5 ms·

Uber has to survive until they can get a self-driving fleet. The winning strategy in the short term is to choke off Uber's cash flow, so paying drivers more so

Uber has to survive until they can get a self-driving fleet. The winning strategy in the short term is to choke off Uber's cash flow, so paying drivers more so they drive for you rather than Uber is the winning strategy at this point of the game.

toomuchtodo 11y ago
> Uber has to survive until they can get a self-driving fleet. Which is hilarious. Tesla already has a semi-autonomous fleet of tens of thousands of cars, improving daily. Best of luck Uber.
- untog 11y ago
  There is a long, long distance between what Tesla has today and a car with no driver.
  - toomuchtodo 11y ago
    I bet you $1000 to a charity of your choice they (Tesla Motors, either itself or through a subsidiary) have a fully autonomous (level 4) vehicle in less than 3 years, and actively provides a ridesharing service with its vehicles. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autonomous_car#Definition https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autonomous_car#Definition "Level 4: The vehicle performs all safety-critical functions for the entire trip, with the driver not expected to control the vehicle at any time. As this vehicle would control all functions from start to stop, including all parking functions, it could include unoccupied cars."
    - rayiner 11y ago
      I'll take that bet!
      - toomuchtodo 11y ago
        Now I'm curious :) Do you see regulatory hurdles as more pressing than technical hurdles? Because technical hurdles for self driving cars appear to be (mostly) solved. I don't even believe laser scanners Google is using are required anymore: http://gizmodo.com/mit-figured-out-how-to-make-cheap-3d-scanners-1-000-tim-1745454853 http://gizmodo.com/mit-figured-out-how-to-make-cheap-3d-scan...
        chipotle_coyote 11y ago
        Do you see regulatory hurdles as more pressing than technical hurdles? Not yet. Based on what I know of Google's efforts, I think your three-year horizon for Tesla is, well, optimistic. As many miles as Google has logged, they're not testing at highway speeds yet -- I don't think their driverless prototypes (as opposed to the modified Lexus SUVs) are even capable of highway speeds. Also, AFAIK, they're only testing cars in Mountain View and Austin, which means there's a lot of weather conditions -- and to some degree terrain -- that they haven't had to accommodate. The most recently-given figures they've supplied that I can find is that they expect to be able to commercialize their technology between 2017 and 2020 -- and they've been working on this project since 2009. Tesla'a engineering is good, to be sure, but I would be really surprised if they beat Google to market in this area. Now, once somebody really does start offering these for sale to the general public (or just to taxi/rideshare companies or etc.), the answer to your question shifts from "not yet" to "yep."
        toomuchtodo 11y ago
        > As many miles as Google has logged, they're not testing at highway speeds yet -- I don't think their driverless prototypes (as opposed to the modified Lexus SUVs) are even capable of highway speeds. Tesla's autopilot functions at up to 90mph. > I think your three-year horizon for Tesla is, well, optimistic. http://www.wired.com/2015/10/obviously-drivers-are-already-abusing-teslas-autopilot/ http://www.wired.com/2015/10/obviously-drivers-are-already-a... "Four days later, Reese, Mastracci, and Roy piled into a Model S and took off. They covered 2,994 miles at an average speed of 51.8 mph, a figure that includes the time spent plugged into Supercharger stations along the way. They had autopilot mode engaged 96 percent of the time, Reese says, using it at speeds around 90 mph. It eased the burden on the team, a big deal when you’re in a car for 57 hours straight." 96 percent of the time, at speeds up to 90mph, across 2,994 miles
    - untog 11y ago
