16 ms·

Loon’s final flight

285 points by sarthakjshetty 6y ago

CraftThatBlock 6y ago
Cue https://killedbygoogle.com https://killedbygoogle.com comments...
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
fossuser 6y ago
I’m going to say I called this one at least 8 months ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23419270 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23419270 Loon is not competitive in a world with Starlink (even without Starlink it seems). The business didn’t make strategic sense. I still really liked their original goal of loon for all and the first video they made for it: https://youtu.be/m96tYpEk1Ao https://youtu.be/m96tYpEk1Ao It’s a little sad they had to downsize and give up. I guess Licklider was right to title the original internet paper an “intergalactic computer network”. Musk started with interplanetary goals and he’ll at least end up with one that covers the earth. Loon for all started too small. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intergalactic_Computer_Network https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intergalactic_Computer_Network —- Related: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23419880 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23419880 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25601473 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25601473
- scotcha1 6y ago
  Wouldn't this be considered 'strategic' to Google b/c it had the potential to provide additional eyeballs & ad revenue to users outside of their normal markets (US/EU)?
  - toast0 6y ago
    Eyeballs without access to terrestrial networking probably don't make a lot of ad revenue. But, even if so, look at Google Fiber. Google benefits from networking build out, regardless of if they're providing the network; it's just as good for them if someone else builds the network. If starlink can fill the niche that Loon filled, that works just as well for Google, on someone else's capex/opex. Or if the freespace optics they worked on for Loon can reduce backhaul costs for traditional cell towers, that might help get more deployed in areas that don't have connectivity; which again works well for Google.
  - fossuser 6y ago
    The general idea of a global telecom is a good one. The strategic failure was not recognizing that starlink’s approach to the problem made way more sense. They didn’t see that as the existential threat it was. Instead they downsized their implementation to running the network over poor countries and hand waved a bit about being able to provide connectivity in congested areas. Loon has no viable future in a world with starlink.
    - wcoenen 6y ago
      I wouldn't call this a strategic failure. Google is a big SpaceX investor.
      - fossuser 6y ago
        Well a nine year investment in a company to end in failure isn’t what I’d call a strategic success.
        wcoenen 6y ago
        A single investment is not strategy though. Think of the investments in Loon, Taara, SpaceX and Google Fiber as part of a larger strategy to bring internet access with decent bandwidth to a larger number of humans. Some investments will not pan out, others will bear fruit.
        fossuser 6y ago
        I think we’re talking about different things. Does this make sense for alphabet? I agree that it does as one of their many bets. Does it make sense for Loon which spun off as its own company under alphabet with its own leadership and its own stock? That’s the strategic failure I’m talking about, Loon’s not alphabet’s.
        ncallaway 6y ago
        I agree with wcoenen. They invested in multiple potential paths to a global internet. It's not surprising that they'd drop the investments that aren't as promising as the investments that are showing significant promise. It's like saying I applied to multiple colleges, and because I only accepted one application, that the other applications were a failure. But, no, it could just mean that I preferred to go to the college that I accepted, but the others were a hedge against that path not working out.
  - asutekku 6y ago
    Users who don’t spend are almost worthless to the advertisers. So google most likely will not receive any meaningful amount of money from countries with data coverage but without the customer base willing to pay for products advertised.
- jessriedel 6y ago
  Loon can (could) handle normal LTE mobile phones. Starlink requires a phased array antenna the size of a pizza box which, to my understanding, cannot be fully miniaturized. That's not to say they aren't somewhat competing against each other, but Starlink doesn't strictly dominate as you imply.
  - fossuser 6y ago
    I honestly think SpaceX could give those away in developing areas if they had to. But yes, you’re right that being able to use LTE and existing phone radios was a point in loon’s favor.
    - rrmoelker 6y ago
      Let's hope so. Though the price might be a hurdle. The price per base station is quite high right now. Estimates range from $500 - $2500 (based on teardown)[1]. 1 https://www.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/kwkep4/tsp_181_starlink_dish_phased_array_design/ https://www.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/kwkep4/tsp_181_star...
    - jessriedel 6y ago
      Ok, but just to be clear, I wasn't trying to make a statement about cost; that can always be folded into the monthly payments or, as you say, philanthropically donated.
      - deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
Mistri 6y ago
People often make fun of Google/Alphabet for their graveyard of failed initiatives/products. While some of it might be warranted, projects like this—that strive to solve a large, global issue through somewhat charitable actions—are generous and have only increased my respect for the Google/Alphabet/X team. I hope they don't get flamed for this, and hopefully some of their research and donation funds can live on and solve the issue that Loon originally intended to one day.
- ogre_codes 6y ago
  I think the days of Google Moonshots are coming to a close. In general Google hasn't been very good at shooting for the moon. They've lost their leadership and vision and all that's left is a giant advertising behemoth. Did any of their moonshots really hit the mark or even come close?
  - Mistri 6y ago
    Waymo seems like it's nearing its final stages. I have high hopes!
    - ogre_codes 6y ago
      I think it's generous to say it's in its final stages. They haven't even left Phoenix have they? And even in Phoenix, it's still largely a beta project in a few predefined areas. It certainly seems like Google's most likely moon shot to take off. But considering only a few thousand people have used it, it's not exactly a big success.
      - deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
    - runawaybottle 6y ago
      Google has absolutely no choice but to make Waymo succeed with Apple and Tesla taking the space seriously. It’s not a moonshot, it’s an absolute necessity.
laverya 6y ago
Given that Starlink will probably solve the same set of problems within a few years (that being access to internet worldwide in areas with minimal infrastructure) this isn't too much of a surprise to me.
- shpx 6y ago
  You connect to Loon balloons with your regular cellphone whereas StarLink requires a "pizza-box-sized" antenna. They solve slightly different problems.
  - sgtnoodle 6y ago
    It's likely easier to set up a solar powered cell tower on the ground with a starlink antenna on top, than to float the same equipment on a balloon though.
    - hckrnrd 6y ago
      Don’t forget about Amazon’s Kuiper System. https://www.aboutamazon.com/news/innovation-at-amazon/amazon-marks-breakthrough-in-project-kuiper-development https://www.aboutamazon.com/news/innovation-at-amazon/amazon...
