4 ms·
This write-up overlooks that hardware integration is neither free nor easy. Tesla has a huge advantage over an 'autonomy in a box' model because 1. It only has
by salt-licker 9y ago
This write-up overlooks that hardware integration is neither free nor easy. Tesla has a huge advantage over an 'autonomy in a box' model because 1. It only has to support 2 or 3 car models and 2. It has full control over all design decisions.
Imagine trying to calibrate your third-party self-driving software for every different car geometry, sensor placement, transmission system, and steering sensitivity across a few different car manufacturers. If you screw it up for one car model, people die and it's your fault.
Now let's say waymo chooses a sole partner to avoid this, GM, for example. Now waymo and GM have to work together to build a car, with a huge expertise barrier between the two teams. Will GM be willing to redesign their decades-old electronics platform around Waymo's self-driving system? Will Waymo put in the effort to make their sensors easily maintainable by GM mechanics? If the relationship doesn't last forever, much of this effort is wasted.
Tesla has expertise on both sides and has a mandate across the organization to make the integrated system work. Not to mention a huge head start handling UX and safety regulations in the field. They may not have a monopoly, but I expect them to be the first to level 5 and the leader in autonomous driving market share for years to come.
- Eridrus 9y ago> Now let's say waymo chooses a sole partner to avoid this, GM, for example. I think it depends a lot on the specific partner. Noticeably WayMo has partnered with Chrysler, rather than Ford, and Chrysler seems in a position where they would retool to do what WayMo told them to do, because they have no self-driving effort of their own, so WayMo is their only hope if this becomes real. WayMo might just buy Chrysler at that point.