Google Scales Back Self-Driving Car Ambitions

[MacRumors]

Google is reported to have shelved plans to develop its own self-driving vehicle in favor of nurturing partnerships with existing car makers to continue its work in the automotive space.

According to The Information, the company's autonomous car unit, known internally as Chauffeur, is working with established car companies to develop vehicles that will include self-driving features, while ditching earlier plans to remove the steering wheel and pedal controls. The news follows on from reports back in May that Google is actively working with Fiat Chrysler on automotive projects.

Despite the shift in gears for its car project, sources suggest Google still has plans to bring an autonomous taxi service to U.S. roads before the end of 2017. Its autonomous vehicles have already clocked over two million miles of tests on public roads.

Recent reports regarding Apple's ambitions in the autonomous vehicle space appear to have taken a similar hard turn away from developing an own-branded electric car. The Cupertino company is said to have shelved its original automotive program "for now" in favor of building a self-driving software platform, possibly in partnership with existing car makers.

In a letter earlier this month to the U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Apple admitted to its interest in "machine learning and automation" as it pertains to transportation, and confirmed its desire to help define rules for the self-driving car industry in the future.

Article Link: Google Scales Back Self-Driving Car Ambitions

 

[T'hain Esh Kelch]

Pfft.. Google is just copying Apple again!

 

[andy.ringwood]

The only company that has nailed it so far is Tesla. Other companies are years off.

 

[Abazigal]

The only company that has nailed it so far is Tesla. Other companies are years off.

Nailed what exactly?

All tesla has shown is that they can make an electric car. If they can deliver on their orders, that is.

Even their self-driving tech is nowhere near prime time.

 

[Kabeyun]

Waiting to see if comments here are as observant of Google's folly as these about Apple's only two months ago.

 

[joueboy]

Google doesn't do this to actually make a product available to the market. That's a lot of responsibility if Google actually makes that happen. What Google did is brilliant for its own good as usual. They develop something that people talks about and gets them excited especially the media. All they do is to pretend to be always relevant to the tech and keeps its title as innovators of tech without actually innovating. They have to keep it that way to preserve their business model as the leader of search engine that brings billions of dollars to their table. As long that we get excited and talk about Google every year of their awesome new product, they will remain in the top spot. They know how to play the game in business.

 

[Zirel]

Pfft.. Google is just copying Apple again!

Except Apple is not doing anything like this.

Google is always a failure, when they make so much easy money from advertising, they don't need money from things like this and just crank up the ads on YouTube.

Their last success was when they still collaborated with Apple, since then it has been Google Buzz, Google Plus, Google Play Music, YouTube Red, Android Wear, Google TV, Android TV, Google Fi, etc. etc. etc.

They promised the self driving car back in 2012 in a time frame of 5 years.

 

[theluggage]

The only company that has nailed it so far is Tesla. Other companies are years off.

Actually, the back-pedalling may have been Tesla's fault because of the negative publicity generated by AutoPilot.

The problem with self-drive is that it won't be ready until it can demonstrate that it is virtually infallible. Rational thinking may suggest that it only has to be as good as the average driver to produce a major advance in road safety - but unfortunately, rational thinking won't have much of a role in the public and legal acceptance of self-driving.

For a while, every incident involving a self-driving car is going to be international front-page news. The first court case over a third-party death caused by a self-driving car is going to be a media circus. Adoption of self-driving cars is going to depend on changes in the law on liability and insurance (are you going to get into a self-driving car if you're liable for the consequences of bugs in Tesla/Google/Apple's last software update?)

Reality is, our pathologically risk-averse society has developed an irrational blind spot when it comes to letting a fallible human control a ton of metal hurtling around at 70mph (the accident rate is actually quite low, considering - turns out that ape brains evolved to tarzan through the trees are really good at it). That free pass isn't going to be extended to robots.

I think we're currently at the point where self-parking, lane-keeping, cruise control, auto braking etc. are at the limits of what can safely be done without causing driver complacency. The industry now has to make a quantum leap[1] to a system which allows the driver to kick back and start playing Pokemon - because typical drivers are not going to pay attention to the road and stand ready to intervene while a car drives itself. What we have now is a good proof-of-concept (and maybe a slightly better lane assist) - it still has a long way to go before mass acceptance. There are significant technical challenges and significant cultural/social challenges.

I'm sure it will come eventually, but its not going to be pulling in profits next year.