  - Tepix 6y ago
    "Pizza-box-sized" was a placeholder. The Starlink antenna ("Dishy") has a diameter of 59cm https://i.imgur.com/ULwOGxs.jpg https://i.imgur.com/ULwOGxs.jpg
    - shpx 6y ago
      That's a 12 inch medium pizza, without the box. An antenna of that size can't be carried by normal people going about their daily lives. More people are willing to buy a phone and a phone plan (Facebook was even willing to subsidize the plan in India with Internet.org) than buying a phone, a phone plan, an antenna and a StarLink plan. That's even more true for people who aren't internet users yet.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
deanCommie 6y ago
>...the road to commercial viability has proven much longer and riskier than hoped. So we’ve made the difficult decision to close down Loon. I don't really understand - wasn't the whole premise of Google X and their "Other Bets" that "Google has deep pockets. Let's use this to explore radically big ideas, that are ahead of their time, and let the world catch up to them?" Bringing "abundant, affordable Internet access, not just to the next billion, but to the last billion" is clearly an investment. You bring them the internet. You spur them to achieve great things. Then you reap the financial rewards. But that's not a 10-year plan, that's a 20-50-100 year plan. But, there's no reason to think that Google couldn't think like a 20-50-100 year company if they tried. So what happened? Did they really think that they were going to make money from the poorest 1B people on the planet BEFORE they brought them ubiquitous internet and helped them use that internet to improve their quality of life?
- MattGaiser 6y ago
  I suspect that Starlink will render it unneeded.
  - systemBuilder 6y ago
    You mean starlink's failure will supplant loon's? Think carefully before you respond. I am one of about 5 engineers to help invent both globalstar and iridium.
    - ncallaway 6y ago
      > Think carefully before you respond. I am one of about 5 engineers to help invent both globalstar and iridium. I don't think this kind of warning is a helpful part of the conversation. If you want to make an argument against Starlink, fine, go ahead and make it. But what is the use of the admonition for someone to "think carefully before they respond"? It seems to be the only real effect that is intended to have is to deter additional conversation. Anyway, I'm going to go ahead and ignore your warning, and the credentials you present: I think Starlink is going to be a commercial success. If they solve the satellite interlink problem (which, admittedly, is a big problem), I think it will be a viable path to delivering a global internet solution.
gkoberger 6y ago
Hey, 9 years is a pretty good run for any product, especially a ambitious one with no clear revenue model. And the shuttering is paired with a $10M donation to continue the support of the mission. I know Google gets hate for shutting things down, but they have hundreds of products – I can't think of any other tech company with such a wide range of products. They make bets, and with bets comes a certain amount of failure. I'd guess they have a better "success" rate than, say, YC. (Ugh, I hate defending Google, but alas)
- 7thaccount 6y ago
  Does google have anything successful outside of: search, adsense, chrome, chromebooks, and android? Those are all large accomplishments to be sure, but it seems like they should have more products out there that people actually buy.
  - carlineng 6y ago
    GCP
  - ehsankia 6y ago
    They have at least a dozen services that have over a billion users. Others not mentioned in your list: Youtube, Photos, Drive, Maps, Gmail, Docs. And probably slightly more trivial ones like translate, calendar, flights, news, finance, and other stuff that are kinda part of search. Their hardware/home line isn't doing that bad either.
    - pnw_hazor 6y ago
      Are any of those innovations? It seems to me they are all boring, obvious, copied, or purchased products that complement their ad selling business.
      - gkoberger 6y ago
        I mean, maybe after 15 years they seem status quo. But almost all of these were revolutionary at the time... do you remember videos before Youtube, collaboration before Docs, email before Gmail or maps before Maps? Yes, Google makes money off ads. But how does that discount them being innovations (which, btw, is a qualification you came up with... nobody above you even said they were).
person_of_color 6y ago
Google is cursed by its own success. Any product they release will always be on shaky ground when compared to their advertising and search money-printing monopolies. At this point, they should give up and settle into their role as the 21st century IBM.
- jariel 6y ago
  This is not a Google Project, it's an Alphabet 'Moonshot' designed to maybe shake things up, create a market, discover new solutions/opportunities/induce investment with a very high risk profile and no obviously commercial outcome i.e. quasi NGO stuff that VC's won't touch. There's no way to compare Loon to a regular commercial venture. It's just stuff the founders want to do and that's fine.
- killjoywashere 6y ago
  IBM builds their own line of processors and operates some of the biggest supercomputers (e.g. Summit at Oak Ridge). I know at least one guy who works on a pretty ambitious project at Google, and last I talked to him, he lusted after the insanely crazy things he used to get to do in an IBM-internal dev shop.
fermienrico 6y ago
I am currently reading "The Idea Factory" [1], the story of Bell Labs and its innovation streak for many decades. There were so many amazing things Bell Labs worked on - all directly related to solving business problems. At one point, they were given a task of developing the most perfect lubrication oil dispenser with a requirement that it dispenses exactly 15 drops of oil per squeeze of the trigger. They worked on Tractors that dug channels for laying telephone lines to materials that lead to the invention of the transistor to solve the problem of unreliability of vacuum tube based switch boards. Some worked on improving manufacturing and invented what we call Quality Control. Everything was deep and wide, but still tied to the Bell's business. When I look at Google X and bunch of modern corporate labs (Lab 126, Facebook probably has something, Intel Labs (drones!), Microsoft Labs), I see a whole lotta hoo haa about tech innovation, but nothing with a long term vision of integration, capitalization and sustenance. No sense of practicality and pragmatism. May be Loon is a way to make Google an internet company (ISP), I could be wrong but as an outsider, it feels like a PR stunt than anything else. Highly recommend this book. [1] https://www.amazon.com/Idea-Factory-Great-American-Innovation/dp/0143122797 https://www.amazon.com/Idea-Factory-Great-American-Innovatio...
- kippinitreal 6y ago
  The difference is that Bell scientists were always focused on core business problems and not just chasing fantasies. OK sure, Shannon was doing whatever with mice and unicycles...but he earned it! All of Bells big accomplishments were tightly coupled to business needs: Information theory => everything, transistors => bad vacuums, fiber optics => latency. Similarly Google has had huge contributions on "research" focused on their core problems: MapReduce, BigTable, Borg, BERT, etc.
  - mjfl 6y ago
    I think another very important component was that they were innovating in an area where they had a legal monopoly - there was no risk that their competitors would steal away their inventions. This is not the case with Waymo for instance.
- someperson 6y ago
