Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

GM Brings IT Dev Back In House; Self-Driving Caddy In the Works

Posted by timothy on from the oh-christine dept.

dstates writes "Want a good job in IT? Detroit of all places may be the place to be. GM is bringing IT development back in house to speed innovation. Among other initiatives, a self driving Cadillac is planned by mid decade. Ford is also actively developing driver assist technology and is betting big on voice recognition. Ann Arbor has thousands of smart cars wirelessly connected on the road. Think about all those aging baby boomers with houses in the burbs and no desire to move as their vision and reflexes decline. The smart car is a huge market. Seriously, Detroit and SE Michigan have good jobs, great universities, cheap housing and easy access to great sports and outdoors activities."

37 of 171 comments (clear)

  1. Free dystopia by concealment · · Score: 4, Funny

    I'm fond of Detroit, but it's worth mentioning that it could be a set from Blade Runner.

    1. Re:Free dystopia by boristdog · · Score: 4, Informative

      Fun Fact: Much of Robocop 2, ostensibly set in Detroit, was filmed in Houston. I have no idea why. Probably because of winter, though, which only marginally exists in Houston.

    2. Re:Free dystopia by tgd · · Score: 2

      I'm fond of Detroit, but it's worth mentioning that it could be a set from Blade Runner.

      Well, on the upside, if you enjoy having variety in your living situation, you can buy a whole block fairly easily. You can have a house for every day of the week!

    3. Re:Free dystopia by lennier1 · · Score: 4, Funny

      In part because due to the high crime rate the real place has become too dangerous to film a movie there about a dystopian crime-ridden Detroit.

    4. Re:Free dystopia by darjen · · Score: 2

      I live in Cleveland, where our motto is... "At least we're not Detroit"

  2. Oh boy... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Ford ... is betting big on voice recognition.

    A driver gets cut off, yells "fucking asshole!"
    Car: "Now fucking your asshole"

  3. Target Market by Nerdfest · · Score: 2

    The Cadillac still seems to be targeted at old people, and based on the way I see most driven, self driving Cadillacs will be a huge benefit to motorists everywhere. The last time I saw the interior of one, it looked like all navigation and controls had been made large enough to be operated by someone with extremely poor vision. I shuddered. Yes, I realize most of them have a lot of power, but it's exceedingly rare that one is driven like it has.

    1. Re:Target Market by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 2

      The Cadillac target market seems to be eerily similar to the cognac target market: a combination of old, at least vaguely affluent, white guys and young hip-hop aspirants. I don't know how it happened.

    2. Re:Target Market by tgd · · Score: 2

      The Cadillac still seems to be targeted at old people, and based on the way I see most driven, self driving Cadillacs will be a huge benefit to motorists everywhere. The last time I saw the interior of one, it looked like all navigation and controls had been made large enough to be operated by someone with extremely poor vision. I shuddered. Yes, I realize most of them have a lot of power, but it's exceedingly rare that one is driven like it has.

      If Cadillac sold a self-driving car for $100k, I'd be in line day one for it, and I'm not old. I just have a very long, stop-and-go, miserable commute. It'd be worth every penny of that kind of price, if not just for my long term sanity.

    3. Re:Target Market by gstoddart · · Score: 4, Funny

      The Cadillac target market seems to be eerily similar to the cognac target market: a combination of old, at least vaguely affluent, white guys and young hip-hop aspirants. I don't know how it happened.

      Price, and marketing. Cadillac has always been sold as up-market luxury. Hell, the name is almost synonymous with luxury in America ... "this is the Cadillac of (item)" conveys quality and luxury.

      So the slightly older and affluent folks are the obvious choices because they have the money to buy one, and because older affluent folks have always bought Cadillacs. That's how they know they're affluent. :-P

      I think that carried over into the nouveau riche because of the same cachet ... in some circles, if you've made it, you drive a Cadillac. And, since they tend to make larger cars, people who need a little room (like pro athletes) go for them.

      I largely think of them as for old men, wise guys (think Sopranos), people who want to put 21" rims, and mommy-tanks (the Escalade).

