12 ms·

If Waymo's tech is years ahead of the competition (say 18-24 months ahead minimum) then I think a lot of the self-driving companies and car manufacturers in the

If Waymo's tech is years ahead of the competition (say 18-24 months ahead minimum) then I think a lot of the self-driving companies and car manufacturers in the US will be having cold sweats. This may not be a winner-take-all market (I don't know honestly...) but I see this lead up enabling Waymo to capture significant market share in the US in regions where laws towards autonomous vehicles are friendly. One way the competition could attempt to mitigate Waymo's lead is to test and launch in areas where Waymo are not currently active (other states in the US, or other countries altogether). They could of course accelerate development of their self driving tech but that's easier said than done I presume. I also worry Uber & Lyft's valuations and usage will drop with the introduction of driverless vehicles, unless they somehow manage to strike long-lasting partnerships with Waymo. Regarding OEMs (i.e. car manufacturers), I can't tell what will happen with them: do they continue shunning Waymo and pursuing their own self-driving car efforts or come back begging for some sort of deal? I presume we will see both attitudes play out depending on how confident each company feels about its own self-driving tech ability and acquisition potential. It's hard to foresee the consequences of this announcement, but I feel Waymo has upped the stakes tremendously today, and the pressure on everyone (including Waymo) to deliver is on, more than ever.