ddmma 6y ago
Keep on the search and play ads on youtube
activatedgeek 6y ago
This is quite a surprise. Only recently, Loon collaborated with seasoned reinforcement learning researchers to build more efficient navigation controllers for the balloons, titled "Autonomous navigation of stratospheric balloons using reinforcement learning" [1]. Although, it would appear that much of the gains come from a simulator that they've been developing for a while. [1]: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2939-8 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2939-8
- mjfl 6y ago
  You need a business though. And that doesn't move the needle.
  - activatedgeek 6y ago
    Of course. My point was that it appeared like they were actively working on developing new technologies. Usually, a project that is expected to shut down would mostly lose momentum months before. Although, it is possible that this work was done months ago and only came out now due to the slower Nature review cycles.
asperous 6y ago
Talking about X more generally, their Gimbal book is interesting: https://storage.googleapis.com/x-prod.appspot.com/files/Gimbal_v2.0_X.pdf https://storage.googleapis.com/x-prod.appspot.com/files/Gimb... I think their self-driving cars project is probably what X could be at its peak, incredibly challenging projects, high profit potential, well financed. Projects like loon seem more like a project that a university would get grant funding to finance.
- aoki 6y ago
  Think about the many hard problems to be solved. They had cost-effective high-endurance stratospheric balloons - decades of military projects never really got there. They had very detailed stratospheric wind models - decades of atmospheric science research never really got there. They had a flying LTE network. Each of these solutions was almost certainly too expensive and “niche” for any conventional funding agency to consider, but necessary for Loon to work.
rmason 6y ago
Well if you want to attempt something big without having to work with company's like Google then Elon Musk made an interesting offer today. Musk is offering $100 million to the team providing the best carbon capture technology. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-musk-carbon-capture/elon-musk-to-offer-100-million-prize-for-best-carbon-capture-tech-idUSKBN29R024 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-musk-carbon-capture/e...
- xirbeosbwo1234 6y ago
  Judged by the person who thinks putting cars in tunnels is the solution to urban transit? No thanks. Your average third grader is a more qualified engineer than Elon Musk.
  - tim333 6y ago
    He does better rockets than most third graders.
    - xirbeosbwo1234 6y ago
      Elon Musk is not an engineer. He hasn't built a thing is his entire life. His biggest accomplishment is hitching a ride on the success of Paypal before getting fired for trying to move their infrastructure to Windows (lol). My niece, on the other hand, just built a pretty cool rocket out of a soda bottle! If SpaceX is less comically incompetent than Tesla, I'd wager it's because Elon Musk hasn't been paying as much attention to it.
omarforgotpwd 6y ago
Starlink made this obsolete before it launched
- solarkraft 6y ago
  But Loon launched in 2013 and Starlink in 2018 (?). In a world in which satellites stayed very expensive I could imagine it being a bit more successful.
  - rasz 6y ago
    Technology was already in use in 2004 (Space Data), and Loon started in 2008 when Google decided to "borrow" it. https://www.wired.com/story/the-lawsuit-that-could-pop-alphabets-project-loon-balloons/ https://www.wired.com/story/the-lawsuit-that-could-pop-alpha...
- hckrnrd 6y ago
  While SpaceX is in the news, there’s also the Amazon LEO initiative: Project Kuiper. They’ve received FCC approval and have access to Blue Origin rockets to launch.
  - omarforgotpwd 6y ago
    Sure, there's lots of satellite internet services. most of them have failed to become financially viable
gagan_23 6y ago
When did it started?
vmception 6y ago
and this is why we have quarterly goals this project was dead in the water a long time ago, and for years
walrus01 6y ago
I don't think they will, but I really wish they would open source and release some technical data on exactly what components/subsystems and design they were using for photovoltaic panels, charge control and monitoring systems, and batteries.
catchmeifyoucan 6y ago
Loon always caught my eye, and I thought the reason it would catch on is due to cost. Isn’t launching a satellite much more expensive than a balloon? For example, providing Loon antennas to a telecom provider, and decreasing the infrastructure cost of setting up networks.
- ridaj 6y ago
  Yeah but satellites get actual shit done reliably and for decades.
- solarkraft 6y ago
  > Isn’t launching a satellite much more expensive than a balloon? Historically yes, but while I don't know the numbers, a launch provider that is able to reduce the cost by about an order of magnitude might have an advantage here (SpaceX are also launching 60 of them at once). It also seems like satellites would be a bit less vulnerable to outside interference than balloons.
pjot 6y ago
This summer I had the luck of actually seeing a Loon balloon floating way up in the sky. Viewing it with a telescope was surreal, especially at night, you could see it blink!
ggm 6y ago
The mesh network was informed by, and in turn informed LEO stuff. They did smart work
ridaj 6y ago
Loons are cute toys that got 100x the deserved media attention vs their actual impact. Actual remote internet connectivity is mostly being addressed through the grungy, mind-numbingly routine job of increasing the coverage of terrestrial networks. The folks doing that unrewarding work should get recognition for actually making a difference in people's lives over the long run.
- cainxinth 6y ago
  > Loons are cute toys that got 100x the deserved media attention vs their actual impact. Then they served their real function: marketing
ratclown23 6y ago
It's surreal to think that a decade ago even corps like Google could get away with using ableist language for their projects.
dartharva 6y ago
The successor, Project Taara, seems quite impressive (and more sustainable): https://x.company/projects/taara/ https://x.company/projects/taara/
- ridaj 6y ago
  Optical beam link technology is old tech. It's also badly affected by weather and pollution (rain, clouds, fog) which is why people who do point-to-point communications for a living tend to prefer microwave.
supermatt 6y ago
IMHO, this is NO different from google closing down any other product. If, however, this news came with a grant of all the patents into the public domain, then it would be another story. Could a startup set up a commercial balloon based mesh network without running into patents now held by google? Probably not. THIS is the problem with these "skunkworks" type projects from megacorps. They suck all the air out of the room and prevent others from innovating. Loon didn't fail, Google/Alphabet just decided they were going to discontinue funding. Now they hold a pool of patents they don't intend to do anything with. Now they will point that funding elsewhere and do the same.
- timClicks 6y ago
  Yes in principle, but probably not for this idea. If a startup was really wanted to take this on, they would be very well funded. At that point, they could easily license/buy any IP monopolies owned by Google.
  - supermatt 6y ago
