This site may earn chapter commissions from the links on this page. Terms of use.

Uber-Feature

Self-driving car technology is emerging equally a powerful next-generation platform. While there are simply a handful of vehicles on the roads today, companies similar Google, Uber, Nvidia, Tesla, and more take all tossed their hats into the ring and are jockeying for position in the nascent market.

But competition is cutthroat, and there's tremendous pressure on the tech industry to deliver real results. Waymo, Google'due south self-driving machine segmentation, has announced information technology believes Uber stole some 10GB of trade secrets on its cocky-driving machine program, and that it is taking activity against Otto (the unit of measurement developing self-driving vehicles for Uber) and Uber itself (the parent company).

Waymo lays out the facts of the state of affairs in a recent Medium mail. In that location, the visitor discusses how it began developing LiDAR (Low-cal Detection and Ranging) technology in 2009. Co-ordinate to the visitor, it has dramatically improved LiDAR and significantly improved the capabilities of the system. Waymo writes:

Hundreds of Waymo engineers have spent thousands of hours, and our company has invested millions of dollars to design a highly specialized and unique LiDAR organisation. Waymo engineers accept driven down the cost of LiDAR dramatically fifty-fifty as we've improved the quality and reliability of its operation. The configuration and specifications of our LiDAR sensors are unique to Waymo. Misappropriating this technology is alike to stealing a secret recipe from a beverage visitor.

GooglePatent

1 of Google'south self-driving car patents

Final year, Uber bought a self-driving car company named Otto, founded past a former Google Waymo engineer. Recently, Waymo received an electronic mail, likely sent accidentally, from one of its major LiDAR component suppliers. The electronic mail included auto drawings of Otto's LiDAR organization and circuit boards — boards that were extremely similar to Google's own designs.

Busted

Waymo began investigating the consequence and institute that Anthony Levandowski, the onetime Google Waymo employee and founder of Otto, had downloaded over 14,000 highly confidential files, including "proprietary design files for Waymo's various hardware systems, including designs of Waymo'due south LiDAR and excursion boards."

Waymo continues:

To gain access to Waymo's design server, Mr. Levandowski searched for and installed specialized software onto his visitor-issued laptop. Once inside, he downloaded 9.seven GB of Waymo'southward highly confidential files and trade secrets, including blueprints, blueprint files and testing documentation. So he continued an external drive to the laptop. Mr. Levandowski and so wiped and reformatted the laptop in an attempt to erase forensic fingerprints. Beyond Mr. Levandowki's deportment, we discovered that other former Waymo employees, now at Otto and Uber, downloaded boosted highly confidential data pertaining to our custom-congenital LiDAR including supplier lists, manufacturing details and statements of piece of work with highly technical data.

That's a damning accusation, given the proof Google has collected, and it comes at a time when Uber scarcely needs more than bad news. The company was hammered earlier this week by robust and documented incidents of sexual harassment past Susan J. Fowler, a former Uber employee. In her post, she documents an HR section that repeatedly told her information technology would not bailiwick employees for sexual harassment because they were too of import to the company. The post alarmed Travis Kalanick, Uber's CEO and co-founder, who immediately vowed to investigate the problem. The company is using its own employees to conduct the investigation, rather than relying on an exterior, impartial investigator, and investors take already criticized the company for this strategy. Information technology'due south besides faced blowback for its privacy-invading updates and its habit of tracking people after they leave their vehicles for more than the few seconds it claims to monitor.

This is just the latest in a string of awful news reports on Uber. The company was criticized for attempting to capitalize on protesters when New York City cab drivers struck to protestation President Trump's immigration orders several weeks agone. It faced heavy criticism for its initial refusal to pay a $150 registration gratuitous to the city of San Francisco in club to test self-driving cars in the city. The optics there were terrible as well; ane of Uber's self-driving vehicles ran a cerise light nearly immediately (though it may have been driver error) and some 20-plus other self-driving machine companies had already paid their $150 fees to exam self-driving vehicles. It's besides been sued for an incredibly predatory loan plan, and the company is expected to mail at to the lowest degree a $3 billion loss for 2016 on $v.5B internet revenue.

Uber-Delete

Discover who is hurt, hither. Not the person who was sexually harassed, lied to, and fired for refusing to "play ball"

The company has been sending the above boilerplate response to at least some American users who want to cancel their accounts, and it's a great example of the attitude that gets them into trouble in the first place. The reference to Eric Holder is meaningless; he's been working as an advocate for Uber since his business firm was hired to fight the idea of using fingerprints as role of background checks on Uber drivers. Arianna Huffington is also part of the investigation, despite non being mentioned in the above — and she's an Uber board member.

Despite its fanciful claims and addiction of breaking the constabulary, Uber isn't "disrupting" annihilation with any kind of sustainable business organization model. A visitor called-for $3 billion per year isn't disrupting taxis; it's driving them out of business organization while incurring unsustainable losses. It's not hard to meet how this ends — with taxis (which I loathe, for the tape) driven out of business, Uber volition be able to enhance its rates and achieve greater profitability. Meanwhile, information technology'south been losing court cases over whether drivers are employees.

Information technology's long past time for Uber to abound upwards. Information technology's not a plucky get-go-up, information technology's a multi-billion dollar company that lies virtually driver pay, misrepresents loan programs, has actively sabotaged its competition by calling and cancelling thousands of rides, and actively attempts to subvert the laws of many of the cities in which it operates. Its self-driving car engineering is an obvious effort to put its current drivers out of a task in the long term. If yous remember about it, that's the simply play Uber can actually make. Raising rates to cover costs would damage its bid to take over the taxi business concern. Thus far, Uber's only existent success has been its power to lose billions of dollars. That's not "disruption."

The existent question is — did Uber know it was buying a stolen gear up of goods when it bought Otto? Conventional wisdom says it didn't, if only because no corporation would want to open itself to that kind of adventure. But given Uber'due south lackadaisical attitude towards the law, it wouldn't be surprising to find out the company knew what it was ownership all along. If Google persists in taking this example to court and refuses to settle, we could larn some very interesting things well-nigh how Uber operates in one case the trial commences.