14 ms·
Toyota Investing $500M in Uber in Driverless Car Pact
- stephengillie 8y agoIsn't Uber pivoting from the self driving car market, to the bikesharing market?[0] [0]https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17849364 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17849364
- sebleon 8y agoThey're not doing a full pivot - rather they're shifting from "car-ride-hailing," to the all-encompassing "mobility" and diversifying their revenue across a number of transportation means.
- taurath 8y agoIt doesn't matter if you're not profitable, don't have the technology, or have huge risks - if people with money believe you, you can make the future you want (and get extraordinarily rich in the process). Seems to be the theme of the tech industry lately. At least the end "goal" is a bit more appealing than the Magic Leap.
- newfocogi 8y agoI must be in the minority here, but the AR future is really compelling to me. The amount of money that Magic Leap was able to raise without a real product is astounding. But I do see wearable computing as the future. Of course we all hope it doesn't become a steady stream of marketing directly into our retinas, but I joined tech because I wanted to help build the future, not just watch it happen.
- taurath 8y agoIf anything the amount of money they were able to raise and resources they were able to throw at the problem proves that its at minimum 10 years away, barring some ground-shaking advances in displays and sensors. With billions of dollars they ended up with a clip-on computer, a 50 degree FOV "lens", no compelling demo and the same judder the hololens had. It seems much closer to being at the VirualBoy stage than the Oculus/Vive.
- ORioN63 8y agoI am actually stunned how there was no displacement of the current input devices. We fitted keyboard onto our screens, AR devices normally come with a joystick or something. I have high hopes for similar projects to Tap Keyboard or the Myo armband, that continue to evolve on something that IMO has large implications on how we can evolve as a society the same way smartphones did. A wearable input device that was _good_ (defined by not being cumbersome, probably even fashionable and functional, as should match current input) would be for me the extra step .
- ghaff 8y agoComputer/console input has been really resistant to change. Even the Wii controller, which was something of a fad at one point, pretty much faded away. Six axis controllers is another one that never went mainstream though they were somewhat popular for a time. There have also been various alternate input styles for phones but nothing's ever taken off.
- pasabagi 8y agoI think there's some interesting work done around natural-user-interfaces (using a kinect to control software, etc). I think this is probably a more promising direction than new custom hardware - because hardware is expensive, and quality hardware is far more so. I mean, if you could use a pen and paper to interface with a computer, you're standing on the shoulders of centuries of experience about how to produce a nice pen-paper experience, at a really cheap price. A newcomer in the world of interface hardware has to overcome the fact that everybody finds a new interface horrible for years, aside from the crazy technical and industrial challenges of producing something at a price/performance ratio that's better than entrenched technologies.
- ghaff 8y agoI actually can imagine a future AR being a lot more compelling than VR. But it would take a lot of significant advances both from a hardware and software/data perspective to be useful. There's also a pretty significant question of whether it caan overcome the glasshole factor for mainstream use.
- smhost 8y agoi hope you will actively help to ensure that the future that is built is the one you want to be built, instead of just hoping that everything will magically work out. A lot of old-school nerds (including yours truly) had the same ideological blind spot as your comment, and look where that's gotten us. a god damned cyberpunk dystopia.
- maxxxxx 8y agoYeah, it seems more and more that the process is to get as much money as you can and then figure out how to use it.
- nradov 8y agoIt's only logical that management raises money when money is cheap. That way the company has extra breathing room to survive and pivot if necessary. And if it turns out they don't need the cash, they can always just return it to investors.
- maxxxxx 8y agoI think there is more to it. For example, when Uber was talking about getting into self driving cars there was really no reason to believe they could take a lead besides having a boatload of money to buy the tech or people.
- naveen99 8y agoTrue. In fact rich people even give money to non-profits. Uber is a thing that should exist. Profitable or not.
- qeternity 8y agoI'm not saying that Kalanick et all aren't going to be very well off in any event, but all this cash they raise at eye popping valuations is going to have liquidation preference...and that's scary for a company with serious cash flow issues like Uber.
- naveen99 8y agopeople with lower liquidity preference (from earlier rounds or common share holders) usually have some opportunities to exit in secondary markets at each of these funding events.
- qeternity 8y agoThey do, but it's typically relatively small when companies need cash, since any secondary market transactions don't result in net equity issuance.
- rasz 8y agoDo you have any historical examples to back up that assertion?
- newfocogi 8y agoI am surprised Toyota would want to work with Uber at this point - it seems Uber's ills are piling up faster than their successes. Could this be a desperation play where if Toyota doesn't partner up with somebody, they won't have a part in a driverless future that looks like it will belong to Waymo and friends?
- sebleon 8y agoWhat ills do you speak of? The negative media narrative is not a full reflection of reality, rather what will attract the most eyeballs to monetize in this current media cycle.
- MBCook 8y agoUber’s history outside of self-driving cars is hardly clean either. My only guess would be Toyota is hoping that when Uber goes full self-driving they would use Toyota vehicles to do it.