    Well it doesn't need to be a global network of stratospheric balloons - i.e. there are related aspects that could be undertaken with much more limited funding on a local scale. For example, if you wanted to use a laser link to communicate between two ground-tethered weather balloons, you would need to account for the movements of the balloons to correct the link alignment. Lo and behold, first patent on the list (https://loon.com/legal/patents/ https://loon.com/legal/patents/) is for that exact thing (https://patents.google.com/patent/US8634974B2/en https://patents.google.com/patent/US8634974B2/en). What about control the descent of a balloon by letting out some of the gas? You know, like flight balloons use, but "with a computer". Yep, patent for that too. LOADS of the patents are basically "mesh network but with ballons" These are obvious things you would need to do, and yet they are patented. In short, they took away the ability to do ANY balloon based communications - not just a stratospheric global mesh network of current maneuvering autonomous balloons. Of course, this shit shouldnt be permitted. The patent system is broken, as we often discuss around here. IMHO, if these megacorps had ANY honour, they would release all patents to public domain - with revocation clause from another entity if that entity creates a derivative patent without same license. THAT is how to foster innovation - everything else should be a trade secret.
rinzler26 6y ago
Google Nose. https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=VFbYadm_mrw&feature=youtube_gdata https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=VFbYadm_mrw&feat...
OpticalWindows 6y ago
I'm sure this type of tech can be rebooted at any time depending on the need. I think a sustainable commercial model would be difficult with the global slowdown. Many of these moonshots might sadly end earlier than anticipated. I don't think COVID is the end of all momentum in startups but it sure feels like it may take a generation to return.
georgewfraser 6y ago
This kinda tells you everything about the culture of Google: > Sadly, despite the team’s groundbreaking technical achievements over the last 9 years — ... — the road to commercial viability has proven much longer and riskier than hoped. Focus is on the technical achievements, never mind if anyone ever used it.
- remus 6y ago
  Surely that's kind of the point of X and moonshot projects? If they weren't taking on projects that required large scale, risky technical innovation then they'd just be...a normal company?
gokulkrishh09 6y ago
Ohh! Satellite to give internet seems more viable.
christmm 6y ago
out of curiosity, how many employees were working on this outdated idea?
- systemBuilder 6y ago
  200.
sixti60 6y ago
Sorry to be this guy, but I am quite happy this will not happen. The sky - our sky - is not a playground for tech companies. Imposing a mesh-grid of thousands of balloons in the sky is an incredible intrusion for people around the world who have not asked for anything. It's the same for mega constellations of satellites (Starlink). Would you be willing to have a company come and put unsolicited electronic equipment in your backyard? Probably not. It's the same for our sky - I don't want that Facebook or Google impose thousands of electronic devices in our sky. Or maybe ask "the owner" before you start, i.e. the citizens of the world. What's more beautiful than watching stars in the sky in a July/August warm night? Do you really want to lose this landscape forever and have 100 times more satellites than we already have? and have series of white dots one behind the other? OK, companies and states have done it the past, but it's not a valid argument to justify the acceleration with a factor 10 or 100 of this process with thousands of Starlink satellites for example.
- threatofrain 6y ago
  Our skies and space shall be the “playground” of military and police though, until the day of international peace.
  - sixti60 6y ago
    Yes, and this is a good reason for not adding 100 times more satellites/balloons/whatever again. NB: currently we don't have "trains" of satellites, i.e. ten white dots one behind the other in the sky. The mega constellation projects would create this.
- Tepix 6y ago
  Unlike an airplane, the baloon flies much higher. I don't think you can see it with your bare eyes from the ground. Perhaps if you look really hard. Regarding the satellites, i hope the Starlink satellites will also be not visible to the naked eye once they reach their final orbit now that they have the sunshade. On the other hand, these technologies provide a huge benefit to the people on the ground. If you want to complain about Loon you should also complain about regular airplanes, helicopters, zeppelins, weather balloons and balloons in general.
zbuf 6y ago
I thought this was parody
dr_dshiv 6y ago
I really respect X and Astro Teller. We need this kind of optimism and radical exploration for social benefit. Did you know that his grandfather was Edward Teller, inventor of the hydrogen bomb? In one of Edward's final contributions [1], he mathematically modeled the cost and effect of pumping sulfur-based compounds into the upper atmosphere to reduce runaway feedback loops of global warming. On paper, it works. Solving global climate change is a real moonshot -- but too bad it is so taboo, because it could dramatically benefit all life on earth, if done right. Looks like balloons could be helpful for the implementation, too [2] [1] https://web.archive.org/web/20160127185550/https://e-reports-ext.llnl.gov/pdf/231636.pdf https://web.archive.org/web/20160127185550/https://e-reports... [2] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_geoengineering https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_geoengineering
systemBuilder 6y ago
I don't understand why google isn't recognized as just about the largest failure on the planet. Other than search and gmail, everything they start, dies.
paxys 6y ago
Worth noting that Google invested close to $1B in SpaceX in 2015, and is estimated to own ~10% of the company. Starlink deployment going smoothly and being much closer to commercially viable may have something to do with the decision to finally kill Loon.
supernova87a 6y ago
So what happens now to all the people who worked on that project? They shop themselves around the X building to see what other project(s) they could interview for and join? Or is this so big a change that this has a broader impact even to the job market around X?
- kortilla 6y ago
  Go to Amazon and work on project Kuiper
iainmerrick 6y ago
One thing that irks me a bit about Google X as a “moonshot factory” is that they seem to be claiming that they’re good at moonshots but I’m not sure that’s true. (I’m not saying they’re bad at it, just questioning that they have a special edge.) I get the basic idea, that you try lots of big ambitious projects, and most of them will fail but some will hopefully stick; but how do you distinguish between a 5% success rate and a 1% rate, say? Deep pockets and the willingness to place big long-term and medium-term bets is crucial, but it’s not everything you need. Does Google X have processes, people, notable successes they can point to to show that they really are good at moonshots?
- benjohnson1707 6y ago
  Maybe on the long run, this might be X's very legacy: figuring out how to become good at achieving moonshots, by pursuing a lot of them and failing at the most. At least that's what Astro Teller is talking about a lot: Work on the approach, don't pursue single lucky punches. Sad that loom didn't work out. If X fails eventually, I think the idea of radical corporate innovation from scratch is dead. Then Elon seems to be the only one left with the most promising 10x or even 100x playbook: hardcore dedication to insane goals in terms of resources, work ethics and throughput.
simonebrunozzi 6y ago
Wondering how much SpaceX's satellite internet has to do with their decision to shut down Loon.

