Hacker News Reader

Comment by ozpri | Hacker News Reader

Because Uber is ride sharing that is getting into self-driving vehicles, their money comes from the rides we take. Alphabet (Google) Is literally just testing and developing their own self-driving car technology. As far as we know they have no business model, yet.

View on HN

They are not as separate as you are implying. Alphabet could easily block Uber from using their self driving cars by preventing remote control and then set up their own competing service. Uber could sell their self driving tech to anyone.

However, the reality is Uber is only looking into self driving cars because otherwise it's going to destroy their business long term and they don't want their stock to tank today.

Uber is also getting their pants sued off by Google for selling self driving car trade secrets. A suit that Uber is more than likely going to lose.

s/selling/stealing/ (or maybe buying?); Levandowski allegedly stole data when he left Google, and brought it to Otto, which is now owned by Uber.

I guess except that it's not about some stolen files, but rather about people. Uber has the guy who built the Google's self driver tech, which is what really matters.

bhhaskin's post said Uber was selling secrets, which is definitely NOT the case; I don't think I've heard anyone accusing them of that.

You haven't heard the allegations that Uber approached Levandowski while still at Google to start Otto so Uber could buy them later?

I'm still not sure how that would involve uber in selling secrets; still sounds like buying to me.

One implies the other, so in this unholy pedantic discussion, a winning move is to point out that being involved in selling is the same as being involved in buying.

Another tact: Otto is accused of being involved in selling secrets. Uber bought Otto. Otto is now Uber. Therefore, Uber is accused of being involved in selling secrets.

Uber is spending VC bucks on their development.

They also spend VC bucks funding operations (so their huge losses aren't just because of investments in technology, they are a direct result of operating at a loss).

Reply on news.ycombinator.com