      For me though, it's one of the last vehicles I'd want to own, but that's just personal taste. They're mostly massive cars.

      Though, it is always amusing to see a Cadillac or a Hummer that someone has pimped out with huge rims and massive amounts of chrome -- there's a Hummer H3 in my area which has the most gigantic chrome spinners I've ever seen, and every piece that could be chromed has been. Seen the same thing applied to Caddies as well.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    4. Re:Target Market by Lord+Grey · · Score: 2

      You clearly have not test driven a Cadillac CTS-V. 556hp V8, 0-60mph in 4.0 seconds. Not a track car, but it gets the job done.

      Some of the "slightly older and affluent folks" appreciate that.

      --
      // Beyond Here Lie Dragons
    5. Re:Target Market by Nerdfest · · Score: 4, Funny

      That would be especially awesome on a stock car track, with the left turn signal left on.

  4. Fears of Self-Driving Cars by MyLongNickName · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I love the idea of self-driving cars. I will talk about it with people and frequently, I will get the response "the idea of computers driving scares me". My response: "the idea of humans driving cars scares me more".

    --
    See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
    1. Re:Fears of Self-Driving Cars by Errol+backfiring · · Score: 2

      Not me. I'm a programmer. Most humans have had a mom who, without any commercial "efficiency need", devoted years and years into raising a sensible human who is capable of responding to anything unexpected. A lot of programs do have a commercial "drive" that causes them to be released into the wild long before they are mature and up to the task they should be able to perform. I might trust an open source program, but only if I could test it first in some kind of emulator. Acceptance testing with your life is just not, well, acceptable.

      --
      Nae king! Nae laird! Nae yurrupiean pressedent! We willna be fooled again!
    2. Re:Fears of Self-Driving Cars by SJHillman · · Score: 2

      I was involved in a big debate about this. A lot of people said that even if self-driving cars were proven to have a fraction of the accident rate of human drivers, people still wouldn't trust them because of those few times something *could* go wrong. It makes no logical sense, but I suppose it's similar to flying in an airplane (which is also significantly safer than driving, statistically) - it's that lack of control that's the scary part. If something goes wrong, you want to be the one controlling it.

    3. Re:Fears of Self-Driving Cars by h4rr4r · · Score: 2

      Still easier to verify and test than a human.

    4. Re:Fears of Self-Driving Cars by Kjella · · Score: 4, Insightful

      A lot of people said that even if self-driving cars were proven to have a fraction of the accident rate of human drivers, people still wouldn't trust them because of those few times something *could* go wrong.

      Many if not most accidents are caused by someone being careless, stupid, tired, distracted, drunk or high. That means most people most of the time think they're driving much safer than average, either because they're not any of the things above or think they're not - that particularly applies to careless and stupid. To gain public acceptance you must beat "idealized" humans, that even if you're cautious, forward thinking, well rested, alert, sober and in every way fit to drive a car an AI has 360 degree vision, millisecond reaction time and all sorts of advantages that you can't beat. You're not competing against the actual accident rate, you're fighting people's perceived - and often imaginary - risk of an accident.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    5. Re:Fears of Self-Driving Cars by Eevee · · Score: 3, Insightful

      ...a sensible human who is capable of responding to anything unexpected.

      It must be nice wher you live, 'cause around here the typical driver's response to anything unexpected seems to be to crash. Actually, for a lot of drivers, the response to expected things seems to be to crash as well.

      Acceptance testing with your life is just not, well, acceptable.

      You do realize you're doing acceptance testing of every driver around you all the time, right?

    6. Re:Fears of Self-Driving Cars by alen · · Score: 2

      planes fly in an almost straight line

      see how a computer drives in NYC where people are always cutting you off, the lane paint is almost gone, etc

    7. Re:Fears of Self-Driving Cars by meta-monkey · · Score: 2

      Baby steps. Perhaps the first self-driving systems would only be permitted on highways where there are no pedestrians (or if there are, they're there in violation of traffic laws).

      Five monotonous hours on the interstate? Self-drive.

