Uber's Self-Driving Trucks Division Is Dead (techcrunch.com) 61
Uber is shuttering its self-driving unit, reports TechCrunch. The company will reportedly stop development of self-driving trucks and instead focus its efforts on self-driving cars. "We recently took the important step of returning to public roads in Pittsburgh, and as we look to continue that momentum, we believe having our entire team's energy and expertise focused on this effort is the best path forward," Eric Meyhofer, head of Uber Advanced Technologies Group, said in an emailed statement. From the report: Uber Freight, a business unit that helps truck drivers connect with shipping companies, is unaffected by this decision. "Rather than having two groups working side by side, focused on different vehicle platforms, I want us instead collaborating as one team, according to an email reviewed by TechCrunch that was sent by Meyhofer to employees. "I know we're all super proud of what the Trucks team has accomplished, and we continue to see the incredible promise of self-driving technology applied to moving freight across the country. But we believe delivering on self-driving for passenger applications first, and then bringing it to freight applications down the line, is the best path forward. For now, we need the focus of one team, with one clear objective." The company will pivot employees focused on self-driving trucks to other work that revolves around self-driving technology.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Wrong direction (Score:2)
I have no citations to present but I think they are going about it backwards. Concentrate on the long haul trucks and the shipping industry, then leverage that know how and experience into self driving cars. The behaviors and needs of big trucks seems more predictable, the trucking industry seem more receptive and more likely to finance and adopt the technology. Then after having success there they can spread to other areas.
Re: (Score:2)
Sure automating the long haul part is about the easiest of the tasks. Especially if you have the software build virtual truck trains, with an awake driver in the lead vehicle.
But their are laws in place and economic interests to protect. It will take 20 years to make it legal for a trucker to rest while his truck is rolling as part of a train. Until they do, it's a waste of effort.
Re: (Score:2)
the trucking industry seem more receptive
Teamsters.
The soccer mom's union doesn't have nearly as much clout.
Re: (Score:2)
Get rid of the second driver and the teamsters will lose close to half their members/power.
Yes I know, many trucks go slower these days and only have one driver, but you get the point. In that case, you get rid of half the trucks too.
Re: (Score:2)
That's right! Trucking companies will be happy to pay a premium for self-driving trucks AND pay the Teamster's driver the same money they received when they were behind the wheel.
Uh, no. Push will eventually come to shove.
Re: (Score:2)
What % of warehouse workers are teamsters?
Decades ago, when I worked a summer doing appliance deliveries, it was one of six of the warehouses we got product from. God they sucked big wet donkey balls. I'm sure it's even lower now, they were putting their employer out of business back then.
Re: (Score:2)
Pfft, it was all a pump and dump. Create the illusion of economic sector dominance, do the IPO, sell and run before it all explodes.
Vehicle manufacturers who dominate the vehicle leasing market, will similarly dominate the automated vehicle market, for much the same reason.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah... but if they did that, they would have less time to stall. By focusing on something a decade out, think of how many more quarters they can obfuscate their true performance...
Teamsters or Driver's unions? (Score:2)
One would think automated delivery truck would be much easier; they go between some loading dock and some other loading dock, not random street corners. And deliveries are made in the early hours of the morning when there's much less traffic.
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Teamsters or Driver's unions? (Score:4)
Until that time, it remains vapor.
Also good luck with your 'better driver than a teenager' advertising campaign. I don't think you'll sell many.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think you'll sell many.
I don't think you understand how companies work. If saving 10% here and 8% there adds up, it adds up. If automating trucks reduces lawsuits for pain and injury in a wreck by xx% and the cost of rolling out that automation is less than that xx%, then only stupid companies wouldn't roll it out. So the massive question is, "Will the automation ever drop in price?" And the answer is undoubtedly yes, it will. If there is one thing about technology is that the cost of implementing it always goes down.
