> <i>The first car from Lyft’s Level 5 self-driving initiative will be the Ford Fusion Hybrid. Lyft’s use of a Ford Fusion apparently isn’t associated with the partnership the two announced last year. Other AV companies have used the Ford Fusion as a platform for integrating self-driving technologies</i><p>Why are we still talking about Level 5 autonomous driving when we can't even get Level 4 working properly? I believe this is sending the wrong message.<p>On the topic of the acquisition, it seems like a good strategic buy for Lyft. I am still not sure whether they have the capital nor the talent pool to develop a strong autonomous vehicle product. It also seems like they are a bit late to the party, as there are more and more doubts on the reality of self-driving in the next few years.<p>I may sound sceptical, but I am just cautious when it comes to news on self-driving cars. However I am genuinely excited at this development and look forward to hearing more about how Lyft is progressing on this quest.
> In effect, every Lyft vehicle in operation today, with a smartphone on the dashboard, could be commandeered to become a “camera” watching, surveying and mapping the roads that those cars drive on, and how humans behave on them, using that to help Lyft’s autonomous vehicle (AV) platform learn more about driving overall.<p>Another instance of the "more data is better" fallacy. Humans can drive cars safely after only fifteen years of intermittent sensory input. Lyft could collect that "data" within just one year employing ten collectors. That still doesn't give you brains.<p>Is Techcrunch an outlet for PR pieces? I'm asking because that article reads like one of those.
Bear with me here, trying to come at this from the other end.<p>Why do Uber and Lyft have to develop their own self driving
tech? If what they sell is their routing algorithm for drivers, they can simply lease self driving cars from the companies directly and run them on their network. The car companies would be happy to get a cut of the profits.<p>What advantage would they get by developing their own tech? They have to manufacture the cars themselves or lease the tech to other companies to cover the costs.<p>Uber and more so Lyft seem late to the game and Uber in particular seem to be fraught with problems and have not made the progress they hoped. So why pursue that? I understand if they started early and are making great progress. On the flip side is the tech no where near completion? Then that would make sense. But Google seems to indicate that they are very very close to launching their own taxi program.
I thought the big selling point for Lyft for awhile is that there profitability wasn't dependent on shifting to autonomous vehicles, where Uber's was. This seemed to make drivers move to Lyft because they felt they had more job security. Was that just perceived?
If I were Lyft I would be looking for an automaker acquisition. Specifically one with an EV program or willing to start one. I say this because once any automaker figures out self driving on an ev, the fleet rideshare aspect would be a negligible effort to add. Once that does happen Lyft would basically no longer need to exist. Maybe this move is what they are trying to do which is be acquired by Ford. Either I applaud there effort and look forward to what they achieve.
So they have 1 car and literally coming in last in the AV field. This is a headfake for IPO. Waymo is 10 years ahead of them, minimum.<p>If Waymo's cars don't have usability issues and launch this year, Lyft's valuation will plummet.