3 ms·

When you say self-driving cars and Glasses had been done before many years ago, you must mean experimental prototypes that never made it to market, right? Makin

by jfoster 14y ago

When you say self-driving cars and Glasses had been done before many years ago, you must mean experimental prototypes that never made it to market, right? Making a self-driving car that "kindof, sort of" works along some desert route as part of a competition is so different from bringing one to market that successfully completes hundreds of thousands of miles in traffic, obeying road rules, and along a less predictable route. Bringing something like Glasses or autonomous cars to market and making it work well enough to be a success counts for more than creation of prototypes that are never more than a cool experiment, in my opinion.

Someone 14y ago
Did I miss the news that Google brought Gogole glaass/autonomous cars to market, and that those products were successful? IMO, autonomous cars will be a success at some time. Who will be the first to sell them is anybody's guess, but Idonit think it is a given it will be Google. Car companies such as Volkswagen and Toyota have the advantage that they already can build cars. Glasses? They might sell at some time, but IMO, the call is out whether these will be niche products or not. I think something must be done on the 'when not in use, they obstruct my view; when in use, they are so tiny' problem before such products can become mainstream.
- michaelt 14y ago
  Did you know that the team that won the DARPA Grand Challenge[1], was run by Sebastian Thrun [2] - who went on play a big part in the creation of Google Street View? And did you know the Grand Challenge winning cars made use of LIDAR and machine vision to identify road features and obstacles, high precision GPS, and inertial navigation? And that very similar sensors can be seen on Google Street View? If you wanted a test data set, to refine your self-driving car by simulating driving every road in the developed world, you could scarcely do better than Google's data. This could be valuable in advancing from a car that works well on wide, well maintained freeway to a car that can work well around towns and cities. [1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uoiJeIb0wBA#t=21m50s http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uoiJeIb0wBA#t=21m50s [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sebastian_Thrun http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sebastian_Thrun
  - Someone 14y ago
    Did you know that that Stanford team only came second in the Urban Grand Challenge, a likely more relevant measure, as far as succesfully bringing autonomous driving to market goes? Did you know that in both challenges, the relative time differences between the top 3/4 competitors were so low that they may not tell anything about the quality of their software? Do you know why, in both competitions all teams were US based (my guess would be that large external players such as Mercedes-Benz and Toyota do not want to give away too many secrets for little gain. US competitors who do well there stand a chance of getting orders from the US military, but non-US ones? Unlikely.) Do you know that Mercedes-Benz claims that this year's S-class model could ride autonomously, if laws permitted it (http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/its-the-dawn-of-the-robocars/story-fnb64oi6-1226540648529 http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/its-the-dawn-of-t...)? Do you know none of that has anything to do with the issue at hand (the OP lauding Google for bringing successful products to market, while they didn't even bring them to market yet?)
    - michaelt 14y ago
      I'd certainly agree that all the teams that completed the Grand Challenge did a good job, whether they finished first or fifth. Although DARPA rules require that the team have an American representative, teams like Team Berlin [1] and CarOLO [2] were run by German universities. I certainly agree that universities produced a lot more entries than the vehicle industry did - but I don't know if that means Mercedes and Toyota had secrets they didn't want to give away in 2005, or if it means they didn't have anything worth showing off. Of course, we'll know much more when companies actually start bringing these products to market, and we shouldn't count Google's chickens before they've hatched. But by my reckoning they got a pretty good head start - I certainly wouldn't bet against them. [1] http://archive.darpa.mil/grandchallenge/Teams/Teamberlin.asp http://archive.darpa.mil/grandchallenge/Teams/Teamberlin.asp [2] http://archive.darpa.mil/grandchallenge/Teams/CarOLO.asp http://archive.darpa.mil/grandchallenge/Teams/CarOLO.asp
taligent 14y ago
Volvo has plans to sell autonomous cars in 2014. And this idea that Google has invented something that the car companies haven't is just ridiculous. Car companies have been selling millions of self-parking and auto avoidance cars for the last few years. So they clearly have the ability to deliver intelligent control systems. As for Google Glasses well all I've seen to date is a video camera on your head (around for years) and a science fiction promo video.
- jfoster 14y ago
  My point is that "inventing" isn't what I value. What Volvo and Google are doing is what I value. Apple do it too. Companies like Apple, Google, and Volvo were not the first with tablets or autonomous vehicles, but they were the first to adapt such inventions into products that the market can accept. (I am making the assumption that Volvo & Google will produce autonomous vehicles that the market will accept) It's almost like the difference between "having an idea" and "achieving product-market fit".
OGinparadise 14y ago
"When you say self-driving cars and Glasses had been done before many years ago, you must mean experimental prototypes that never made it to market, right?" Ford, GM, BMW and Toyota are among manufacturers working on what Google is getting virtually all the press for. We'll compare them when you can buy a Google Self-Driving Car at your local dealer. How can you judge Glasses and compare them to others? How many have you used and tested?