Also good luck with your 'better driver than a teenager' advertising campaign
Yeah, I
Re: (Score:2)
We only see the successes. For every 'airplane' there 100 'uranium water infusers', 'anti fapping pajamas/cereals', 'porn blockers', 'electric boner belts' and female paroxysm inducing vibrating devices (that require a medical licence to operate). Engineering success is _not_ inevitable, no matter how much someone wants porn filters to work, they don't. Unpost.exe and rStabInEye.exe are not 'just around the corner'.
Level 5 automated driving requires strong AI. We don't even know where to start in the tas
Re: (Score:2)
Your realize that American freight rail is _better_ than Europe's? By any metric you choose.
A rail spur still costs millions more than a loading dock, if it's possible at all. I trust businesses to make those decisions for themselves.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Put your money where your mouth is chump.
Re: (Score:2)
The next 20% needs to be solved.
I'm honestly curious, what's this mythical 20% that needs to be solved?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
Autonomous vehicles have rounded the corner and already arrived [wired.com]. Right now they're doing, you know, autonomous driving - the kind that doesn't require a human driver.
These are merely Class 4 AVs, only capable of driving in a limited area under specific conditions, so still a long way from 100%. But those "specific conditions" include full city driving among pedestrians, buses, trucks, pets, distracted drivers, roadworks.. clearly an already-useful percentage of human capability.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That's a good point; I agree that many will feel they can drive better than the car can. Yet I'd bet most people consider themselves better than their last taxi driver too, and that doesn't stop them taking taxis. You watch, they'll still be willing to let the car drive for them on an increasing number of occasions - commuting in traffic, after a couple of drinks, when they'd rather play that new mobile game etc - and trust will build.
That's enough (Score:2)
I'm sure a lot of people would be just fine if merely 80% of their driving needs were automatable, or their truck drove itself 80% of the way while they napped.
Very few humans can do 100% of all driving tasks too (our accident rate is proof of that). Self-driving cars may never be perfect, but they're already good enough today for Waymo's taxis to be carrying unaccompanied passengers in Phoenix as we speak [fortune.com].
They're saving money (Score:5, Informative)
They know they'll never develop viable self-driving technology.
They need to keep pretending they can, as it's the end-goal to turn a profit on their main business, ride-sharing.
They'll lose investors if they give up on that. The company is still running at a loss, without constant investment it's going to collapse.
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
That is the same trick that Tesla has been using. Eventually investors figure it out, the stock falls, then the lawsuits start.
Apples and Oranges. You can go out and buy a Tesla car today. You can't go out and buy an Uber self driving anything today.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe. But Uber has no choice but to be in this game. If someone else arrives with reliable automated passenger car technology and Uber is far behind, Uber stock price can go to zero overnight.
The vision of the future is that you can order your ride with a convenient app, which could be Uber or Lyft or Google or Apple or Walmart -- nobody cares who is the provider when the service is a cheap commodity.
Even if that vision is a looooong way off, Uber cannot look like it will allow itself to be written out o
It's not dead... (Score:2)
...it has simply hit a wall. *rimshot*
I'll see myself out. ;)
dog whistle : pivot == lay off (Score:1)
Translation: "the path to making this stuff work is a lot harder than we thought. So the path to profits is a waaaaays out. So, we're going to "combine" these units, and expect us to dribble out layoffs as we 'realize synergies' "
Re: (Score:2)
More than the 1.3 million people a year human drivers kill.
Why does the link go to a gold pimping site? (Score:2)
The link in that article goes to goldseek.com, which has dick all to do with Uber trucks.
What is going on here? Are that many people really ranting without clicking on the link, or has it been subsequently hacked?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
The link in that article goes to goldseek.com, which has dick all to do with Uber trucks.
What is going on here? Are that many people really ranting without clicking on the link, or has it been subsequently hacked?
The actual link *is* in the tech crunch name on the heading.
But shame on the editors for the pimping. Not that they actually care what we think.
Good (Score:3)
And before you rant about how autonomous cars and trucks will save lives because human drivers suck, I agree. I just want competent companies building them, not Uber.