      Five blocks on city streets? Drive yourself.

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    8. Re:Fears of Self-Driving Cars by phoebus1553 · · Score: 2

      but I suppose it's similar to flying in an airplane (which is also significantly safer than driving, statistically) - it's that lack of control that's the scary part. If something goes wrong, you want to be the one controlling it.

      Then I suggest you never fly in a modern commercial airliner. From an uncle's stories flying many an Airbus for United, you have 0 ability to perform an evasive maneuver in one that is outside the bounds of 'comfort for the passengers.' Want to throw it into a dive or a hard corner? Nope, that must be an incorrect command from the yoke, we'll just go ahead and give you the predetermined limit for that action instead. Here you go, a nice steady decline, that's what you really meant.

      Your garden variety Cessna isn't in that category, but those big ones you've actually been in are worse than a car for absolute control.

      --
      ----- - The beatings will continue until morale improves
    9. Re:Fears of Self-Driving Cars by Izmunuti · · Score: 3, Insightful

      While oftware bugs will probably cause some catastrophic accidents from self-driving cars, in the grand scheme of things they would probably be safer.

      What will really kill them in the US, at least, is lawyers. If I rear-end someone, who's at fault? Me, and my insurance company gets to pay. When a computer-driven Google-car rear-ends someone, who's at fault. Me? Nah, I was half-asleep, listening to music, brushing my teeth, watching videos, etc. _I_ wasn't driving. Hey, Google wrote the software....they have a lot of money....

      Case in point: the media coverage and lawsuits of the supposed Prius accelerator malfunction. That was just a single drive-by-wire element. A fully autonomous car will get trampled flat by the thundering herds of lawyers.

    10. Re:Fears of Self-Driving Cars by cayenne8 · · Score: 2

      Try reading up on the advancements in this area of computer science. They have a JonnyCab level of tech right now.

      What....the driver crackles and immediately catches on fire if there is a wreck????

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    11. Re:Fears of Self-Driving Cars by Belial6 · · Score: 2

      I think you are vastly over estimating the "mom" goal in raising humans. We are are decades into the "MY happiness is important, so don't bother me." era.

    12. Re:Fears of Self-Driving Cars by Belial6 · · Score: 2

      Virtually anything that the car cannot stop for is going to happen fast enough that most humans would not respond in time even if they were actively driving.

  5. Self driving Caddys for old people by fustakrakich · · Score: 3, Funny

    With turn signals that are always on? And will they remind the "driver" where he is going and why?

    --
    “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
  6. Nice places to visit also... by RocketScientist · · Score: 3, Informative

    Michigan is a beautiful state. Once you clear Detroit you get a sportsman's paradise with fishing, camping, and hunting in some very scenic and well tended state and county parks. The summers are very temperate (rarely gets into the mid 90's) and the humidity is pretty comfortable.

    The winters are...more interesting. Not horrible, but lots of snow and cold.

  7. Need Self-driving cars by neokushan · · Score: 2

    As someone with a bad enough sight problem that I'll never ever be allowed to drive, I yearn for the Self-driving car. For the love of almighty fuck, I just want to be able to get to work without having to deal with buses and trains. And yeah, fuck you, other commuters, fuck you all.

    --
    +1 IDisagreeSoHeMustBeATrollOrAnAstroturferOrAShill
  8. The Rest of the Story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    GM is just hiring all the HP (formerly EDS) contractors that already work for GM. It's not as if they creating thousands of new IT jobs.

  9. Re:Seriously... by Flavianoep · · Score: 2

    I've just imagined this scene: [Driver:] Follow that Caddy. [Computer:] There are no golf courses nearby.