      I'll take that bet. Even if they produced a working prototype of this tomorrow I doubt the government would be able to pass the necessarily legislation in three years.
      - toomuchtodo 11y ago
        Deal. I'll setup a LongBet and post the info in this comment.
        untog 11y ago
        Sorry, I'm not really going to bet a thousand dollars on an internet comment. I have bills to pay. That's not say I don't believe what I said, just that I don't have $1000 to throw around to back it up.
        toomuchtodo 11y ago
        > I'll take that bet. Your comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10673357 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10673357 Wha?
        untog 11y ago
        "I bet you $1000" is, 98% of the time, not an actual offer to bet a thousand dollars with a person. The numbers are even higher when said person is a stranger you are talking to on an internet message board. You are lucky to be able to consider such a thing seriously!
        toomuchtodo 11y ago
        Forgive my honesty and authenticity then.
        untog 11y ago
        I don't really think it's a case of honesty, just a frequently used phrase. When my friend tells me he'll kill me if I drink the last beer I do not take it literally and call the police.
- SilasX 11y ago
  Can someone explain the logic there? That's never made sense to me and yet gets repeated a lot. Ride-hailing services are a saturated market with major network effects (the more drivers on a service, the faster they can get to you) and thus, expensive barriers to entry. It just seems like it makes more business sense for Tesla to sell/license as many self-driving cars as they can to any and all services that want them, and concentrate on their core business, rather than branch out into an entirely new market and write a whole new app from scratch and market it. Can someone make the opposite case?
  - toomuchtodo 11y ago
    > Ride-hailing services are a saturated market with major network effects Not so much. Drivers frequently run Uber and Lyft simultaneously. There is no "stickiness". > It just seems like it makes more business sense for Tesla to sell/license as many self-driving cars as they can to any and all services that want them, and concentrate on their core business, rather than branch out into an entirely new market and write a whole new app from scratch and market it. You'd think so, wouldn't you? But apparently that's the direction Elon is going: http://www.techinsider.io/elon-musk-hints-tesla-may-enter-ride-sharing-space-2015-11 http://www.techinsider.io/elon-musk-hints-tesla-may-enter-ri... > write a whole new app from scratch and market it. I think its humorous this is thought of as expensive. How much does it cost to build an iOS/Android app and run the infrastructure to match riders to drivers? $3-5/million/year? Tesla has hundreds of millions of dollars of credit available to it. And you know, the cars receiving software updates constantly.
    - SilasX 11y ago
      >Not so much. Drivers frequently run Uber and Lyft simultaneously. There is no "stickiness". I meant from the perspective of users and providers, not drivers (which are irrelevant in the case of self-driving cars...). You have to get all these users to download another app when their existing one works fine. That's money that Tesla could be further investing in their core specialty rather. >You'd think so, wouldn't you? But apparently that's the direction Elon is going Yes, which is why I'm asking; the fact that someone is in fact doing it doesn't resolve this mystery. >I think its humorous this is thought of as expensive. How much does it cost to build an iOS/Android app and run the infrastructure to match riders to drivers? $3-5/million/year? Tesla has hundreds of millions of dollars of credit available to it. And you know, the cars receiving software updates constantly. Right, but they haven't trodden the path of scaling up a ride-hailing app and made the numerous optimizations that Uber/Lyft have made based on the unique problems of that domain.
chrischen 11y ago
Which is funny, because that's what Uber is probably doing to Lyft.