Cue https://killedbygoogle.com https://killedbygoogle.com comments...

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

I’m going to say I called this one at least 8 months ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23419270 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23419270 Loon is not competitive in a world with Starlink (even without Starlink it seems). The business didn’t make strategic sense. I still really liked their original goal of loon for all and the first video they made for it: https://youtu.be/m96tYpEk1Ao https://youtu.be/m96tYpEk1Ao It’s a little sad they had to downsize and give up. I guess Licklider was right to title the original internet paper an “intergalactic computer network”. Musk started with interplanetary goals and he’ll at least end up with one that covers the earth. Loon for all started too small. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intergalactic_Computer_Network https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intergalactic_Computer_Network —- Related: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23419880 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23419880 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25601473 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25601473

scotcha1 6y ago
Wouldn't this be considered 'strategic' to Google b/c it had the potential to provide additional eyeballs & ad revenue to users outside of their normal markets (US/EU)?
- toast0 6y ago
  Eyeballs without access to terrestrial networking probably don't make a lot of ad revenue. But, even if so, look at Google Fiber. Google benefits from networking build out, regardless of if they're providing the network; it's just as good for them if someone else builds the network. If starlink can fill the niche that Loon filled, that works just as well for Google, on someone else's capex/opex. Or if the freespace optics they worked on for Loon can reduce backhaul costs for traditional cell towers, that might help get more deployed in areas that don't have connectivity; which again works well for Google.
- fossuser 6y ago
  The general idea of a global telecom is a good one. The strategic failure was not recognizing that starlink’s approach to the problem made way more sense. They didn’t see that as the existential threat it was. Instead they downsized their implementation to running the network over poor countries and hand waved a bit about being able to provide connectivity in congested areas. Loon has no viable future in a world with starlink.
  - wcoenen 6y ago
    I wouldn't call this a strategic failure. Google is a big SpaceX investor.
    - fossuser 6y ago
      Well a nine year investment in a company to end in failure isn’t what I’d call a strategic success.
      - wcoenen 6y ago
        A single investment is not strategy though. Think of the investments in Loon, Taara, SpaceX and Google Fiber as part of a larger strategy to bring internet access with decent bandwidth to a larger number of humans. Some investments will not pan out, others will bear fruit.
        fossuser 6y ago
        I think we’re talking about different things. Does this make sense for alphabet? I agree that it does as one of their many bets. Does it make sense for Loon which spun off as its own company under alphabet with its own leadership and its own stock? That’s the strategic failure I’m talking about, Loon’s not alphabet’s.
      - ncallaway 6y ago
        I agree with wcoenen. They invested in multiple potential paths to a global internet. It's not surprising that they'd drop the investments that aren't as promising as the investments that are showing significant promise. It's like saying I applied to multiple colleges, and because I only accepted one application, that the other applications were a failure. But, no, it could just mean that I preferred to go to the college that I accepted, but the others were a hedge against that path not working out.
- asutekku 6y ago
  Users who don’t spend are almost worthless to the advertisers. So google most likely will not receive any meaningful amount of money from countries with data coverage but without the customer base willing to pay for products advertised.
jessriedel 6y ago
Loon can (could) handle normal LTE mobile phones. Starlink requires a phased array antenna the size of a pizza box which, to my understanding, cannot be fully miniaturized. That's not to say they aren't somewhat competing against each other, but Starlink doesn't strictly dominate as you imply.
- fossuser 6y ago
  I honestly think SpaceX could give those away in developing areas if they had to. But yes, you’re right that being able to use LTE and existing phone radios was a point in loon’s favor.
  - rrmoelker 6y ago
    Let's hope so. Though the price might be a hurdle. The price per base station is quite high right now. Estimates range from $500 - $2500 (based on teardown)[1]. 1 https://www.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/kwkep4/tsp_181_starlink_dish_phased_array_design/ https://www.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/kwkep4/tsp_181_star...
  - jessriedel 6y ago
    Ok, but just to be clear, I wasn't trying to make a statement about cost; that can always be folded into the monthly payments or, as you say, philanthropically donated.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]

Mistri 6y ago

People often make fun of Google/Alphabet for their graveyard of failed initiatives/products. While some of it might be warranted, projects like this—that strive to solve a large, global issue through somewhat charitable actions—are generous and have only increased my respect for the Google/Alphabet/X team. I hope they don't get flamed for this, and hopefully some of their research and donation funds can live on and solve the issue that Loon originally intended to one day.

ogre_codes 6y ago
I think the days of Google Moonshots are coming to a close. In general Google hasn't been very good at shooting for the moon. They've lost their leadership and vision and all that's left is a giant advertising behemoth. Did any of their moonshots really hit the mark or even come close?
- Mistri 6y ago
  Waymo seems like it's nearing its final stages. I have high hopes!
  - ogre_codes 6y ago
    I think it's generous to say it's in its final stages. They haven't even left Phoenix have they? And even in Phoenix, it's still largely a beta project in a few predefined areas. It certainly seems like Google's most likely moon shot to take off. But considering only a few thousand people have used it, it's not exactly a big success.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
  - runawaybottle 6y ago
    Google has absolutely no choice but to make Waymo succeed with Apple and Tesla taking the space seriously. It’s not a moonshot, it’s an absolute necessity.

laverya 6y ago

Given that Starlink will probably solve the same set of problems within a few years (that being access to internet worldwide in areas with minimal infrastructure) this isn't too much of a surprise to me.

