9 ms·

Uber's product is the company's stock. All of their "AI" and "self-driving" stunts so far have been transparent hype fuel that anyone with the slightest domain

by aedron 10y ago

Uber's product is the company's stock. All of their "AI" and "self-driving" stunts so far have been transparent hype fuel that anyone with the slightest domain knowledge knows have no practical significance. Their PR department are, as can be expected, top notch though. I especially like how they put a populist spin on their announcements, like the beer delivery (yay, beer!) and now picking up passengers with their proof-of-concept vehicles, to make it look like self-driving cars are already part of their business.

beambot 10y ago
Or... they're trying to learn the nuances of operating with and around real customers for their actual application. Too many tech companies (and esp. robotics ones) do their development and testing under limited conditions, and then they're blindsided by real-world realities. Getting contact with customers early is key. It's like the old military adage: No battle plan ever survives first contact with the enemy. In this case, the "enemy" is the real world. Kudos to Uber for getting out there and working with customers -- it's much better than Google's autonomous cars, which have driven millions of miles and never had a single paying passenger!
- Fricken 10y ago
  Ya, Uber just wants people to think they provide better service at lower prices than their competition; and the tricksters, they're doing it by working to provide better service at lower prices than the competition. Feeling peckish? Ignore it. It's just the McDonald's corporation trying to raise the value of it's stock.
  - ASinclair 10y ago
    > Ya, Uber just wants people to think they provide better service at lower prices than their competition; and the tricksters, they're doing it by working to provide better service at lower prices than the competition. The prices are lower because they're subsidized with invested money and debt.
    - beambot 10y ago
      > they're subsidized with invested money and debt. So are public utilities, public resources, and all levels of government (local, state, & federal)...
      - cududa 10y ago
        Unless the government decides to nationalize Uber, what's your point?
        beambot 10y ago
        That subsidization with invested money and debt is not uncommon, atypical, or untoward. In fact, those same instruments are used by most companies (not just startups) in one form or another. Actually, they're used by almost every entity in our economy, even individuals (ie. credit cards and mortgages). So the GP's point was moot.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
vivekd 10y ago
Nah, Uber and Lyft CEOs both said they envision a future where we don't own cars and just call self driving taxi services via app when we need them. They both envision this happening in less than a decade. This seems to be coming true, millennials have the lowest rate of car ownership and it seems to be the best explanation for why both companies are willing to bleed money to expand market-share as quickly a possible in the mobile taxi app game.
- hackerboos 10y ago
  It'd be nice if we could get to the point where my self-driving car is earning cash as a taxi whilst I'm doing my 9-5.
  - hackalaugh 10y ago
    Seems potentially unlikely that a consumer could own and (auto-)operate a self-driving vehicle at a rate competitive with Uber & Lyft (or whatever corp.), who could purchase in bulk and have their cars operate for significantly less.
    - kbenson 10y ago
      On the other hand, I imagine there will be lots of locations where Uber and Lyft won't serve with their own fleet, either because it's too small, or because it's too sparse. Having a program, or a separate competitor, that allowed people to submit their own vehicles and do their own upkeep might help those areas get served. Then again, those areas might be geographically small enough that you don't need a car (depending on weather). Who know, maybe there's a long tail there which is hard for the big players to capitalize on completely, given they need fleet servicing facilities if they are running their own cars.
      - linkregister 10y ago
        Yes! The far suburbs of Nashville aren't going to see UberTeslaWaymo fleet cars; the utilization would be far too low. They'll see what they see right now: one or two drivers on Uber or Lyft. And the trip price will be higher to reflect the human driving the car.
rconti 10y ago
[citation needed] I have a friend working for a major supplier in self-driving vehicle sensor tech who went to Pittsburg to learn from Uber. I imagine they at least did their homework before flying him out there.
fudged71 10y ago
Plausible. Apparently, the driver needs to intervene 15+ times in a 30min period. Their technology seems to be way behind other companies.

by aedron 10y ago

beambot 10y ago

Or... they're trying to learn the nuances of operating with and around real customers for their actual application. Too many tech companies (and esp. robotics ones) do their development and testing under limited conditions, and then they're blindsided by real-world realities. Getting contact with customers early is key. It's like the old military adage: No battle plan ever survives first contact with the enemy. In this case, the "enemy" is the real world. Kudos to Uber for getting out there and working with customers -- it's much better than Google's autonomous cars, which have driven millions of miles and never had a single paying passenger!

Fricken 10y ago
Ya, Uber just wants people to think they provide better service at lower prices than their competition; and the tricksters, they're doing it by working to provide better service at lower prices than the competition. Feeling peckish? Ignore it. It's just the McDonald's corporation trying to raise the value of it's stock.
- ASinclair 10y ago
  > Ya, Uber just wants people to think they provide better service at lower prices than their competition; and the tricksters, they're doing it by working to provide better service at lower prices than the competition. The prices are lower because they're subsidized with invested money and debt.
  - beambot 10y ago
    > they're subsidized with invested money and debt. So are public utilities, public resources, and all levels of government (local, state, & federal)...
    - cududa 10y ago
      Unless the government decides to nationalize Uber, what's your point?
      - beambot 10y ago
        That subsidization with invested money and debt is not uncommon, atypical, or untoward. In fact, those same instruments are used by most companies (not just startups) in one form or another. Actually, they're used by almost every entity in our economy, even individuals (ie. credit cards and mortgages). So the GP's point was moot.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

vivekd 10y ago

Nah, Uber and Lyft CEOs both said they envision a future where we don't own cars and just call self driving taxi services via app when we need them. They both envision this happening in less than a decade. This seems to be coming true, millennials have the lowest rate of car ownership and it seems to be the best explanation for why both companies are willing to bleed money to expand market-share as quickly a possible in the mobile taxi app game.

hackerboos 10y ago
It'd be nice if we could get to the point where my self-driving car is earning cash as a taxi whilst I'm doing my 9-5.
- hackalaugh 10y ago
  Seems potentially unlikely that a consumer could own and (auto-)operate a self-driving vehicle at a rate competitive with Uber & Lyft (or whatever corp.), who could purchase in bulk and have their cars operate for significantly less.
  - kbenson 10y ago
    On the other hand, I imagine there will be lots of locations where Uber and Lyft won't serve with their own fleet, either because it's too small, or because it's too sparse. Having a program, or a separate competitor, that allowed people to submit their own vehicles and do their own upkeep might help those areas get served. Then again, those areas might be geographically small enough that you don't need a car (depending on weather). Who know, maybe there's a long tail there which is hard for the big players to capitalize on completely, given they need fleet servicing facilities if they are running their own cars.
    - linkregister 10y ago
      Yes! The far suburbs of Nashville aren't going to see UberTeslaWaymo fleet cars; the utilization would be far too low. They'll see what they see right now: one or two drivers on Uber or Lyft. And the trip price will be higher to reflect the human driving the car.

rconti 10y ago

[citation needed] I have a friend working for a major supplier in self-driving vehicle sensor tech who went to Pittsburg to learn from Uber. I imagine they at least did their homework before flying him out there.

fudged71 10y ago

Plausible. Apparently, the driver needs to intervene 15+ times in a 30min period. Their technology seems to be way behind other companies.