toomuchtodo 11y ago

> Uber has to survive until they can get a self-driving fleet. Which is hilarious. Tesla already has a semi-autonomous fleet of tens of thousands of cars, improving daily. Best of luck Uber.

untog 11y ago
There is a long, long distance between what Tesla has today and a car with no driver.
- toomuchtodo 11y ago
  I bet you $1000 to a charity of your choice they (Tesla Motors, either itself or through a subsidiary) have a fully autonomous (level 4) vehicle in less than 3 years, and actively provides a ridesharing service with its vehicles. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autonomous_car#Definition https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autonomous_car#Definition "Level 4: The vehicle performs all safety-critical functions for the entire trip, with the driver not expected to control the vehicle at any time. As this vehicle would control all functions from start to stop, including all parking functions, it could include unoccupied cars."
  - rayiner 11y ago
    I'll take that bet!
    - toomuchtodo 11y ago
      Now I'm curious :) Do you see regulatory hurdles as more pressing than technical hurdles? Because technical hurdles for self driving cars appear to be (mostly) solved. I don't even believe laser scanners Google is using are required anymore: http://gizmodo.com/mit-figured-out-how-to-make-cheap-3d-scanners-1-000-tim-1745454853 http://gizmodo.com/mit-figured-out-how-to-make-cheap-3d-scan...
      - chipotle_coyote 11y ago
        Do you see regulatory hurdles as more pressing than technical hurdles? Not yet. Based on what I know of Google's efforts, I think your three-year horizon for Tesla is, well, optimistic. As many miles as Google has logged, they're not testing at highway speeds yet -- I don't think their driverless prototypes (as opposed to the modified Lexus SUVs) are even capable of highway speeds. Also, AFAIK, they're only testing cars in Mountain View and Austin, which means there's a lot of weather conditions -- and to some degree terrain -- that they haven't had to accommodate. The most recently-given figures they've supplied that I can find is that they expect to be able to commercialize their technology between 2017 and 2020 -- and they've been working on this project since 2009. Tesla'a engineering is good, to be sure, but I would be really surprised if they beat Google to market in this area. Now, once somebody really does start offering these for sale to the general public (or just to taxi/rideshare companies or etc.), the answer to your question shifts from "not yet" to "yep."
        toomuchtodo 11y ago
        > As many miles as Google has logged, they're not testing at highway speeds yet -- I don't think their driverless prototypes (as opposed to the modified Lexus SUVs) are even capable of highway speeds. Tesla's autopilot functions at up to 90mph. > I think your three-year horizon for Tesla is, well, optimistic. http://www.wired.com/2015/10/obviously-drivers-are-already-abusing-teslas-autopilot/ http://www.wired.com/2015/10/obviously-drivers-are-already-a... "Four days later, Reese, Mastracci, and Roy piled into a Model S and took off. They covered 2,994 miles at an average speed of 51.8 mph, a figure that includes the time spent plugged into Supercharger stations along the way. They had autopilot mode engaged 96 percent of the time, Reese says, using it at speeds around 90 mph. It eased the burden on the team, a big deal when you’re in a car for 57 hours straight." 96 percent of the time, at speeds up to 90mph, across 2,994 miles
  - untog 11y ago
    I'll take that bet. Even if they produced a working prototype of this tomorrow I doubt the government would be able to pass the necessarily legislation in three years.
    - toomuchtodo 11y ago
      Deal. I'll setup a LongBet and post the info in this comment.
      - untog 11y ago
        Sorry, I'm not really going to bet a thousand dollars on an internet comment. I have bills to pay. That's not say I don't believe what I said, just that I don't have $1000 to throw around to back it up.
        toomuchtodo 11y ago
        > I'll take that bet. Your comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10673357 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10673357 Wha?
        untog 11y ago
        "I bet you $1000" is, 98% of the time, not an actual offer to bet a thousand dollars with a person. The numbers are even higher when said person is a stranger you are talking to on an internet message board. You are lucky to be able to consider such a thing seriously!
        toomuchtodo 11y ago
        Forgive my honesty and authenticity then.
        untog 11y ago
        I don't really think it's a case of honesty, just a frequently used phrase. When my friend tells me he'll kill me if I drink the last beer I do not take it literally and call the police.
SilasX 11y ago
Can someone explain the logic there? That's never made sense to me and yet gets repeated a lot. Ride-hailing services are a saturated market with major network effects (the more drivers on a service, the faster they can get to you) and thus, expensive barriers to entry. It just seems like it makes more business sense for Tesla to sell/license as many self-driving cars as they can to any and all services that want them, and concentrate on their core business, rather than branch out into an entirely new market and write a whole new app from scratch and market it. Can someone make the opposite case?
- toomuchtodo 11y ago
  > Ride-hailing services are a saturated market with major network effects Not so much. Drivers frequently run Uber and Lyft simultaneously. There is no "stickiness". > It just seems like it makes more business sense for Tesla to sell/license as many self-driving cars as they can to any and all services that want them, and concentrate on their core business, rather than branch out into an entirely new market and write a whole new app from scratch and market it. You'd think so, wouldn't you? But apparently that's the direction Elon is going: http://www.techinsider.io/elon-musk-hints-tesla-may-enter-ride-sharing-space-2015-11 http://www.techinsider.io/elon-musk-hints-tesla-may-enter-ri... > write a whole new app from scratch and market it. I think its humorous this is thought of as expensive. How much does it cost to build an iOS/Android app and run the infrastructure to match riders to drivers? $3-5/million/year? Tesla has hundreds of millions of dollars of credit available to it. And you know, the cars receiving software updates constantly.
  - SilasX 11y ago
    >Not so much. Drivers frequently run Uber and Lyft simultaneously. There is no "stickiness". I meant from the perspective of users and providers, not drivers (which are irrelevant in the case of self-driving cars...). You have to get all these users to download another app when their existing one works fine. That's money that Tesla could be further investing in their core specialty rather. >You'd think so, wouldn't you? But apparently that's the direction Elon is going Yes, which is why I'm asking; the fact that someone is in fact doing it doesn't resolve this mystery. >I think its humorous this is thought of as expensive. How much does it cost to build an iOS/Android app and run the infrastructure to match riders to drivers? $3-5/million/year? Tesla has hundreds of millions of dollars of credit available to it. And you know, the cars receiving software updates constantly. Right, but they haven't trodden the path of scaling up a ride-hailing app and made the numerous optimizations that Uber/Lyft have made based on the unique problems of that domain.

chrischen 11y ago

Which is funny, because that's what Uber is probably doing to Lyft.