shpx 6y ago
You connect to Loon balloons with your regular cellphone whereas StarLink requires a "pizza-box-sized" antenna. They solve slightly different problems.
- sgtnoodle 6y ago
  It's likely easier to set up a solar powered cell tower on the ground with a starlink antenna on top, than to float the same equipment on a balloon though.
  - hckrnrd 6y ago
    Don’t forget about Amazon’s Kuiper System. https://www.aboutamazon.com/news/innovation-at-amazon/amazon-marks-breakthrough-in-project-kuiper-development https://www.aboutamazon.com/news/innovation-at-amazon/amazon...
- Tepix 6y ago
  "Pizza-box-sized" was a placeholder. The Starlink antenna ("Dishy") has a diameter of 59cm https://i.imgur.com/ULwOGxs.jpg https://i.imgur.com/ULwOGxs.jpg
  - shpx 6y ago
    That's a 12 inch medium pizza, without the box. An antenna of that size can't be carried by normal people going about their daily lives. More people are willing to buy a phone and a phone plan (Facebook was even willing to subsidize the plan in India with Internet.org) than buying a phone, a phone plan, an antenna and a StarLink plan. That's even more true for people who aren't internet users yet.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

deanCommie 6y ago

>...the road to commercial viability has proven much longer and riskier than hoped. So we’ve made the difficult decision to close down Loon. I don't really understand - wasn't the whole premise of Google X and their "Other Bets" that "Google has deep pockets. Let's use this to explore radically big ideas, that are ahead of their time, and let the world catch up to them?" Bringing "abundant, affordable Internet access, not just to the next billion, but to the last billion" is clearly an investment. You bring them the internet. You spur them to achieve great things. Then you reap the financial rewards. But that's not a 10-year plan, that's a 20-50-100 year plan. But, there's no reason to think that Google couldn't think like a 20-50-100 year company if they tried. So what happened? Did they really think that they were going to make money from the poorest 1B people on the planet BEFORE they brought them ubiquitous internet and helped them use that internet to improve their quality of life?

MattGaiser 6y ago
I suspect that Starlink will render it unneeded.
- systemBuilder 6y ago
  You mean starlink's failure will supplant loon's? Think carefully before you respond. I am one of about 5 engineers to help invent both globalstar and iridium.
  - ncallaway 6y ago
    > Think carefully before you respond. I am one of about 5 engineers to help invent both globalstar and iridium. I don't think this kind of warning is a helpful part of the conversation. If you want to make an argument against Starlink, fine, go ahead and make it. But what is the use of the admonition for someone to "think carefully before they respond"? It seems to be the only real effect that is intended to have is to deter additional conversation. Anyway, I'm going to go ahead and ignore your warning, and the credentials you present: I think Starlink is going to be a commercial success. If they solve the satellite interlink problem (which, admittedly, is a big problem), I think it will be a viable path to delivering a global internet solution.

gkoberger 6y ago

Hey, 9 years is a pretty good run for any product, especially a ambitious one with no clear revenue model. And the shuttering is paired with a $10M donation to continue the support of the mission. I know Google gets hate for shutting things down, but they have hundreds of products – I can't think of any other tech company with such a wide range of products. They make bets, and with bets comes a certain amount of failure. I'd guess they have a better "success" rate than, say, YC. (Ugh, I hate defending Google, but alas)

7thaccount 6y ago
Does google have anything successful outside of: search, adsense, chrome, chromebooks, and android? Those are all large accomplishments to be sure, but it seems like they should have more products out there that people actually buy.
- carlineng 6y ago
  GCP
- ehsankia 6y ago
  They have at least a dozen services that have over a billion users. Others not mentioned in your list: Youtube, Photos, Drive, Maps, Gmail, Docs. And probably slightly more trivial ones like translate, calendar, flights, news, finance, and other stuff that are kinda part of search. Their hardware/home line isn't doing that bad either.
  - pnw_hazor 6y ago
    Are any of those innovations? It seems to me they are all boring, obvious, copied, or purchased products that complement their ad selling business.
    - gkoberger 6y ago
      I mean, maybe after 15 years they seem status quo. But almost all of these were revolutionary at the time... do you remember videos before Youtube, collaboration before Docs, email before Gmail or maps before Maps? Yes, Google makes money off ads. But how does that discount them being innovations (which, btw, is a qualification you came up with... nobody above you even said they were).

person_of_color 6y ago

Google is cursed by its own success. Any product they release will always be on shaky ground when compared to their advertising and search money-printing monopolies. At this point, they should give up and settle into their role as the 21st century IBM.

jariel 6y ago
This is not a Google Project, it's an Alphabet 'Moonshot' designed to maybe shake things up, create a market, discover new solutions/opportunities/induce investment with a very high risk profile and no obviously commercial outcome i.e. quasi NGO stuff that VC's won't touch. There's no way to compare Loon to a regular commercial venture. It's just stuff the founders want to do and that's fine.
killjoywashere 6y ago
IBM builds their own line of processors and operates some of the biggest supercomputers (e.g. Summit at Oak Ridge). I know at least one guy who works on a pretty ambitious project at Google, and last I talked to him, he lusted after the insanely crazy things he used to get to do in an IBM-internal dev shop.

fermienrico 6y ago

I am currently reading "The Idea Factory" [1], the story of Bell Labs and its innovation streak for many decades. There were so many amazing things Bell Labs worked on - all directly related to solving business problems. At one point, they were given a task of developing the most perfect lubrication oil dispenser with a requirement that it dispenses exactly 15 drops of oil per squeeze of the trigger. They worked on Tractors that dug channels for laying telephone lines to materials that lead to the invention of the transistor to solve the problem of unreliability of vacuum tube based switch boards. Some worked on improving manufacturing and invented what we call Quality Control. Everything was deep and wide, but still tied to the Bell's business. When I look at Google X and bunch of modern corporate labs (Lab 126, Facebook probably has something, Intel Labs (drones!), Microsoft Labs), I see a whole lotta hoo haa about tech innovation, but nothing with a long term vision of integration, capitalization and sustenance. No sense of practicality and pragmatism. May be Loon is a way to make Google an internet company (ISP), I could be wrong but as an outsider, it feels like a PR stunt than anything else. Highly recommend this book. [1] https://www.amazon.com/Idea-Factory-Great-American-Innovation/dp/0143122797 https://www.amazon.com/Idea-Factory-Great-American-Innovatio...

kippinitreal 6y ago
The difference is that Bell scientists were always focused on core business problems and not just chasing fantasies. OK sure, Shannon was doing whatever with mice and unicycles...but he earned it! All of Bells big accomplishments were tightly coupled to business needs: Information theory => everything, transistors => bad vacuums, fiber optics => latency. Similarly Google has had huge contributions on "research" focused on their core problems: MapReduce, BigTable, Borg, BERT, etc.
- mjfl 6y ago
  I think another very important component was that they were innovating in an area where they had a legal monopoly - there was no risk that their competitors would steal away their inventions. This is not the case with Waymo for instance.
someperson 6y ago

ddmma 6y ago

Keep on the search and play ads on youtube

activatedgeek 6y ago

This is quite a surprise. Only recently, Loon collaborated with seasoned reinforcement learning researchers to build more efficient navigation controllers for the balloons, titled "Autonomous navigation of stratospheric balloons using reinforcement learning" [1]. Although, it would appear that much of the gains come from a simulator that they've been developing for a while. [1]: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2939-8 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2939-8

mjfl 6y ago
You need a business though. And that doesn't move the needle.
- activatedgeek 6y ago
  Of course. My point was that it appeared like they were actively working on developing new technologies. Usually, a project that is expected to shut down would mostly lose momentum months before. Although, it is possible that this work was done months ago and only came out now due to the slower Nature review cycles.

