Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Google Transportation

Alphabet Exec Blames Media For Overhyping Self-driving Cars, Even Though Google Drove the Hype (cnbc.com) 38

Waymo executives think people have taken its promises of self-driving cars too seriously. From a report: The Alphabet subsidiary "went through a lot of hype that was sort of unmanageable," said Tekedra N. Mawakana, Waymo's chief external officer. "Sometimes a lot of hype is so mismatched to what's happening in the real world." Mawakana said the reporting has become a bit more "grounded" today, but he went on to say that the hype had caused people to develop mistaken ideas like they would no longer be able to drive their own cars once self-driving cars became ubiquitous. "We want the ride to be amazingly boring," Mawakana continued. "We don't want the ride to be exciting."

The company has dialed back its enthusiastic tone as it falls behind its original timeline for getting full self-driving cars on the road. The company said in 2017 that it wouldn't need to wait until 2020 -- when analysts expected self-driving cars to go fully autonomous -- but that it would give riders the ability within "months." Morgan Stanley cut its valuation on Waymo by 40% last month from $175 billion to $105 billion, concluding that the industry is moving toward commercialization slower than expected and that Waymo still relies on human safety drivers, which CNBC reported in August. But no company has been more instrumental in driving the hype around self-driving than Google. Consumer and media expectations arose based on what Waymo had told the press and public, dating back as far as 2012, when it was still known as Google's self-driving car project.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Alphabet Exec Blames Media For Overhyping Self-driving Cars, Even Though Google Drove the Hype

Comments Filter:
  • by Culture20 ( 968837 ) on Wednesday October 23, 2019 @01:32PM (#59339682)
    Just sayin'
    • by JungleBoy ( 7578 ) on Wednesday October 23, 2019 @01:48PM (#59339732)
      Buzz vs. Hype. If the product is awesome, it will generate it's own buzz. If the product sucks, it will need to be hyped by companies and shills (sorry, "influencers").
      • by rtb61 ( 674572 )

        Google manipulated their customers into hyping the product for them. From targeted searches, to distorted Google adwords, to adjustments into YouTube home pages. Buzz and hype are quite the incorrect words for a carefully targeted mass social psychological manipulation campaign in order to promote vapour ware Google products which in turn are used to inflate the Google share price, a promote increases in Google bonuses. They Google announcement about new technology that rarely arrives as claimed, as the def

      • by DrYak ( 748999 )

        Wooooosh!!!!

        ^-- This was a self-driving woosh.

  • There's certainly no shortage of self-driving fans on Slashdot who seem to have an endless thirst for the Kool-Aide.

  • by zarmanto ( 884704 ) on Wednesday October 23, 2019 @01:44PM (#59339726) Journal

    ...But no company has been more instrumental in driving the hype around self-driving than Google. ...

    I would have to disagree with that statement, as written; while it's clear that Google/Waymo has had some pretty significant influence, I think an argument can easily be made that the most influential "hypester" with regards to the oversold promises of self-driving is -- for better or worse -- Elon Musk.

    • by Anonymous Coward
      A thousand times this. From my highly average place in the world, Elon Musk was the one promoting self driving. I knew of Waymo but always thought Google was rather quiet about it.
    • I don't know if that's necessarily true. I think he might be easier to associate with it because Tesla has an actual product (car) that contains some self-driving functionality. About the worst thing Musk did was call it auto-pilot which is a terribly misleading term in the mind of the average consumer even if it is quite analogous to what you'd find in an airplane. However, Tesla's capabilities are just a little bit better than other manufacturers. Several companies have vehicles that will parallel park th
      • auto-pilot which is a terribly misleading term in the mind of the average consumer

        Is it ? I feel that most people understand pretty well what it means.

        • Yes, you push the auto-pilot button and a pilot inflates and does the flying for you.

        • Musk knew what he was doing. It implies 'it will drive you around' to the non-critical thinking public while absolving him of any legal responsibility.
        • Maybe most do, but there are been too many idiots that thought I meant that they could go to sleep or stop paying attention to the road while the vehicle does its thing. As a result some of them have died. Try to make something fool proof and the universe will just invent a bigger fool.
      • > Tesla's capabilities are just a little bit better than other manufacturers

        Based on? according to AAA Cars with high-tech safety systems are still really bad at not running people over [theverge.com] The Tesla Model 3 seamed to be behind all the other manufactures, Along with the Chevy, it most often didn't even slow before running over pedestrian dummies, while Toyota and Honda slowed significantly. But Chevy outperformed in other tests, where as Tesla was always worst or next to worst.

