4 ms·

This might be the worst written article I have ever read. What the heck is this guys point? I'll tell you why it's being done by Google. A computer driving a c

This might be the worst written article I have ever read. What the heck is this guys point? I'll tell you why it's being done by Google. A computer driving a car is an artificial intelligence problem. Google is fundamentally an artificial intelligence company. Car companies are not artificial intelligence companies. They're not even software companies - just look at antiquated the average stereo/navigation system is in even the latest, most expensive cars. I'd definitely rather have Google do it and license it back to the car companies than have the car companies do it on their own. The software is going to be solved in the next 5-10 years. The hard part after that is dropping the sensor price enough to make this work (a lot of the SICK lasers are $35k+ still). But 10-15 years from now, we are going to have self driving cars for sale, no question in my mind.

Someone 14y ago
"Car companies are [...] not even software companies" - Fuel injection: software - ABS: software - Airbags: software - Traction control: software - Brake assist: software - That clicker that opens your car door: software Etc.
- deelowe 14y ago
  I don't think the op was arguing that car companies don't produce software. He was arguing that they don't produce it well, because it's not a core competency for the company. Car company profits are tied to industrial design, manufacturing, and logistics, not software. His point about GPS is an apt one. My brother has the best SUV Infinity makes and the GPS is so terrible, he uses his phone (android) instead.
  - herval 14y ago
    current car companies don't produce user interfaces well. All the other software that runs in a car (or an airplane, or a mars rover) is great
  - roisin09 14y ago
    Suppliers to the car makers, like those that produce anti-lock brakes, do good software. Car makers typically have Silicon Valley offices. And they typically buy components from companies rather than rely on themselves. None of that means Google will make and driverless car that sells in the way the original article claimed.
- nitrogen 14y ago
  Car companies write software that is incidental to their primary purpose. Software companies write software as a primary purpose. This is the definition of a software company. A more interesting argument is whether a software company is more likely to produce a successful self-driving car, which I believe the parent comment demonstrated to be likely by pointing out that it's an AI problem, and Google does a lot more with AI than car companies.
- krschultz 14y ago
  Those are very different kinds of software. Everything other than the last one is a real time OS problem with very known inputs and outputs. Validation is critical but manageable. And even then, most of them are outsourced to Bosch and other suppliers.
roisin09 14y ago
Driverless cars on roads where people's lives are at stake is a social-legal-regulatory issue and even when the software is solved these issues remain. Even when there are cars capable of driving unaided, humans will be legally responsible for them - so we need to factor that in too

Someone 14y ago

"Car companies are [...] not even software companies" - Fuel injection: software - ABS: software - Airbags: software - Traction control: software - Brake assist: software - That clicker that opens your car door: software Etc.

deelowe 14y ago
I don't think the op was arguing that car companies don't produce software. He was arguing that they don't produce it well, because it's not a core competency for the company. Car company profits are tied to industrial design, manufacturing, and logistics, not software. His point about GPS is an apt one. My brother has the best SUV Infinity makes and the GPS is so terrible, he uses his phone (android) instead.
- herval 14y ago
  current car companies don't produce user interfaces well. All the other software that runs in a car (or an airplane, or a mars rover) is great
- roisin09 14y ago
  Suppliers to the car makers, like those that produce anti-lock brakes, do good software. Car makers typically have Silicon Valley offices. And they typically buy components from companies rather than rely on themselves. None of that means Google will make and driverless car that sells in the way the original article claimed.
nitrogen 14y ago
Car companies write software that is incidental to their primary purpose. Software companies write software as a primary purpose. This is the definition of a software company. A more interesting argument is whether a software company is more likely to produce a successful self-driving car, which I believe the parent comment demonstrated to be likely by pointing out that it's an AI problem, and Google does a lot more with AI than car companies.
krschultz 14y ago
Those are very different kinds of software. Everything other than the last one is a real time OS problem with very known inputs and outputs. Validation is critical but manageable. And even then, most of them are outsourced to Bosch and other suppliers.

roisin09 14y ago

Driverless cars on roads where people's lives are at stake is a social-legal-regulatory issue and even when the software is solved these issues remain. Even when there are cars capable of driving unaided, humans will be legally responsible for them - so we need to factor that in too