4 ms·

> Something is happening in the next decade or you have the responsibility to blow the whistle Blow the whistle? There's nothing unethical here - I'm just say

> Something is happening in the next decade or you have the responsibility to blow the whistle Blow the whistle? There's nothing unethical here - I'm just saying it won't make money. It's not like children are being exploited for slavery and it's my moral duty to raise awareness to this issue. Why would I, or anyone, open myself to getting sued into bankruptcy over this? There's a big difference between making some vague comments about how I know this won't work, and releasing trade secrets. I don't have to release any more data than I am comfortable with (not to mention it would be illegal), and you don't have to take me seriously if you don't want to. But if you think I'm full of shit, you have the opportunity to make a bet with me and make some money.

adrr 7y ago
https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/dmv/detail/vr/autonomous/disengagement_report_2019 https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/dmv/detail/vr/autonomous/disen... Just came out. Is the data correct or are companies underreporting disengagements? Cruise is at 20,000 miles per disengagement. 4 years ago they were only at 50 miles.
- BigBubbleButt 7y ago
  Those disengagements are not representative of all the disengagements the vehicle makes. Basically, the company gets to decide for itself whether or not an incident is severe enough it needs to be reported. https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2018-02-02/safety-numbers-on-autonomous-cars-just-don-t-add-up https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2018-02-02/safety...
anoncareer0212 7y ago
It's fraudulent to raise money and make the statements Alphabet has been making if there's no path to profitability in the next decade. I'm guessing you have a more limited proposition (won't be a profitable passenger carrier in next decade) and more perfect information on that (no way it can work in rain or snow; fixed cost of mobile compute > $XX,XXX)
- BigBubbleButt 7y ago
  It's not fraud, it's just a bad investment. Unless Waymo is saying "we guarantee to have this technology doing this impossible thing and making a trillion dollars in revenue in 5 years" there is nothing illegal about it. Being disingenuous is almost never the same thing as fraud. By simply prefacing each statement with "we hope to" it removes legal liability. It's not illegal to be optimistic. Staging demos where the cars perform better than average isn't illegal, it's just misleading. Likewise, making projections about revenue isn't illegal, it's just not grounded in reality. I'm not accusing Waymo of fraud. I'm saying their technology isn't going to be ready anytime soon, and they aren't making any legally binding statements to refute that - so why would it be fraud?
  - KKKKkkkk1 7y ago
    Just for fun I looked up the dictionary definition of fraud. fraud, n., wrongful or criminal deception intended to result in financial or personal gain. When Dmitri Dolgov said that Waymo's cars are safe enough to drive his children, I think that he committed fraud. Maybe not in the legal sense, but it's wrongful and deceptive and results in financial and personal gain.

adrr 7y ago

https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/dmv/detail/vr/autonomous/disengagement_report_2019 https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/dmv/detail/vr/autonomous/disen... Just came out. Is the data correct or are companies underreporting disengagements? Cruise is at 20,000 miles per disengagement. 4 years ago they were only at 50 miles.

BigBubbleButt 7y ago
Those disengagements are not representative of all the disengagements the vehicle makes. Basically, the company gets to decide for itself whether or not an incident is severe enough it needs to be reported. https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2018-02-02/safety-numbers-on-autonomous-cars-just-don-t-add-up https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2018-02-02/safety...

anoncareer0212 7y ago

It's fraudulent to raise money and make the statements Alphabet has been making if there's no path to profitability in the next decade. I'm guessing you have a more limited proposition (won't be a profitable passenger carrier in next decade) and more perfect information on that (no way it can work in rain or snow; fixed cost of mobile compute > $XX,XXX)

BigBubbleButt 7y ago
It's not fraud, it's just a bad investment. Unless Waymo is saying "we guarantee to have this technology doing this impossible thing and making a trillion dollars in revenue in 5 years" there is nothing illegal about it. Being disingenuous is almost never the same thing as fraud. By simply prefacing each statement with "we hope to" it removes legal liability. It's not illegal to be optimistic. Staging demos where the cars perform better than average isn't illegal, it's just misleading. Likewise, making projections about revenue isn't illegal, it's just not grounded in reality. I'm not accusing Waymo of fraud. I'm saying their technology isn't going to be ready anytime soon, and they aren't making any legally binding statements to refute that - so why would it be fraud?
- KKKKkkkk1 7y ago
  Just for fun I looked up the dictionary definition of fraud. fraud, n., wrongful or criminal deception intended to result in financial or personal gain. When Dmitri Dolgov said that Waymo's cars are safe enough to drive his children, I think that he committed fraud. Maybe not in the legal sense, but it's wrongful and deceptive and results in financial and personal gain.