        It appears; Tesla is just the

    • ...But no company has been more instrumental in driving the hype around self-driving than Google. ...

      I would have to disagree with that statement, as written; while it's clear that Google/Waymo has had some pretty significant influence, I think an argument can easily be made that the most influential "hypester" with regards to the oversold promises of self-driving is -- for better or worse -- Elon Musk.

      He called his particular product "auto pilot". That's about the only difference between him and every other bullshit artist in this same arena. The technical claims about Tesla self-drive features were no more grandiose than anyone elses.

      His only mistake, was assuming that consumers would be smart enough to know that "auto pilot" doesn't mean press a button and take a fucking nap.

      • consumers would be smart enough to know that "auto pilot" doesn't mean press a button and take a fucking nap.

        99.99% of the consumers realize this. The problem is that the few idiots end up in the news. Having another name for the same system would not make a difference.

        • consumers would be smart enough to know that "auto pilot" doesn't mean press a button and take a fucking nap.

          99.99% of the consumers realize this.

          Common sense, isn't that common. If it were, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

          The problem is that the few idiots end up in the news.

          No, the problem isn't the few idiots who end up in the news. The problem is the news "reporters" blowing any bad story way out of proportion to ensure they create revenue via the click-bait train-wreck circus we call marketing these days, which is why "news" reporting has turned into whatever bullshit makes money.

          Here's a perfect example. There are 150,000 ICE vehicles that catch fire every year in the US. That's over 4

    • ...But no company has been more instrumental in driving the hype around self-driving than Google. ...

      I would have to disagree with that statement, as written; while it's clear that Google/Waymo has had some pretty significant influence, I think an argument can easily be made that the most influential "hypester" with regards to the oversold promises of self-driving is -- for better or worse -- Elon Musk.

      We know that it wasn't Musk that paid for the media hype because his company uses the term "autopilot" and the media hype was all using the term "self-driving cars."

      Media hype doesn't just "happen." It is caused by payments that order the hype. It is advertising. Most of the content of these talk or newsvertainment "shows" is simply advertising. They agree to talk during some time slot, and then companies pay them to talk about their thing.

      The only suspects for the client would be companies like Google who

    • He totally jumped the gun on that one.

      Maybe this is part of the downside to his ability to pull off such remarkable feats. In order to believe he can steer multiple companies into uncharted territory and profit while doing so, and then create new markets while actually doing it, he kinda has to believe his own hype to an extent. With self-driving cars, that belief was clearly misplaced, but he may have been at least somewhat sincere. I love many of the thing's he's accomplishing in the world, so it su
    • by Luthair ( 847766 )

      I would throw in Uber and a few other startups as well. I don't think Google has ever particularly shown or talked about Waymo outside of giving rides at a few tech events.

      I would also say that generally the silicon valley press often acts as a PR wing parroting what they've been told by company spokespeople

  • Technically, I think the hype should drive itself. :P
  • by QuietLagoon ( 813062 ) on Wednesday October 23, 2019 @01:56PM (#59339772)
    ... that's become a catch-phrase meaning, "we goofed up, but we do not want to take the responsibility for our actions or our errors."
  • The Media will cover what ever their viewers will be willing to tolerate and want to learn about.

    I may have saved the health care industry a million dollars today. But that isn't going to make the News, because that million dollars isn't going to lower their health insurance cost in the next week. And what I did to save all this money will take hours to try to explain so the normal consumer would understand. So it just won't be on the news, at best I may get a partial sentence on my work with the combinati

    • Hahaha, you may as well have saved a penny. With 3.5 trillion a year in health care costs a million is the same as a penny, it's nothing. If you saved a few billion that might affect some people, but not much.

  • Just how far back do we want to lay blame for hyping up bullshit claims in auto marketing?

    According to Popular Science, flying cars have been coming soon for at least half a century.

  • Expect 2020 to get pushed back to 2022, 2025, or 2030, and some companies (maybe Google) might ultimately cancel their projects. "Slower than expected commercialization"

    • Nahhh, google would just release it as a beta; let it sit idle for 5+ years, then quietly discontinue it. (and brick everyone's car in the process)

  • ... get me my self driving electric RV powered by Thorium generated electricity by retirement. You're running out of time!

  • It's all fine till someone dies!

    Uber had theirs.

    Who will be next?

  • ... their goddam quantum supremacy [slashdot.org] hoax.

    Quantum Supremacy From Google? Not So Fast, Says IBM.

  • I see what you did there...

  • So what Google is saying is that this is self driving hype?

A morsel of genuine history is a thing so rare as to be always valuable. -- Thomas Jefferson

Working...