by jfoster 14y ago

Someone 14y ago

Did I miss the news that Google brought Gogole glaass/autonomous cars to market, and that those products were successful? IMO, autonomous cars will be a success at some time. Who will be the first to sell them is anybody's guess, but Idonit think it is a given it will be Google. Car companies such as Volkswagen and Toyota have the advantage that they already can build cars. Glasses? They might sell at some time, but IMO, the call is out whether these will be niche products or not. I think something must be done on the 'when not in use, they obstruct my view; when in use, they are so tiny' problem before such products can become mainstream.

michaelt 14y ago
Did you know that the team that won the DARPA Grand Challenge[1], was run by Sebastian Thrun [2] - who went on play a big part in the creation of Google Street View? And did you know the Grand Challenge winning cars made use of LIDAR and machine vision to identify road features and obstacles, high precision GPS, and inertial navigation? And that very similar sensors can be seen on Google Street View? If you wanted a test data set, to refine your self-driving car by simulating driving every road in the developed world, you could scarcely do better than Google's data. This could be valuable in advancing from a car that works well on wide, well maintained freeway to a car that can work well around towns and cities. [1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uoiJeIb0wBA#t=21m50s http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uoiJeIb0wBA#t=21m50s [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sebastian_Thrun http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sebastian_Thrun
- Someone 14y ago
  Did you know that that Stanford team only came second in the Urban Grand Challenge, a likely more relevant measure, as far as succesfully bringing autonomous driving to market goes? Did you know that in both challenges, the relative time differences between the top 3/4 competitors were so low that they may not tell anything about the quality of their software? Do you know why, in both competitions all teams were US based (my guess would be that large external players such as Mercedes-Benz and Toyota do not want to give away too many secrets for little gain. US competitors who do well there stand a chance of getting orders from the US military, but non-US ones? Unlikely.) Do you know that Mercedes-Benz claims that this year's S-class model could ride autonomously, if laws permitted it (http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/its-the-dawn-of-the-robocars/story-fnb64oi6-1226540648529 http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/its-the-dawn-of-t...)? Do you know none of that has anything to do with the issue at hand (the OP lauding Google for bringing successful products to market, while they didn't even bring them to market yet?)
  - michaelt 14y ago
    I'd certainly agree that all the teams that completed the Grand Challenge did a good job, whether they finished first or fifth. Although DARPA rules require that the team have an American representative, teams like Team Berlin [1] and CarOLO [2] were run by German universities. I certainly agree that universities produced a lot more entries than the vehicle industry did - but I don't know if that means Mercedes and Toyota had secrets they didn't want to give away in 2005, or if it means they didn't have anything worth showing off. Of course, we'll know much more when companies actually start bringing these products to market, and we shouldn't count Google's chickens before they've hatched. But by my reckoning they got a pretty good head start - I certainly wouldn't bet against them. [1] http://archive.darpa.mil/grandchallenge/Teams/Teamberlin.asp http://archive.darpa.mil/grandchallenge/Teams/Teamberlin.asp [2] http://archive.darpa.mil/grandchallenge/Teams/CarOLO.asp http://archive.darpa.mil/grandchallenge/Teams/CarOLO.asp

taligent 14y ago

Volvo has plans to sell autonomous cars in 2014. And this idea that Google has invented something that the car companies haven't is just ridiculous. Car companies have been selling millions of self-parking and auto avoidance cars for the last few years. So they clearly have the ability to deliver intelligent control systems. As for Google Glasses well all I've seen to date is a video camera on your head (around for years) and a science fiction promo video.

jfoster 14y ago
My point is that "inventing" isn't what I value. What Volvo and Google are doing is what I value. Apple do it too. Companies like Apple, Google, and Volvo were not the first with tablets or autonomous vehicles, but they were the first to adapt such inventions into products that the market can accept. (I am making the assumption that Volvo & Google will produce autonomous vehicles that the market will accept) It's almost like the difference between "having an idea" and "achieving product-market fit".

OGinparadise 14y ago

"When you say self-driving cars and Glasses had been done before many years ago, you must mean experimental prototypes that never made it to market, right?" Ford, GM, BMW and Toyota are among manufacturers working on what Google is getting virtually all the press for. We'll compare them when you can buy a Google Self-Driving Car at your local dealer. How can you judge Glasses and compare them to others? How many have you used and tested?