asperous 6y ago

Talking about X more generally, their Gimbal book is interesting: https://storage.googleapis.com/x-prod.appspot.com/files/Gimbal_v2.0_X.pdf https://storage.googleapis.com/x-prod.appspot.com/files/Gimb... I think their self-driving cars project is probably what X could be at its peak, incredibly challenging projects, high profit potential, well financed. Projects like loon seem more like a project that a university would get grant funding to finance.

aoki 6y ago
Think about the many hard problems to be solved. They had cost-effective high-endurance stratospheric balloons - decades of military projects never really got there. They had very detailed stratospheric wind models - decades of atmospheric science research never really got there. They had a flying LTE network. Each of these solutions was almost certainly too expensive and “niche” for any conventional funding agency to consider, but necessary for Loon to work.

rmason 6y ago

Well if you want to attempt something big without having to work with company's like Google then Elon Musk made an interesting offer today. Musk is offering $100 million to the team providing the best carbon capture technology. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-musk-carbon-capture/elon-musk-to-offer-100-million-prize-for-best-carbon-capture-tech-idUSKBN29R024 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-musk-carbon-capture/e...

xirbeosbwo1234 6y ago
Judged by the person who thinks putting cars in tunnels is the solution to urban transit? No thanks. Your average third grader is a more qualified engineer than Elon Musk.
- tim333 6y ago
  He does better rockets than most third graders.
  - xirbeosbwo1234 6y ago
    Elon Musk is not an engineer. He hasn't built a thing is his entire life. His biggest accomplishment is hitching a ride on the success of Paypal before getting fired for trying to move their infrastructure to Windows (lol). My niece, on the other hand, just built a pretty cool rocket out of a soda bottle! If SpaceX is less comically incompetent than Tesla, I'd wager it's because Elon Musk hasn't been paying as much attention to it.

omarforgotpwd 6y ago

Starlink made this obsolete before it launched

solarkraft 6y ago
But Loon launched in 2013 and Starlink in 2018 (?). In a world in which satellites stayed very expensive I could imagine it being a bit more successful.
- rasz 6y ago
  Technology was already in use in 2004 (Space Data), and Loon started in 2008 when Google decided to "borrow" it. https://www.wired.com/story/the-lawsuit-that-could-pop-alphabets-project-loon-balloons/ https://www.wired.com/story/the-lawsuit-that-could-pop-alpha...
hckrnrd 6y ago
While SpaceX is in the news, there’s also the Amazon LEO initiative: Project Kuiper. They’ve received FCC approval and have access to Blue Origin rockets to launch.
- omarforgotpwd 6y ago
  Sure, there's lots of satellite internet services. most of them have failed to become financially viable

gagan_23 6y ago

When did it started?

vmception 6y ago

and this is why we have quarterly goals this project was dead in the water a long time ago, and for years

walrus01 6y ago

I don't think they will, but I really wish they would open source and release some technical data on exactly what components/subsystems and design they were using for photovoltaic panels, charge control and monitoring systems, and batteries.

catchmeifyoucan 6y ago

Loon always caught my eye, and I thought the reason it would catch on is due to cost. Isn’t launching a satellite much more expensive than a balloon? For example, providing Loon antennas to a telecom provider, and decreasing the infrastructure cost of setting up networks.

ridaj 6y ago
Yeah but satellites get actual shit done reliably and for decades.
solarkraft 6y ago
> Isn’t launching a satellite much more expensive than a balloon? Historically yes, but while I don't know the numbers, a launch provider that is able to reduce the cost by about an order of magnitude might have an advantage here (SpaceX are also launching 60 of them at once). It also seems like satellites would be a bit less vulnerable to outside interference than balloons.

pjot 6y ago

This summer I had the luck of actually seeing a Loon balloon floating way up in the sky. Viewing it with a telescope was surreal, especially at night, you could see it blink!

ggm 6y ago

The mesh network was informed by, and in turn informed LEO stuff. They did smart work

ridaj 6y ago

Loons are cute toys that got 100x the deserved media attention vs their actual impact. Actual remote internet connectivity is mostly being addressed through the grungy, mind-numbingly routine job of increasing the coverage of terrestrial networks. The folks doing that unrewarding work should get recognition for actually making a difference in people's lives over the long run.

cainxinth 6y ago
> Loons are cute toys that got 100x the deserved media attention vs their actual impact. Then they served their real function: marketing

ratclown23 6y ago

It's surreal to think that a decade ago even corps like Google could get away with using ableist language for their projects.

dartharva 6y ago

The successor, Project Taara, seems quite impressive (and more sustainable): https://x.company/projects/taara/ https://x.company/projects/taara/

ridaj 6y ago
Optical beam link technology is old tech. It's also badly affected by weather and pollution (rain, clouds, fog) which is why people who do point-to-point communications for a living tend to prefer microwave.

supermatt 6y ago

IMHO, this is NO different from google closing down any other product. If, however, this news came with a grant of all the patents into the public domain, then it would be another story. Could a startup set up a commercial balloon based mesh network without running into patents now held by google? Probably not. THIS is the problem with these "skunkworks" type projects from megacorps. They suck all the air out of the room and prevent others from innovating. Loon didn't fail, Google/Alphabet just decided they were going to discontinue funding. Now they hold a pool of patents they don't intend to do anything with. Now they will point that funding elsewhere and do the same.

