Since84
Moderator
To infinity and beyond!
Posts: 3,933
|
Post by Since84 on May 3, 2019 2:16:48 GMT -8
|
|
Since84
Moderator
To infinity and beyond!
Posts: 3,933
|
Post by Since84 on May 3, 2019 2:18:36 GMT -8
Just a reminder, I do not concur with all the articles posted here. Many are here as a reminder of the FUD that is out there...
|
|
Since84
Moderator
To infinity and beyond!
Posts: 3,933
|
Post by Since84 on May 3, 2019 4:12:02 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by dreamRaj on May 3, 2019 6:59:24 GMT -8
How about Berkshire buying AMZN?!
Grandpa Warren's livin' on the edge nowadays.
|
|
|
Post by BillH on May 3, 2019 7:29:39 GMT -8
How about Berkshire buying AMZN?! Grandpa Warren's livin' on the edge nowadays. He did say his minions bought it. That said, I'm still surprised that it could pass muster. Silly me, I always thought the goal should be profits but maybe world domination is close enough.
|
|
chinacat
Moderator
AAPL Long since 2006
Posts: 4,426
|
Post by chinacat on May 3, 2019 7:53:09 GMT -8
|
|
chinacat
Moderator
AAPL Long since 2006
Posts: 4,426
|
Post by chinacat on May 3, 2019 9:43:18 GMT -8
|
|
mark
fire starter
Posts: 1,552
|
Post by mark on May 3, 2019 9:50:33 GMT -8
How about Berkshire buying AMZN?! Grandpa Warren's livin' on the edge nowadays. He did say his minions bought it. That said, I'm still surprised that it could pass muster. Silly me, I always thought the goal should be profits but maybe world domination is close enough. Last I read, up to some level of investment, the "minions" (i.e. future replacement) have decision-making power up to a certain level. Maybe $5B or $10B, but nothing larger, like entire companies or 50% partners in takeovers.
|
|
|
Post by artman1033 on May 3, 2019 10:55:45 GMT -8
HAS THIS BEEN POSTED? Apple's granted patent 10,247,816 is titled "Apparatus and method to measure slip and velocity."
According to Apple, road vehicles use tires that are compliant air-filled structures that exert force on the road by continually deforming and slipping relative to the road. For road vehicle stability and traction, modern vehicle control systems often use an estimate of how the vehicle moves with respect to the road. here
golly! that is a BIG DEAL!
|
|
ems
Member
Posts: 97
|
Post by ems on May 3, 2019 12:09:19 GMT -8
slip angle sensor: interesting, though that has been a relatively-solved problem already (re: ESC, traction/stability/yaw control, etc.)
I wouldn't take this as "The AAPL car is coming soon!", more like "Well, we invested all this time and resources into this car project (which may or may not happen), let's at least patent what we can so we can get some IP value back out of it in the future maybe".
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 3, 2019 18:11:52 GMT -8
>> because they could not see the future. BlackBerry. HTC. Motorola. Nokia
Nonsense. The "Apple can't save itself from itself" piece trots out a familiar canard. Horace Dediu I think calls this the "stupid manager thesis".
It wouldn't matter even if they did see the future. General-purpose computer companies don't spring up out of other companies to help solve a specific problem, any more than a brain tumor might spur one to learn how to become a brain surgeon. There've been very few general-purpose computer companies: IBM (and a handful of competitors that it outlasted), WinTel, and Apple. That's about it. None of them came about by suddenly realizing one is needed for some project. They came about because of a burning desire to make a general-purpose computer no matter how long it might take, and the whole point of a general purpose computer is that they can do anything, at least in theory. So some tasks have to wait for future evolutions of them with extended capabilities. I don't really think there is anything more difficult than creating a general-purpose computer company. It's unimaginably difficult. What BlackBerry, HTC, Motorola, and Nokia did wrong was not having a few decades of being a general purpose computer company under their belt. So they were disrupted, and there's nothing they could have done about it even if they realized it.
|
|
4aapl
Moderator
Posts: 3,622
|
Post by 4aapl on May 5, 2019 7:47:51 GMT -8
slip angle sensor: interesting, though that has been a relatively-solved problem already (re: ESC, traction/stability/yaw control, etc.) I wouldn't take this as "The AAPL car is coming soon!", more like "Well, we invested all this time and resources into this car project (which may or may not happen), let's at least patent what we can so we can get some IP value back out of it in the future maybe". The patent (it was posted before, but is good info, even if a bit dense) is about the sensors involved (to be used by ESC, etc), and improving the way the car movement is figured, with the additional benefit of being able to figure out the surface (it calls out ice and potholes). "Knowledge of these handling limits can be of great benefit especially when encountering circumstances such as an icy surface, where the vehicle may slip and travel cannot necessarily be understood from tire rotation information and the like." I liked the part about human drivers, basically in that while it's possible to outperform a computer system, the computer can hit it every time. That's how I feel about ABS, that while it's a bit of a compromise (going between static and moving friction), it does better than someone in a panic situation who just skids. I had a lot of time to think about that, while commuting over the highest pass in the Sierras for a couple years. Even though they did a great job of clearing it, there was lots of snow and ice to potentially slide on. "An experienced driver can over the years lean how to drive under varying road conditions and is able to adjust to driving and stopping on roads that are icy, slippery or wet and know when to slow down when approaching intersections or turns in the road in order to keep the vehicle under control. Humans don't always get it right. To a vehicle that is autonomous or semi-autonomous mode, nothing is left to chance. Everything is about math and highly intricate systems that can monitor every road condition, the vehicle's tire conditions, and the tire's traction capacity so as to determine in realtime how the vehicle will handle varying conditions." I thought when I read the article previously it finally called out the downsides, but I'm not seeing it here. I think these would be somewhat like the parking sensors in bumpers. The obvious downsides I see are added cost, damage potential (rocks, grit, etc) and getting dirty (grit, salt, etc). In our slowly local, they limit the salt usage but there is a lot of grit. We have some in wheel wells that is caked up so much that it's more like a protective 1/8" or greater layer that doesn't come off when washing the car. I'd imagine that would give most optical sensors a bit of trouble.
|
|