sliverstorm 9y ago
Do we have a good signal that truly indicates Waymo has more advanced tech? Or could they simply have a bigger appetite for risk?
- tonyedgecombe 9y ago
  Tesla seems to be the company with an appetite for risk in this area.
- edshiro 9y ago
  They've historically played it very safe so it feels like a bold announcement coming from them. We don't know whether they have more advanced tech; there is too much opacity in this space. The best proxy we may have are the California disengagement reports[1] from last year and Waymo were doing better than anyone, by a WIDE margin. [1] https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/dmv/detail/vr/autonomous/disengagement_report_2016 https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/dmv/detail/vr/autonomous/disen...
- jfoster 9y ago
  If anything, Waymo's risk appetite has seemed cautious to me. How many years have they been at it? How many millions of miles have they tested on? Every company that has something good in this race (Waymo, Tesla, Mercedes, etc.) seems to want to show it off. It seems pretty definite that Waymo is in the lead.
  - macawfish 9y ago
    I hope the "race" your referring to doesn't include any "race conditions" D*8
  - speedplane 9y ago
    Waymo is doing more than building an autonomous vehicle, they are building a trusted brand. Admitting the problem is hard and periodically presenting small milestones builds credibility. When Waymo does release a general purpose car, I'll be far more likely to trust it than a Tesla Autopilot.
- michaelt 9y ago
  We know Waymo started well before most other players in this space. We know they hired a bunch of people from teams that did well in the DARPA Grand Challenge - such as Sebastian Thrun. We know that Google Maps has some of the best map data on the market, including high-resolution images of a great many streets; and that ReCAPCHA regularly asks people to identify cars and street signs - which they do free of charge. And finally, there are autonomous vehicle accident reports [1] which tell us they've driven a great many miles with very few manual interventions; and that their competitors are either doing orders of magnitude less driving or are doing so badly they won't even release their figures. Of course, there's no reason this should be a winner-take-all market. [1] https://www.wired.com/2017/02/california-dmv-autonomous-car-disengagement/ https://www.wired.com/2017/02/california-dmv-autonomous-car-...
- scarmig 9y ago
  Just as a contrary response to everyone else pointing to Waymo's (real) historical tendency to be very risk-averse... Waymo has been feeling a lot of pressure from Uber and other companies, who have developed their autonomous car programs faster than Waymo did, even if Waymo is still momentarily ahead. Waymo's legal attempt to sidetrack Uber's program seems to have failed. So Waymo's executive may be at the point where Alphabet is asking them, "we've poured literally billions of dollars into you: when are you going to produce something beyond good marketing?" FWIW, I think Waymo is still significantly more risk-averse than Uber and ahead of it technically, but you can't project its historical hyper-caution into the present or future indefinitely.
  - davidcbc 9y ago
    > Waymo has been feeling a lot of pressure from Uber and other companies, who have developed their autonomous car programs faster than Waymo did Did the other companies develop their autonomous car programs faster than Waymo did or have they just hyped their programs up more than Waymo did when they started?
  - jacksmith21006 9y ago
    Who has developed a SDC faster than Google? DE reports it is not at all close. Google working longer and appears spending more and just wants it more. Plus Google has the prephereal systems like simulations to test. P!us Google is the only one with the cloud infrastructure that is in play. https://www.wired.com/2017/02/california-dmv-autonomous-car-disengagement/ https://www.wired.com/2017/02/california-dmv-autonomous-car-... The Numbers Don't Lie: Self-Driving Cars Are Getting Good - Wired
  - speedplane 9y ago
    Uber strikes me as a company that'll spend a ton of money, try it out for a year or two, show off a few prototypes and back off once they see how hard it is. In the meantime they may produce a few vehicles with flaky autonomous capability that will hopefully not get anyone killed. The company has money, muscle, and can-do drive, but the company isn't rooted in nerdy tech the way Google is. Makes far more sense for Uber to license Google's tech and integrate with vehicles.
- jacksmith21006 9y ago
  Yes Waymo is well ahead. https://www.wired.com/2017/02/california-dmv-autonomous-car-disengagement/ https://www.wired.com/2017/02/california-dmv-autonomous-car-... The Numbers Don't Lie: Self-Driving Cars Are Getting Good - Wired
Fricken 9y ago
It's certainly not a winner take all market, the world is a big place and it would be ridiculously capital-intensive to deploy everywhere before anyone else has a shot. Though we could very well end up seeing regional monopolies where a single fleet provider dominates in a given city. Uber is working hard to develop autonomous vehicles, but I don't think they need to worry about getting usurped by a competitors robotaxis near term. Uber's biggest future markets are in the developing world, particularly fast growing metropolises where transit infrastructure can't grow to meet demand. In places like Lagos, Dhaka, Delhi, Jakarta or Karachi it will be a long time before robotaxis can handle that level of chaos, or compete with low-cost human labour in those markets. Overwhelmed and cash strapped governments in these places are more than happy to let a private operator such as Uber handle transit. (interesting article on that: https://thebolditalic.com/ubers-goal-is-not-to-operate-alongside-public-transit-but-to-replace-it-c76e48d8d317 https://thebolditalic.com/ubers-goal-is-not-to-operate-along...) Regarding OEM's, well, some are doing better than others. GM subsidiary Cruise Automation has some real inertia. While Waymo is first to hit this milestone, I'm betting Cruise will be the first to deploy 100k robotaxis. Waymo doesn't make cars, and doesn't have any sort of manufacturing partnership on lock-down. With these FCA Pacifica's Waymo basically just bought them and retrofitted the autonomous hardware themselves. It's not clear if the so-called partnership will go any further than that. In a few years maybe one or several of the OEM's will throw up their arms and say "This is too hard, I give up", and that will be Waymo's opportunity to pounce, though they'll likely be competing with intel/mobileye, who are a little behind but entertain aspirations of becoming an open provider of autonomous hardware and software, and have a lot of money to spend.
