3 ms·
This seems like an industry wide admission that this stuff doesn't actually work, tbh. I've heard similar things from Farley at Ford--advanced lane keeping crui
by jcgrillo 2y ago
This seems like an industry wide admission that this stuff doesn't actually work, tbh. I've heard similar things from Farley at Ford--advanced lane keeping cruise control systems work, robotaxis don't. Only the "tech" companies are so committed as to double down and try to wish this sci-fi into reality. The car companies are a little more grounded in reality.
- nradov 2y agoBut Waymo actually works? It's limited by geography and speed but they have robotaxis carrying paying customers in multiple cities. This is reality today, not sci-fi.
- jcgrillo 2y agoWhen will it be profitable? The carmakers are betting that L3 autonomy is a profitable investment, but robotaxis aren't. Regardless of what Waymo can or can't demonstrate technically. So either the carmakers are wrong or Waymo is. I guess we'll wait and see.
- nradov 2y agoWell now you're asking a different question. Robotaxis clearly work today and are rapidly improving. Waymo is past the technical demonstration stage and has paying customers. Alphabet doesn't report profitability for that unit but it will probably take a number of years until they can drive down costs and achieve economies of scale. The senior leadership seems to be willing to fund this initiative indefinitely. Several other carmakers beyond GM are still pursuing L4+ autonomous technology. So apparently they don't think Waymo is wrong, although they're way behind.
- 7thpower 2y agoYou’re shifting the goal posts, but do you not believe these services can eventually be delivered profitably?
- jcgrillo 2y agoI have absolutely not shifted a goal post. What I believe is immaterial, what's important is that the companies that really know this industry are behaving as if there's no future in robotaxis. That should give you pause.
- 7thpower 2y agoWhich industry are you referring to?
- jcgrillo 2y agoTake a wild guess.
- 7thpower 2y agoWell GM is in the automobile industry, so maybe the automobile industry? I’m trying to understand how this would be them determining autonomous driving is not viable, which appears to be your premise, rather than them and others just not having a path to compete.
- jcgrillo 2y agoThey've been shouting it from the rooftops: https://www.theverge.com/2024/12/11/24318651/cruise-robotaxi-gm-funding-autonomous-vehicles-risk https://www.theverge.com/2024/12/11/24318651/cruise-robotaxi... https://www.cnbc.com/video/2023/03/22/why-ford-and-vw-shut-down-their-multi-billion-dollar-self-driving-project.html https://www.cnbc.com/video/2023/03/22/why-ford-and-vw-shut-d... It's not that they can't compete with the almighty google, it's that there's no business there.
- speleding 2y agoI would think that getting to a positive cashflow shouldn't be that hard, most of the cost are fixed. Recouping the billions of R&D will take many years, but those cost are sunk. The fact that they're adding cities probably means they already have positive cashflow, or are near it.
- chrischen 2y agoThe question is does it work well enough to justify its costs and beat out 70-90% of-the-way driver assistance features on peoples' own cars.