- chriselles 8y agoThat’s what I’m thinking. A large investment in a potentially very large future customer. Would Boeing invest money in an autonomous flight project by Southwest Airlines in hopes of locking in a Boeing 737 only fleet?
- giancarlostoro 8y agoI hope this is the strategy instead of Toyota wanting to use Uber on their cars as the main source of AI. To this day Uber hasn't done anything to impress me and probably most people. Their corporate culture doesn't help either.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- smt88 8y agoTheir reckless (compared to Waymo) behavior with self-driving car testing is certainly more than negative press. It seems to reflect their entire culture.
- drenvuk 8y agoI don't know if this is a fair point of view but from an outsider's perspective it seems like any company that isn't Waymo is simply burning money. What companies actually have a reasonable chance at developing a usable autonomous driving system that won't kill me while I cross a street and won't kill the driver while on the highway? Anyone have a list of real contenders free of the marketing bs?
- ForHackernews 8y agoGM Cruise is a strong contender.
- mi_lk 8y agoCurious, what makes you claim that?
- tedsanders 8y agoOne piece of evidence is disengagement rates. In 2017, Waymo led with ~6,000 miles per disengagement. Cruise was in second with ~1,000 miles per disengagement. Also, if you look only at the last few months of 2017, Cruise had improved to around ~3,000 or so as I recall. The other players testing in CA are far behind Waymo and Cruise. Of course, there are many caveats to comparing disengagement rates. These are self-reported by companies, and each company may have different policies about which disengagements are serious enough to report. Also, not all miles are equal. Cruise likes to emphasize that its SF miles are more difficult than Waymo's more suburban Mountain View miles. Here's a nice summary of the 2017 data I found for you: https://thelastdriverlicenseholder.com/2018/02/01/disengagement-report-2017-the-good-the-bad-the-ugly/ https://thelastdriverlicenseholder.com/2018/02/01/disengagem...
- logical42 8y agoTo be fair, I feel like I, as a human, get confused about what I’m supposed to be doing driving in SF at a rate worse than once every thousand miles.
- samirparikh 8y agoI wonder what this means for TRI/TRI-AD which currently work on AV development for Toyota.
- jpm_sd 8y agoThat is a really good question. An outside investment on this scale seems kind of like a vote of no-confidence for the internal efforts.
- ingenieroariel 8y agoFrom what I have heard Toyota’s approach is to prefer taking over the driver in difficult situations instead of the other way around. Uber could benefit a lot from this.
- evadne 8y agoThis reminds me of the SEC filing for Toyota which I had to pull up earlier out of curiosity https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1094517/000119312518201591/d549954d20f.htm https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1094517/000119312518... > As filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on June 25, 2018 > Toyota and Uber Technologies, Inc. have entered into a memorandum of understanding to explore collaboration with respect to ridesharing. As part of the partnership, the companies created new leasing options in which car purchasers can lease vehicles with connected terminals from Toyota Financial Services and cover their payments through earnings generated as Uber drivers So not their first rodeo, Toyota sells cars after all Also Toyota Connected is making quite a big splash in Europe at the moment with a London office having been established March 2018 to soak up local talent.
- ghaff 8y agoToyota also has a joint research center with MIT CSAIL. https://toyota.csail.mit.edu/ https://toyota.csail.mit.edu/
- rhacker 8y agoMy read: Once Waymo has released re-usable tech, Toyota will install that on its cars, and Uber will facilitate the dispatch - And that Uber won't do this with another car vendor for X years (in the deal)
- PunchTornado 8y agoSeems like a bad deal to me. Uber looks like it is behind it's competitors. Uber is a company that I just hate. It doesn't have any ethics whatsoever.
- PunchTornado 8y agoAnyone know how VW is doing in self-driving cars? This move by Toyota seems a little desperate, so I'm wondering what the other giant is doing...
- selimthegrim 8y agoWhat happened to Uber wanting to focus equally on bikeshare going forward?
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- urchony 8y agoBusiness, Business, Business
- clu1590 8y agoThis makes no sense to me. They already have TRI which has billions in funding and poached the former head of the DARPA challenge. Why do they need Uber?
- debt 8y agoThey want to win.
- cityzen 8y agoJam Pad.
- neonate 8y agohttp://archive.is/RQtYT http://archive.is/RQtYT
- true_tuna 8y agoI have no idea what this article says.
- ectospheno 8y agoToyota likes their best selling car in America moniker. This is why they sell so many cars to rental car agencies. Honda and others don't aggressively pursue this and have lower "sales" as a result. So I don't find this "investment" very surprising at all.
- oculusthrift 8y agodon’t get what you’re getting at. are sales to rental car agencies not real sales? if so why not? i don’t know much about it so curious.
- smolder 8y agoI think he's implying they just take a hit to their profitability in some cases to maintain their high market share.