- jacksmith21006 9y ago
  Disagree. Think it is a winner take all. But I also think Google will involve other companies but be controlling the platform that wins. Google has way too many advantgeous even beyond a beta? Alpha? working solution. But it is the fact that Google really wants it. Plus there is no competition from any other big tech player like Amazon and FB be the most important two.
  - speedplane 9y ago
quirkot 9y ago
> This may not be a winner-take-all market (I don't know honestly...) I think it’s important to distinguish service from tech. Once the tech is mature, you’ll probably have a handful of providers but the service will be wildly federated. It’ll only take one tech provider to have moderately open terms and the service will be the equivalent of WordPress for autonomous vehicles.
Animats 9y ago
Waymo does seem to be ahead technically. They've been working on the hard cases for years, while the other guys are still struggling. They are trying hard to get good situational awareness. One of the few neutral measures we have are CA DMV's disconnect and accident reports, and in those, Waymo has been consistently ahead. Waymo is hooked up with FCA (Fiat-Chrysler Automobiles), of all things. Uber is "fake it 'til you make it". Otto's truck demo only worked on a deserted highway surrounded by chase cars. Cruise also started out that way, but they seem to have improved once acquired by GM. Those guys seem to drive mostly on visual cues, without as much of a near-area model as Waymo. Tesla has the self-crashing car. Four collisions with something partly blocking a lane, all on video. I've posted the links before. Musk made a big mistake trying to do it without LIDAR. Nobody else can do that reliably, and neither can Tesla. Tesla had to turn off most of the autonomy. Now they're shipping the Model 3 in small quantities with hardware that's only enough for lane keeping and auto-braking. Volvo has a good, but limited 100 car demo with real drivers running. Freeway only. Their goal is "no crashes". They'll probably get there. Ford is quietly doing something and not talking about it much. Meanwhile, Continental and now, Delphi are quietly gearing up to make low-cost LIDARs by the millions. Despite all the talk about self-driving as a service, it may turn out to just be an auto part.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- 3pt14159 9y ago
  One question I can't seem to find a good answer for is this: Why doesn't the self-driving tech hand off control to a remote driver if the internet connection is good enough and there is enough warning? Even with a couple seconds notice a primed human could take the wheel and do the right thing when the sensors aren't making sense.
  - Jyaif 9y ago
    There's no good reason; it's likely what they'll do.
    - 9y ago
jacksmith21006 9y ago
The road for car makers is way, way longer than ride sharing. Thru ride sharing things will be so far along that there is little chance the car makers will be competitive. Plus the future is NOT buying cars.
- dx034 9y ago
  A lot of people say that buying cars will be a thing of the past but I doubt that. People don't just own a car because they have to, they like having a car. I currently don't own one and use a lot of ride sharing and rental cars. And I'm seriously considering buying a car soon. Even with a dense network of cars it's still a hassle to always look for an available car and you don't know what model you'll end up with. The same goes for cleanliness or any issues with the car. I really doubt that car sales will fall a lot.
shostack 9y ago
What I'm dying to see with the OEMs is how it will impact their advertising and design. They used to design for individuals and advertise for brand affinity. Will they still make that distinction with self-driving cars? Will they have a luxury line, a mid-end line and an economy line?
MarkMc 9y ago
> If Waymo's tech is years ahead of the competition ... then I think a lot of the self-driving companies and car manufacturers in the US will be having cold sweats...I see this lead up enabling Waymo to capture significant market share in the US in regions where laws towards autonomous vehicles are friendly Yes, Waymo may capture 100% of the self-driving tech market for a few years, but I don't see it having a sustainable advantage. As soon as another company develops self-driving technology that meets safety standards it can undercut Waymo and capture a significant market share. In 10 years self driving tech will be a commodity product - any car manufacturer/ride hailing company will be able to choose between a half-dozen offerings. But car manucturers are still in for long-term pain because their product is also becoming a commodity: nobody cares about the colour or horsepower of the taxi they take to work. Electrification and ride sharing may also significantly reduce the demand for new vehicles. Ride-hailing companies like Uber are also going to feel their share of pain, but only until they can develop or buy self-driving technology. Until then they can just pay a few billion dollars to subsidize their human drivers.
- alooPotato 9y ago
  > Yes, Waymo may capture 100% of the self-driving tech market for a few years, but I don't see it having a sustainable advantage. As soon as another company develops self-driving technology that meets safety standards it can undercut Waymo and capture a significant market share. In 10 years self driving tech will be a commodity product - any car manufacturer/ride hailing company will be able to choose between a half-dozen offerings. This is what I'm most excited about. Currently ride sharing market isn't very competitive because its hard for new entrants to get the network effects going of drivers and passengers. With driverless cars, once the tech is commoditized, any large-ish company could theoretically offer a ride sharing service - it just becomes a financing problem to lease the cars which I believe will allow for more entrants (not mom and pops, but many more corps can jump in). > But car manucturers are still in for long-term pain because their product is also becoming a commodity: nobody cares about the colour or horsepower of the taxi they take to work. Maybe they don't care about color and horsepower but they might care about other features. Comfort, tech bells and whistles, layout (all the seats face inwards with a poker table in the middle), or just straight luxury. On that last point, there are many high end cars that aren't meant to be driven by their owners. The owners are meant to sit in the back and enjoy. I'm still unsure whether net cars will go up or go down, theirs arguments on both sides.