    --
    Linux is for people who don't mind RTFM.
  10. Re:Huge Challenge by Talderas · · Score: 2

    Ignoring vehicle technology, the companies are way behind the tech curve when it comes to supporting their business. I work in an automotive related industry and based on my experience on how we've interfaced with the big three (GM, Chrysler, Ford), Chrysler is the best position. The fleet business for the big three is a significant portion of their business and I'm honestly surprised that they haven't taken more efforts to support this. Just to explain how the fleet business works (at its most basic level). A large company which has a fleet of vehicles will contact a leasing company to get their vehicles (a lot of fleet do not purchase their own vehicles). The leasing company, in turn, will then handle getting the truck into the company's hands. Often times these fleet vehicles must undergo some amount of upfitting before the end company will get them. This may be as simple as some decals. So the leasing company gets an upfitter to do that work. The trip of the vehicle in question then is often Manufacturing Plant to Upfitter to Manufacturing Plant to Rail Car to end destination depot onto a car hauler and to whatever staging area is used for the company to pick the vehicle up.

    Chrysler has been, since about 2009, attempting to track where their vehicles are until they reach the final destination. That means when they're on a car carrier train car, at some upfitter doing work, on a car hauler, or if they've arrived at a dealership. They've also been smoothing out their shipping process by outsourcing some of their final shipment processes (like printing monroney window stickers) to upfitters who do work on their vehicles before they ship to dealerships. I've seen no similar efforts on GM or Ford's part so perhaps this is a sign that GM is going to try to get a better grasp on their chain.

    --
    "Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
  11. Re:Cost of living by DriveDog · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Well, no, I can't finance the same lifestyle in Detroit at any price. It's not available in Michigan. For those who like what I consider bad weather, go for it, by all means. But aside from the bombed-out Detroit proper, the area is bitterly cold and grey in winter without a break. Living there year-round is not for everyone no matter how much they clean it up. Cities in cold climes grew 60-120 years ago because it was easier to generate heat than escape it, but now the warmer climes have A/C, so such places will never again see their former glory.

    Some people like that climate. That's wonderful. They might love it there.

  12. It's a trap! by Anon+E.+Muss · · Score: 3, Informative

    Anybody thinking of getting an IT job at GM should talk to somebody who worked under Randy Mott at one of his previous gigs (e.g. Wal-Mart, Dell, HP). You won't find many fans.

    --
    The key sequence to access my Slashdot bookmark in Firefox is Alt-B-S. I don't believe this is a coincidence.
    1. Re:It's a trap! by Virtucon · · Score: 2

      So start 'splainin Lucy! How is this a bad thing? Are you saying that it will turn Detroit into the new Bangalore? Having worked in Detroit this year and seeing the burned out houses, neighborhoods that have been mowed down it would seem to me that any kind of economic investment that brings jobs to the community is a good thing regardless of who's leading the charge.

      --
      Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
    2. Re:It's a trap! by Anon+E.+Muss · · Score: 2

      At the macro level, adding employment to Detroit would be a good thing. At the micro level, it could be a bad thing for individuals who take a job at GM, and then find themselves working in conditions that make Dilbert look good by comparison. I understand "any port in a storm, and any job in a recession." But if you have a choice, would you really want to go to work for somebody who is absolutely hated by many of his prior employees?

      --
      The key sequence to access my Slashdot bookmark in Firefox is Alt-B-S. I don't believe this is a coincidence.
  13. Re:Seriously... by RaceProUK · · Score: 4, Funny

    A caddy is a car carrying golf clubs.

    FTFY

    --
    No colour or religion ever stopped the bullet from a gun
  14. Some actual facts by sjbe · · Score: 2

    Basically, its Wisconsin, but with a couple more feet of lake effect snow, and the eyesore / mindsore of Detroit.

    Detroit proper has a population of just 700,000 people. Most people who say they are "from Detroit" don't actually live in the city itself. The Metro Detroit area is much larger (population 4 million) and actually is a nice place to live. Oakland County just to the north of Detroit has a AAA credit rating and is among the 10 wealthiest counties in the US. There is a huge amount of engineering talent in the state and the businesses that need it. (Hint, the auto industry uses a LOT of technology)

    I believe Wisconsin has something like 10 lakes for every 1 lake in Michigan.

    Wisconsin has about 15,000 while Michigan has over 11,000. The numbers are very similar. Please cease making up nonsense when two seconds on Google will prove you are making stuff up.