- dalbasal 8y agoIt seems reasonable enough. If driverless happens, Uber would be rushing to acquire a very large number of cars. Regardless of autonomousness, there are paths that Uber could take which would make them a huge consumer and operator of cars. It's a hard to predict future. There is at least some possibility that driverless will eat a market fast, and the market changes for car makers. They need a hedge. Overall though... how much money is going in to autonomous r&d? It's also possible that driverless doesn't get to the making money part for a long time. Is the funding sustainable?
- smolder 8y agoI think "autonomy" is the right word where you said "autonomousness"
- az123zaz 8y agoMany of the posts here assume Toyota is investing in Uber to get access Uber's self-driving tech. This is a Toyota self-driving vehicle in 2014: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x5Qey8ksE18 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x5Qey8ksE18 I think Uber self-driving initiative got serious around 2015.
- nissimk 8y agoI thought the investment was to open a channel for selling more Toyotas. They're going to offer preferential lease deals that can be paid through Uber earnings. https://www.freep.com/story/money/cars/2016/05/24/toyota-invests-uber-ride-sharing-lease-vehicles-drivers/84863156/ https://www.freep.com/story/money/cars/2016/05/24/toyota-inv...
- thrwjddi893 8y agoThis is quite strange. Toyota has a research center in SC and Boston (TRI) and has invested about 100M in PFN. This seems to indicate the complete lack of progress on this front. This'd not be surprising. I think Renault Nissan is the only one with a working system.
- nojvek 8y agoRight now there is too much money chasing too few startups. Some startups literally operate with a "we have a bottomless pit of money and it doesn't matter if we never show a dollar of profit, we just need to keep on raising more from investors who think they'll miss the train". Uber and Cruise kind of feel like that. I'm sure Waymo has a bottomless pit from Google too. I guess that's the reality of moonshot projects. A lot of them are going to burn billions of dollars throwing lavish office parties and off sites, but one of them will be huge. That's essentially what SoftBank's 100B vision fund is kind of doing. A lot of investors operate with a "fear of missing out" syndrome and that's probably why Uber gets more funding than 99% of all US startups combined.
- superkuh 8y agoDriving a vehicle is the most dangerous thing most people do regularly. Not just to themselves but in terms of potential of hurting or killing others. Software is the most unreliable thing that most people use regularly. Combinging the two is kind of crazy. Especially since no one has even begun to demonstrate a self driving car that can handle inclimate weather (like, say, the 5 months of snow covered pavement for a large part of the USA).
- kart23 8y agoI think people underrate human drivers. When you take into account the massive amount of miles driven each day, the amount of crashes isnt that bad, and currently self driving cars have much more fatalities per mile than humans.
- trytophan 8y agoThe leading cause of transportation deaths are, by a long mile, automobiles. Automobile fatalities also have the highest rate of people killed per miles traveled. I think human driving ability is overrated, but I agree with you that self driving cars aren't doing too great either
- beerlord 8y agoWhere are Toyota's electric cars?
- uptownfunk 8y agoI think Tesla is highly underrated in this space. All Tesla cars now have sonar and radar capability built in, in addition to the extensive camera system. As someone who frequently commutes in Teslas, I would say Tesla is closest to actually deploying something close to self-driving to the general population out of all the current self-driving competitors. Furthermore, I imagine they're collecting data on all the Tesla cars currently being driven. I have seen the model updates substantially improve the auto-pilot capabilities with every update. And as someone who works with lots of quantitative data on a daily basis, I think there is a fundamental difference between training on billions of miles of simulated data vs. actual data. Simulated data may reduce overfitting, but there is still scope to overfit compared to raw data gathered from the field. Simply put, you won't generalize as well to data that's been simulated vs. field-generated data.
- michaelt 8y agoYou can train on a hundred billion miles of real world data - you'll still be wasting your time if you need LIDAR and you don't have it.
- lgbr 8y ago> you'll still be wasting your time if you need LIDAR This is not for certain. I'm quoting Tesla's CEO, but it's suggested that LIDAR leads to optimizing for local minima. It means that LIDAR can get you 90% of the way there, but there's still going to be a lot of situations where LIDAR might not be capable. The problem that needs to be solved is vision. Humans only have vision, and they can drive with it. Radar and LIDAR are nice-to-haves, but until you solve vision, you haven't solved self driving.
- michaelt 8y agoI'm not saying you do or don't need LIDAR. I'm saying that if you _do_ need LIDAR, a training data set without it ain't worth much, no matter how large it may be.
- ProblemFactory 8y ago
- halhod 8y agoThere are reasons to think that Toyota's automated driving strategy is a good one. Wrote about it here https://www.economist.com/business/2018/05/19/toyota-takes-a-winding-road-to-autonomous-vehicles https://www.economist.com/business/2018/05/19/toyota-takes-a.... I'd assume that the Uber partnership is about mobility and ridesharing. One of Toyota's main focuses with autonomy is on making the driving safer and more comfortable. Gil Pratt talks explicitly about improving the experience for ride-hailing drivers