32 comments

[ 3.0 ms ] story [ 53.3 ms ] thread
> The parent company would provide about $13 billion to the robotaxi firm, while the rest would come from others, including new investors ...

No IPO for us little people

I presume if you invest in Google you are indirectly (but significantly) invested in Waymo, like it is with Anthropic?

Waymo is the best service I've used in many, many years. The jump from Uber->Waymo is similar to the quality jump from Taxi->Uber 12 years ago, but I don't see an obvious way for Waymo to get enshittified.

Why does Google need outside investors? Is it a play to get a “serious” valuation since it would be vetted by outside parties?

I guess Im questioning why Waymo doesn’t just IPO, or raise 100% private raise by Google.

Why risk your own money, when you can risk others'?
Rich people and big companies buy insurance too.
I also wonder this - my best theory is getting institutional buy-in from all corners will help with the regulation going forward.
>> or raise 100% private by Google?

Isn't that what they are kinda doing? 13bn out of the 16bn is coming from Google itself.

I think the reason they are taking 3bn from outside high-profile investors is to validate the valuation, for legal or accounting reasons.

(comment deleted)
Just don’t take one if another one is operating nearby. If they see another waymo, having passed the insecure emotional Turing test, they get self-conscious and wander the neighborhood backstreets until the other one has dropped off its passengers.

(Just experienced this multiple times in Phoenix. It’s impressive at navigating and braking, but not rational planning or flocking.)

why is Tesla much higher? I thought Tesla's market cap was because of the self driving feature.
No product had such a fast transition from novelty to "omg i never want to interact with a human again". I feel about 100% less stressed and happier using a waymo or riding motorbike or bicycle next to a waymo than with human drivers. I hope this next phase will bring availability and prices down. We need this in europe.
Waymo is not solving driving, it is closer to a sophisticated Disney Parkland ride. It is running inside a tightly constrained Operational Design Domain:

- Geofenced areas

- HD pre-mapped roads

- Curated infrastructure

- Remote ops fallback

This is not general autonomy, it is highend automation inside a controlled distribution. The system degrades exactly where humans do not: construction, unmapped lane shifts, police manually directing traffic, chaotic mixed behavior.

A cop overriding a light is not an “edge case”, it is a semantic and social reasoning problem that current perception stacks still do not robustly solve. It works because the world is pre modeled, not because the car understands driving.

Scaling that beyond a few mapped US suburbs into Europe is a totally different problem. Dont get fooled by Wall Street stock pumping.

My anecdote: My wife had to literally have two drinks before here first Waymo ride. Now she doesn't want to use anything else other that Waymo when we can't drive ourselves, and totally agree with her

Having said that, Uber was amazing experience when it started too, now it's on par with cabs.

Yeah, this is one of my guilty automation pleasures alongside self-checkout. I hate that I am displacing a human, and I mourn for the handful of really pleasant taxi / Uber experiences I’ve had over the years, but damn is Waymo such a better default experience right now.

I really hope there’s enough viable competition over time to keep costs down or I worry this will evolve into robo-limos rather than a nice cheap default option for areas without good public transit infrastructure. The DUI prevention alone is such a huge win.

There is the matter of surveillance though. I don’t love that I have to take their word on not abusing the cabin recordings, but I guess that’s pretty much all modern vehicles (via onStar and the like) not just robo-taxis. Pretty much every Sci-fi dystopian with urban infrastructure has that scene where the corrupt authorities have someone’s self-driving car pulled over remotely, that seems important as well given the state of things lately.

I do too, except for the fact that Waymos constantly break traffic laws.
>We need this in europe.

I'm not against automated driving at all, but in my experience we actually don't have that much use for stuff like this in most (big) European cities, since almost all of them have good public transport options already. I think trams especially fill the hole of "low-friction transport in a city" perfectly. I think having less vehicles on the road is a benefit to us all, but I understand some cities are not as tightly packed for public transport to work that well.

Either way, less human drivers is better.

I just want a fucking bus with a professional driver in it. Or even better, a subway
I love, love, love Waymo and am so excited about their success. Uber and Lyft were the heroes for a while, but became the villains. If Waymo is available anywhere I need a cab, that is absolutely my first choice, even for the premium cost.
I can't wait to subscribe to Waymo (or any reasonable provider) for personal cars.

It's one thing to call an Uber. It's another to pack your car for a road trip to the beach or mountains.

Waymo is going to make vacationing even bigger than it already is. It'll be easy, especially for remote workers.

Van life with a Waymo is a whole new thing.

It seems like a fair valuation to me. I can see a path for them to approach or surpass Uber's revenue (~$50B) in the future, and I think their technology and brand are actual moats in comparison to all other driverless systems out there.
Left pocket valuing the right pocket.
Wow that is headline carnage. What does it mean?

Edit: there is a paywall in my country. Why downvotes? I’m just curious.

HN in a bit odd when it comes to paywells. You're not allowed to complain about them and everyone reading is individually expected to figure out how to access the content (which usually involves finding a top comment linking to a workaround for everyone or the usual users all going with their preferred tools silently).

https://archive.is/Lh2QY

I do not think driverless will solve the main transportation problem we are dealing with as a society: we are giving up more space for cars, space that humans cannot use. We build more highways, widen roads, increase speed limits, and expect humans to stay out of this space. I live in a 100+ year old neighborhood. The roads were built for horse and buggy and streetcars. Now I have to beg to cross the road. My neighborhood has been effectively chopped up. I question whether I should walk to another block because I'll have to deal with crossing the street. Quiet houses now have the constant buzz of cars either from the ever-present highways or from the 40+ mph traffic right outside their doors. Driverless cars will not solve these problems. Fewer kids will die, partially from safe software, but mostly because they won't be able to leave their bubble without being strapped down into a car.
FWIW Waymo may have been "seeking" this deal when Bloomberg wrote that article but FT reports that it's already closed.
As someone who lives in a city with a lot of Waymos (Atlanta), I do not understand why anyone considers these things more than an early test or a novelty.

From an outside perspective, they're constantly obstructing traffic and driving in erratic and confusing ways. It's gotten to a point that if I see one ahead of me, I'll turn down the next block and change my route to avoid being behind it and dealing with whatever slowdown its about to cause.

I took one once via Uber with some coworkers and it was also jarring to ride in. I'd rather take my chances with a random human.

(comment deleted)