[1] (in the correct sense of the term - i.e. no intermediate states)

 

[T'hain Esh Kelch]

Except Apple is not doing anything like this.

https://www.macrumors.com/2016/10/17/apple-late-2017-deadline-self-driving-system/

Google is always a failure, when they make so much easy money from advertising, they don't need money from things like this and just crank up the ads on YouTube.

Their last success was when they still collaborated with Apple, since then it has been Google Buzz, Google Plus, Google Play Music, YouTube Red, Android Wear, Google TV, Android TV, Google Fi, etc. etc. etc.

They promised the self driving car back in 2012 in a time frame of 5 years.

Fanboy response, eh?

 

[Zirel]

https://www.macrumors.com/2016/10/17/apple-late-2017-deadline-self-driving-system/


Fanboy response, eh?

Do you have any proof?

Is 2017 over yet and the division failed to impress the board?

Not!

 

[T'hain Esh Kelch]

Do you have any proof?

Is 2017 over yet and the division failed to impress the board?

Not!

Childish response much? First you reply to an obvious joke with a rant, and then you want to argue about something that we don't even know exists. Do you have any proof Apple is even making a car?

 

[Stella]

The right approach - do what Google do well - build software and let established car companies build the hardware.

 

[Abazigal]

The right approach - do what Google do well - build software and let established car companies build the hardware.

And then Apple swoops in and vacuums up all the profits.

 

[slineaudi]

Google is heavily invested in Uber, who seems to be leading in bringing self driving tech to the masses.

 

[Abazigal]

Google doesn't do this to actually make a product available to the market. That's a lot of responsibility if Google actually makes that happen. What Google did is brilliant for its own good as usual. They develop something that people talks about and gets them excited especially the media. All they do is to pretend to be always relevant to the tech and keeps its title as innovators of tech without actually innovating. They have to keep it that way to preserve their business model as the leader of search engine that brings billions of dollars to their table. As long that we get excited and talk about Google every year of their awesome new product, they will remain in the top spot. They know how to play the game in business.

To be fair, Google does have a lot of great ideas and inventions. They just suck at design and successfully monetising those products.

 

[Apple Knowledge Navigator]

Until self-driving cars develop a conscience, I fail to see how they're going to impact the automotive industry. There are just far too many instances where a human has greater control over a given situation. How would it communicate with other drivers at a roundabout? Or give way in narrow roads when you're behind a parked car? How would it fight to change lanes when Mr BMW or Mrs 4x4 are far too busy to slow down and let you out? The list is endless.

 

[geenosr]

I don't want a self-driving electric car.....I just want more choices for great electric cars with extended range and low prices. I like....no I LOVE driving my own car (Leaf) and just want better. It's going to take a lot of convincing for me to let a car drive me. I'm such a control freak I don't want any other person than me to drive....much less 1's and 0's. I'm sure self-driving cars will come eventually but the time is not now. So Google and Apple, try working on perfecting the car itself, then worry about the software a little further down the line.

 

[dilbert99]

Nailed what exactly?

All tesla has shown is that they can make an electric car. If they can deliver on their orders, that is.

Even their self-driving tech is nowhere near prime time.

Tesla produce electric cars and deliver on orders as you can see with the model S.
Ah, you mean they are niche players?
But they have to be mass market you say?
But unlike Apple with the Mac (and other devices) which are niche player?

So does Tesla need to be big like Toyota or niche like Apple and some other brands?

I'm guessing Tesla has to increase production to stay afloat.
[doublepost=1481633684][/doublepost]

Until self-driving cars develop a conscience, I fail to see how they're going to impact the automotive industry. There are just far too many instances where a human has greater control over a given situation. How would it communicate with other drivers at a roundabout? Or give way in narrow roads when you're behind a parked car? How would it fight to change lanes when Mr BMW or Mrs 4x4 are far too busy to slow down and let you out? The list is endless.

Self driving cars are coming. If they can demonstrate that they are safer than drivers. We will not be allowed to drive.
Communication with other cars is easy, that is just a matter of legislation.
Yes, bullying self driving cars is a problem that will need to be solved and I guess there are many other things to be solved.

But automation as in cars, I don't think is that hard to solve.
As for cars that are (AI) intelligent (concscience even), I don't ever see happening.

 

[Fender2112]

But unlike Apple with the Mac (and other devices) which are niche player?