sliverstorm 9y ago

Do we have a good signal that truly indicates Waymo has more advanced tech? Or could they simply have a bigger appetite for risk?

tonyedgecombe 9y ago
Tesla seems to be the company with an appetite for risk in this area.
edshiro 9y ago
They've historically played it very safe so it feels like a bold announcement coming from them. We don't know whether they have more advanced tech; there is too much opacity in this space. The best proxy we may have are the California disengagement reports[1] from last year and Waymo were doing better than anyone, by a WIDE margin. [1] https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/dmv/detail/vr/autonomous/disengagement_report_2016 https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/dmv/detail/vr/autonomous/disen...
jfoster 9y ago
If anything, Waymo's risk appetite has seemed cautious to me. How many years have they been at it? How many millions of miles have they tested on? Every company that has something good in this race (Waymo, Tesla, Mercedes, etc.) seems to want to show it off. It seems pretty definite that Waymo is in the lead.
- macawfish 9y ago
  I hope the "race" your referring to doesn't include any "race conditions" D*8
- speedplane 9y ago
  Waymo is doing more than building an autonomous vehicle, they are building a trusted brand. Admitting the problem is hard and periodically presenting small milestones builds credibility. When Waymo does release a general purpose car, I'll be far more likely to trust it than a Tesla Autopilot.
michaelt 9y ago
We know Waymo started well before most other players in this space. We know they hired a bunch of people from teams that did well in the DARPA Grand Challenge - such as Sebastian Thrun. We know that Google Maps has some of the best map data on the market, including high-resolution images of a great many streets; and that ReCAPCHA regularly asks people to identify cars and street signs - which they do free of charge. And finally, there are autonomous vehicle accident reports [1] which tell us they've driven a great many miles with very few manual interventions; and that their competitors are either doing orders of magnitude less driving or are doing so badly they won't even release their figures. Of course, there's no reason this should be a winner-take-all market. [1] https://www.wired.com/2017/02/california-dmv-autonomous-car-disengagement/ https://www.wired.com/2017/02/california-dmv-autonomous-car-...
scarmig 9y ago
Just as a contrary response to everyone else pointing to Waymo's (real) historical tendency to be very risk-averse... Waymo has been feeling a lot of pressure from Uber and other companies, who have developed their autonomous car programs faster than Waymo did, even if Waymo is still momentarily ahead. Waymo's legal attempt to sidetrack Uber's program seems to have failed. So Waymo's executive may be at the point where Alphabet is asking them, "we've poured literally billions of dollars into you: when are you going to produce something beyond good marketing?" FWIW, I think Waymo is still significantly more risk-averse than Uber and ahead of it technically, but you can't project its historical hyper-caution into the present or future indefinitely.
- davidcbc 9y ago
  > Waymo has been feeling a lot of pressure from Uber and other companies, who have developed their autonomous car programs faster than Waymo did Did the other companies develop their autonomous car programs faster than Waymo did or have they just hyped their programs up more than Waymo did when they started?
- jacksmith21006 9y ago
  Who has developed a SDC faster than Google? DE reports it is not at all close. Google working longer and appears spending more and just wants it more. Plus Google has the prephereal systems like simulations to test. P!us Google is the only one with the cloud infrastructure that is in play. https://www.wired.com/2017/02/california-dmv-autonomous-car-disengagement/ https://www.wired.com/2017/02/california-dmv-autonomous-car-... The Numbers Don't Lie: Self-Driving Cars Are Getting Good - Wired
- speedplane 9y ago
  Uber strikes me as a company that'll spend a ton of money, try it out for a year or two, show off a few prototypes and back off once they see how hard it is. In the meantime they may produce a few vehicles with flaky autonomous capability that will hopefully not get anyone killed. The company has money, muscle, and can-do drive, but the company isn't rooted in nerdy tech the way Google is. Makes far more sense for Uber to license Google's tech and integrate with vehicles.
jacksmith21006 9y ago
Yes Waymo is well ahead. https://www.wired.com/2017/02/california-dmv-autonomous-car-disengagement/ https://www.wired.com/2017/02/california-dmv-autonomous-car-... The Numbers Don't Lie: Self-Driving Cars Are Getting Good - Wired

