Volvo, BMW and Mercedes will presumably be welcomed by Google if they opt to use the Google technology in the future.

mattcornell 11y ago

Google really needs to be thinking further ahead. Since they're not interested in decreasing car-based transportation (imagine if they spent all that money on a first world train system), then with climate change and rising sea levels, I suggest they get into self-driving boats. And nanotech sunscreen.