I don't think people any longer consider Apple a niche player. They are one of the biggest brands and most profitable companies in the world.

 

[CE3]

Can't believe they actually had plans to ditch the steering wheel and pedals this early in development. Removal of those controls only makes sense in extremely controlled environments like amusement parks.

 

[Fender2112]

Actually, the back-pedalling may have been Tesla's fault because of the negative publicity generated by AutoPilot.

The problem with self-drive is that it won't be ready until it can demonstrate that it is virtually infallible. Rational thinking may suggest that it only has to be as good as the average driver to produce a major advance in road safety - but unfortunately, rational thinking won't have much of a role in the public and legal acceptance of self-driving.

For a while, every incident involving a self-driving car is going to be international front-page news. The first court case over a third-party death caused by a self-driving car is going to be a media circus. Adoption of self-driving cars is going to depend on changes in the law on liability and insurance (are you going to get into a self-driving car if you're liable for the consequences of bugs in Tesla/Google/Apple's last software update?)

Reality is, our pathologically risk-averse society has developed an irrational blind spot when it comes to letting a fallible human control a ton of metal hurtling around at 70mph (the accident rate is actually quite low, considering - turns out that ape brains evolved to tarzan through the trees are really good at it). That free pass isn't going to be extended to robots.

I think we're currently at the point where self-parking, lane-keeping, cruise control, auto braking etc. are at the limits of what can safely be done without causing driver complacency. The industry now has to make a quantum leap[1] to a system which allows the driver to kick back and start playing Pokemon - because typical drivers are not going to pay attention to the road and stand ready to intervene while a car drives itself. What we have now is a good proof-of-concept (and maybe a slightly better lane assist) - it still has a long way to go before mass acceptance. There are significant technical challenges and significant cultural/social challenges.

I'm sure it will come eventually, but its not going to be pulling in profits next year.

[1] (in the correct sense of the term - i.e. no intermediate states)

Nice write-up.

I agree. People are not going to give up their steering wheels anytime soon.
At the end of the day someone has to be responsible and accept the liability. I don't think car companies are ready to bare that burden.

 

[Abazigal]

I don't want a self-driving electric car.....I just want more choices for great electric cars with extended range and low prices. I like....no I LOVE driving my own car (Leaf) and just want better. It's going to take a lot of convincing for me to let a car drive me. I'm such a control freak I don't want any other person than me to drive....much less 1's and 0's. I'm sure self-driving cars will come eventually but the time is not now. So Google and Apple, try working on perfecting the car itself, then worry about the software a little further down the line.

From what I have read, Apple seems to be skating towards the autonomous self-driving ride-sharing market, which suggests that Apple intends to skip the electric car market altogether.

The rationale is that most of the time, your car just sits unused in a car park, which takes up space. A ride-sharing model would make more efficient use of cars, and could provide a cheaper alternative to owning cars which is just as convenient.

There's simply more money to be made in such a partnership (which can reach many many more cars) than simply selling electric cars which have low margins.

In this context, I doubt we will see Apple release an actual car. They will continue to work on the software and the AI and partner with other car companies for the hardware.

 

[rodgersmc]

Waiting to see if comments here are as observant of Google's folly as these about Apple's only two months ago.

I see your point, but there is a difference: Apple is a hardware maker in need* of a new product line. Google is not, and this always seemed like more of an experimental side project for Google.

*This need may be mostly perceived. They're still raking in cash through the iPhone.

 

[JustMartin]

...How would it fight to change lanes when Mr BMW or Mrs 4x4 are far too busy to slow down and let you out? The list is endless.

The obvious answer is to replace all private car ownership with a fleet of self-driving taxis. Even at the volume required to guarantee a car arriving within two minutes of you ordering it, the roads would still be more efficient. The cars would talk to each other in order to maximise road usage. Then, think what would be available - more space because you wouldn't need to park them. More money through an increased efficiency in resource usage. Environmentally friendlier because you're no longer building cars that sit idle for hours at a time.

Of course the cultural change would be huge and I don't think people could be persuaded to give up their cars any time soon - even if the solution was quicker, cheaper and more reliable than owning your own car.

 

[brueck]

Nailed what exactly?

All tesla has shown is that they can make an electric car. If they can deliver on their orders, that is.

Even their self-driving tech is nowhere near prime time.

You need to read the news more often man.