Fricken 9y ago

It's certainly not a winner take all market, the world is a big place and it would be ridiculously capital-intensive to deploy everywhere before anyone else has a shot. Though we could very well end up seeing regional monopolies where a single fleet provider dominates in a given city. Uber is working hard to develop autonomous vehicles, but I don't think they need to worry about getting usurped by a competitors robotaxis near term. Uber's biggest future markets are in the developing world, particularly fast growing metropolises where transit infrastructure can't grow to meet demand. In places like Lagos, Dhaka, Delhi, Jakarta or Karachi it will be a long time before robotaxis can handle that level of chaos, or compete with low-cost human labour in those markets. Overwhelmed and cash strapped governments in these places are more than happy to let a private operator such as Uber handle transit. (interesting article on that: https://thebolditalic.com/ubers-goal-is-not-to-operate-alongside-public-transit-but-to-replace-it-c76e48d8d317 https://thebolditalic.com/ubers-goal-is-not-to-operate-along...) Regarding OEM's, well, some are doing better than others. GM subsidiary Cruise Automation has some real inertia. While Waymo is first to hit this milestone, I'm betting Cruise will be the first to deploy 100k robotaxis. Waymo doesn't make cars, and doesn't have any sort of manufacturing partnership on lock-down. With these FCA Pacifica's Waymo basically just bought them and retrofitted the autonomous hardware themselves. It's not clear if the so-called partnership will go any further than that. In a few years maybe one or several of the OEM's will throw up their arms and say "This is too hard, I give up", and that will be Waymo's opportunity to pounce, though they'll likely be competing with intel/mobileye, who are a little behind but entertain aspirations of becoming an open provider of autonomous hardware and software, and have a lot of money to spend.

jacksmith21006 9y ago
Disagree. Think it is a winner take all. But I also think Google will involve other companies but be controlling the platform that wins. Google has way too many advantgeous even beyond a beta? Alpha? working solution. But it is the fact that Google really wants it. Plus there is no competition from any other big tech player like Amazon and FB be the most important two.
- speedplane 9y ago

quirkot 9y ago

> This may not be a winner-take-all market (I don't know honestly...) I think it’s important to distinguish service from tech. Once the tech is mature, you’ll probably have a handful of providers but the service will be wildly federated. It’ll only take one tech provider to have moderately open terms and the service will be the equivalent of WordPress for autonomous vehicles.

Animats 9y ago

Waymo does seem to be ahead technically. They've been working on the hard cases for years, while the other guys are still struggling. They are trying hard to get good situational awareness. One of the few neutral measures we have are CA DMV's disconnect and accident reports, and in those, Waymo has been consistently ahead. Waymo is hooked up with FCA (Fiat-Chrysler Automobiles), of all things. Uber is "fake it 'til you make it". Otto's truck demo only worked on a deserted highway surrounded by chase cars. Cruise also started out that way, but they seem to have improved once acquired by GM. Those guys seem to drive mostly on visual cues, without as much of a near-area model as Waymo. Tesla has the self-crashing car. Four collisions with something partly blocking a lane, all on video. I've posted the links before. Musk made a big mistake trying to do it without LIDAR. Nobody else can do that reliably, and neither can Tesla. Tesla had to turn off most of the autonomy. Now they're shipping the Model 3 in small quantities with hardware that's only enough for lane keeping and auto-braking. Volvo has a good, but limited 100 car demo with real drivers running. Freeway only. Their goal is "no crashes". They'll probably get there. Ford is quietly doing something and not talking about it much. Meanwhile, Continental and now, Delphi are quietly gearing up to make low-cost LIDARs by the millions. Despite all the talk about self-driving as a service, it may turn out to just be an auto part.