timClicks 6y ago
Yes in principle, but probably not for this idea. If a startup was really wanted to take this on, they would be very well funded. At that point, they could easily license/buy any IP monopolies owned by Google.
- supermatt 6y ago
  Well it doesn't need to be a global network of stratospheric balloons - i.e. there are related aspects that could be undertaken with much more limited funding on a local scale. For example, if you wanted to use a laser link to communicate between two ground-tethered weather balloons, you would need to account for the movements of the balloons to correct the link alignment. Lo and behold, first patent on the list (https://loon.com/legal/patents/ https://loon.com/legal/patents/) is for that exact thing (https://patents.google.com/patent/US8634974B2/en https://patents.google.com/patent/US8634974B2/en). What about control the descent of a balloon by letting out some of the gas? You know, like flight balloons use, but "with a computer". Yep, patent for that too. LOADS of the patents are basically "mesh network but with ballons" These are obvious things you would need to do, and yet they are patented. In short, they took away the ability to do ANY balloon based communications - not just a stratospheric global mesh network of current maneuvering autonomous balloons. Of course, this shit shouldnt be permitted. The patent system is broken, as we often discuss around here. IMHO, if these megacorps had ANY honour, they would release all patents to public domain - with revocation clause from another entity if that entity creates a derivative patent without same license. THAT is how to foster innovation - everything else should be a trade secret.

rinzler26 6y ago

Google Nose. https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=VFbYadm_mrw&feature=youtube_gdata https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=VFbYadm_mrw&feat...

OpticalWindows 6y ago

I'm sure this type of tech can be rebooted at any time depending on the need. I think a sustainable commercial model would be difficult with the global slowdown. Many of these moonshots might sadly end earlier than anticipated. I don't think COVID is the end of all momentum in startups but it sure feels like it may take a generation to return.

georgewfraser 6y ago

This kinda tells you everything about the culture of Google: > Sadly, despite the team’s groundbreaking technical achievements over the last 9 years — ... — the road to commercial viability has proven much longer and riskier than hoped. Focus is on the technical achievements, never mind if anyone ever used it.

remus 6y ago
Surely that's kind of the point of X and moonshot projects? If they weren't taking on projects that required large scale, risky technical innovation then they'd just be...a normal company?

gokulkrishh09 6y ago

Ohh! Satellite to give internet seems more viable.

christmm 6y ago

out of curiosity, how many employees were working on this outdated idea?

systemBuilder 6y ago
200.

sixti60 6y ago

Sorry to be this guy, but I am quite happy this will not happen. The sky - our sky - is not a playground for tech companies. Imposing a mesh-grid of thousands of balloons in the sky is an incredible intrusion for people around the world who have not asked for anything. It's the same for mega constellations of satellites (Starlink). Would you be willing to have a company come and put unsolicited electronic equipment in your backyard? Probably not. It's the same for our sky - I don't want that Facebook or Google impose thousands of electronic devices in our sky. Or maybe ask "the owner" before you start, i.e. the citizens of the world. What's more beautiful than watching stars in the sky in a July/August warm night? Do you really want to lose this landscape forever and have 100 times more satellites than we already have? and have series of white dots one behind the other? OK, companies and states have done it the past, but it's not a valid argument to justify the acceleration with a factor 10 or 100 of this process with thousands of Starlink satellites for example.

threatofrain 6y ago
Our skies and space shall be the “playground” of military and police though, until the day of international peace.
- sixti60 6y ago
  Yes, and this is a good reason for not adding 100 times more satellites/balloons/whatever again. NB: currently we don't have "trains" of satellites, i.e. ten white dots one behind the other in the sky. The mega constellation projects would create this.
Tepix 6y ago
Unlike an airplane, the baloon flies much higher. I don't think you can see it with your bare eyes from the ground. Perhaps if you look really hard. Regarding the satellites, i hope the Starlink satellites will also be not visible to the naked eye once they reach their final orbit now that they have the sunshade. On the other hand, these technologies provide a huge benefit to the people on the ground. If you want to complain about Loon you should also complain about regular airplanes, helicopters, zeppelins, weather balloons and balloons in general.

zbuf 6y ago

I thought this was parody

dr_dshiv 6y ago

I really respect X and Astro Teller. We need this kind of optimism and radical exploration for social benefit. Did you know that his grandfather was Edward Teller, inventor of the hydrogen bomb? In one of Edward's final contributions [1], he mathematically modeled the cost and effect of pumping sulfur-based compounds into the upper atmosphere to reduce runaway feedback loops of global warming. On paper, it works. Solving global climate change is a real moonshot -- but too bad it is so taboo, because it could dramatically benefit all life on earth, if done right. Looks like balloons could be helpful for the implementation, too [2] [1] https://web.archive.org/web/20160127185550/https://e-reports-ext.llnl.gov/pdf/231636.pdf https://web.archive.org/web/20160127185550/https://e-reports... [2] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_geoengineering https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_geoengineering

systemBuilder 6y ago

I don't understand why google isn't recognized as just about the largest failure on the planet. Other than search and gmail, everything they start, dies.

paxys 6y ago

Worth noting that Google invested close to $1B in SpaceX in 2015, and is estimated to own ~10% of the company. Starlink deployment going smoothly and being much closer to commercially viable may have something to do with the decision to finally kill Loon.

supernova87a 6y ago

So what happens now to all the people who worked on that project? They shop themselves around the X building to see what other project(s) they could interview for and join? Or is this so big a change that this has a broader impact even to the job market around X?

kortilla 6y ago
Go to Amazon and work on project Kuiper

iainmerrick 6y ago

One thing that irks me a bit about Google X as a “moonshot factory” is that they seem to be claiming that they’re good at moonshots but I’m not sure that’s true. (I’m not saying they’re bad at it, just questioning that they have a special edge.) I get the basic idea, that you try lots of big ambitious projects, and most of them will fail but some will hopefully stick; but how do you distinguish between a 5% success rate and a 1% rate, say? Deep pockets and the willingness to place big long-term and medium-term bets is crucial, but it’s not everything you need. Does Google X have processes, people, notable successes they can point to to show that they really are good at moonshots?

benjohnson1707 6y ago
Maybe on the long run, this might be X's very legacy: figuring out how to become good at achieving moonshots, by pursuing a lot of them and failing at the most. At least that's what Astro Teller is talking about a lot: Work on the approach, don't pursue single lucky punches. Sad that loom didn't work out. If X fails eventually, I think the idea of radical corporate innovation from scratch is dead. Then Elon seems to be the only one left with the most promising 10x or even 100x playbook: hardcore dedication to insane goals in terms of resources, work ethics and throughput.

simonebrunozzi 6y ago

Wondering how much SpaceX's satellite internet has to do with their decision to shut down Loon.