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
3pt14159 9y ago
One question I can't seem to find a good answer for is this: Why doesn't the self-driving tech hand off control to a remote driver if the internet connection is good enough and there is enough warning? Even with a couple seconds notice a primed human could take the wheel and do the right thing when the sensors aren't making sense.
- Jyaif 9y ago
  There's no good reason; it's likely what they'll do.
  - 9y ago

jacksmith21006 9y ago

The road for car makers is way, way longer than ride sharing. Thru ride sharing things will be so far along that there is little chance the car makers will be competitive. Plus the future is NOT buying cars.

dx034 9y ago
A lot of people say that buying cars will be a thing of the past but I doubt that. People don't just own a car because they have to, they like having a car. I currently don't own one and use a lot of ride sharing and rental cars. And I'm seriously considering buying a car soon. Even with a dense network of cars it's still a hassle to always look for an available car and you don't know what model you'll end up with. The same goes for cleanliness or any issues with the car. I really doubt that car sales will fall a lot.

shostack 9y ago

What I'm dying to see with the OEMs is how it will impact their advertising and design. They used to design for individuals and advertise for brand affinity. Will they still make that distinction with self-driving cars? Will they have a luxury line, a mid-end line and an economy line?

MarkMc 9y ago

> If Waymo's tech is years ahead of the competition ... then I think a lot of the self-driving companies and car manufacturers in the US will be having cold sweats...I see this lead up enabling Waymo to capture significant market share in the US in regions where laws towards autonomous vehicles are friendly Yes, Waymo may capture 100% of the self-driving tech market for a few years, but I don't see it having a sustainable advantage. As soon as another company develops self-driving technology that meets safety standards it can undercut Waymo and capture a significant market share. In 10 years self driving tech will be a commodity product - any car manufacturer/ride hailing company will be able to choose between a half-dozen offerings. But car manucturers are still in for long-term pain because their product is also becoming a commodity: nobody cares about the colour or horsepower of the taxi they take to work. Electrification and ride sharing may also significantly reduce the demand for new vehicles. Ride-hailing companies like Uber are also going to feel their share of pain, but only until they can develop or buy self-driving technology. Until then they can just pay a few billion dollars to subsidize their human drivers.

alooPotato 9y ago
> Yes, Waymo may capture 100% of the self-driving tech market for a few years, but I don't see it having a sustainable advantage. As soon as another company develops self-driving technology that meets safety standards it can undercut Waymo and capture a significant market share. In 10 years self driving tech will be a commodity product - any car manufacturer/ride hailing company will be able to choose between a half-dozen offerings. This is what I'm most excited about. Currently ride sharing market isn't very competitive because its hard for new entrants to get the network effects going of drivers and passengers. With driverless cars, once the tech is commoditized, any large-ish company could theoretically offer a ride sharing service - it just becomes a financing problem to lease the cars which I believe will allow for more entrants (not mom and pops, but many more corps can jump in). > But car manucturers are still in for long-term pain because their product is also becoming a commodity: nobody cares about the colour or horsepower of the taxi they take to work. Maybe they don't care about color and horsepower but they might care about other features. Comfort, tech bells and whistles, layout (all the seats face inwards with a poker table in the middle), or just straight luxury. On that last point, there are many high end cars that aren't meant to be driven by their owners. The owners are meant to sit in the back and enjoy. I'm still unsure whether net cars will go up or go down, theirs arguments on both sides.