Slashdot Mirror


Google Puts Boston Dynamics Up For Sale In Robotics Retreat (bloomberg.com)

An anonymous reader writes from an article on Bloomberg: Executives at Google parent Alphabet Inc., absorbed with making sure all the various companies under its corporate umbrella have plans to generate real revenue, concluded that Boston Dynamics isn't likely to produce a marketable product in the next few years and have put the unit up for sale, according to two people familiar with the company's plans. Possible acquirers include the Toyota Research Institute, a division of Toyota Motor Corp., and Amazon.com Inc., which makes robots for its fulfillment centers, according to one person. Google acquired Boston Dynamics in late 2013 as part of a spree of acquisitions in the field of robotics. Over the following year, the robot initiative, dubbed Replicant, was plagued by leadership changes, failures to collaborate between companies and an unsuccessful effort to recruit a new leader. Jonathan Rosenberg, an adviser to Alphabet Chief Executive Officer Larry Page and former Google senior vice president, said, "we as a startup of our size cannot spend 30-plus percent of our resources on things that take ten years," and that "there's some time frame that we need to be generating an amount of revenue that covers expenses and (that) needs to be a few years." In December, Google announced that Replicant had been folded into Google's advanced research group, Google X. In a private all-hands meeting around that time, Astro Teller, the head of Google X, told Replicant employees that if robotics aren't the practical solution to problems that Google was trying to solve, they would be reassigned to work on other things, according to a person who was at that meeting. Boston Dynamics, though, was never folded into Google X and was instead put up for sale.

25 of 95 comments (clear)

  1. dogs by Noah+Haders · · Score: 2

    I always feel bad when the people try to kick over the dog robots. I understand the point they're trying to make, but they seem to be doing it with too much glee.

    1. Re:dogs by The-Ixian · · Score: 2

      I know. I feel the same way. Watching them push the robots around makes me want to yell at them to stop.

      --
      My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
    2. Re:dogs by wardrich86 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Every push builds their calibration and balance. They're literally training it to become invincible. They should be pushing it with terror in their eyes knowing that one day they will be bowing to the robot overlords that they created.

    3. Re:dogs by spacepimp · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Do you feel bad for shovels when people use them to dig? Your mind is pattern matching humanistic traits and applying them to a smarter shovel in a sense. I too feel bad. Thats just a neo cortex lingering issue.

    4. Re:dogs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Not necessarily, applying physical violence to any productive object will always evoke a sense of waste at the very least. Using a shovel to dig isn't the same thing as abusing a shovel. If I saw someone kicking their shovel over, I'd think twice about approaching that person soon after for pleasant conversation. It is the action being judged, not the recipient of the action (which is only ever imaginary anyway)

    5. Re:dogs by OhPlz · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Doesn't "running a bunch of data through a neural network" also define our own existence?

    6. Re:dogs by Verdatum · · Score: 2

      I understand how you would have that emotional response, but try and think about it this way: perhaps the glee doesn't come from being aggressive to the robot, perhaps it comes from discovering and experiencing first-hand how the robot can, by-design, completely withstand such a kick.

  2. Hopefully, Tesla by WindBourne · · Score: 2

    This is their opportunity to get into the game and produce manufacturing equipment. In addition, BD is ideal for the moon and mars.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    1. Re:Hopefully, Tesla by WarJolt · · Score: 3

      Amazon has the right idea. Thousands of cloud connected drones. Google needs to improve their cloud controlled car, but that's a little bit more difficult. Both companies need to focus more on the IoT aspect of robotics because that's where the money's at.

      Stay away from building the hardware. It's a money pit.

    2. Re:Hopefully, Tesla by KGIII · · Score: 2

      I really like robots. I really am openly biased about Boston Dynamics for stupid personal reasons. I really like the robots that I've seen that they've created.

      Alas, there's no way that I could do a damned thing to help this company along. It may be years out before they'd be profitable. I almost (I've not yet thought it through) hope they're picked up by one of the heavies like Boeing. I could even see them tucked into Oshkosh somewhere. I'd love to see DARPA just keep them researching but, if I recall correctly, they've always wanted to be independent(ish) and only went to outsiders 'cause that shit's expensive - so many they could just retain the IP and go work for DARPA. I don't know, I've not given it much thought.

      But that leads me to this...

      They are, and I'm hugely biased, really awesome. I mean they make my childhood dreams flash back to memory. They make me giddy, sort of. I'm enthralled with them in ways that are surely not healthy - I've watched every single video they've ever released, found them in documentaries, and really enjoyed watching them grow - I remember when they were just splitting from academia, that's how long I've followed them, since the beginning.

      It does give me a few ideas. It'd be neat if there was a way that group-funding could generate recurring revenue large enough to keep them afloat - with no real necessity to generate profit. It'd be neat if a group of people got together to fund stuff like this - on a larger scale. There are already some programs to do this.

      It'll make me sad to see them building assembly robots. Those robots, the ones that they've made, shouldn't be in factories. They should be out giving bad people nightmares. They should be stomping in and out of battles to rescue wounded, bring gear, and maybe even stand up with hidden mini-guns embedded in its chest and lay waste to an approaching enemy's armored personnel carrier. They should be leaping from peak to peak in a destroyed urban landscape like a mountain goat does atop a precarious precipice perch. They should not be loading boxes and moving them around a factory.

      Yeah, I'm kind of, probably, sort of not the least biased person here. Even if I could do anything to help something out at that scale, I'd not touch it as an investment. There's no way I could be objective enough to do that. Biased or not, I'd hate to see 'em go.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
  3. Re:Quelle surprise by Chas · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Yeah. I didn't get that either.

    You have a division that supposedly has no revenue generation prospects.

    But you're going to sell it? Who's going to buy something like that?

    That's like selling someone a flat paddle of wood and calling it a hairbrush.

    --


    Chas - The one, the only.
    THANK GOD!!!
  4. BD had a product - Google effed them by dyslexicbunny · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The impression I had was that Big Dog was their big product. Google bought them and killed the program cause they don't do defense work. I thought the Army saying Big Dog didn't meet noise requirements was something that allowed everyone to save face.

    Maybe Google shouldn't have bought a robotics company that was primarily defense funded...

    1. Re:BD had a product - Google effed them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The impression I had was that Big Dog was their big product. Google bought them and killed the program cause they don't do defense work. I thought the Army saying Big Dog didn't meet noise requirements was something that allowed everyone to save face.

      Maybe Google shouldn't have bought a robotics company that was primarily defense funded...

      Or maybe they *did* buy a defense company and closed it down because it fit the politics of their founders...
      If google is good at anything, it's buying startup companies and shutting them down...

    2. Re:BD had a product - Google effed them by dj245 · · Score: 3, Informative

      The impression I had was that Big Dog was their big product. Google bought them and killed the program cause they don't do defense work. I thought the Army saying Big Dog didn't meet noise requirements was something that allowed everyone to save face.

      Maybe Google shouldn't have bought a robotics company that was primarily defense funded...

      I read somewhere that soldiers hated Big Dog because of the noise and limited use cases, and that soldiers preferred wheeled vehicles that they could ride in. You could probably ride on Big Dog and similar legged robots, but it wouldn't be very comfortable.

      Just something I read on the internet but it makes sense. Getting rid of the group seems a bit odd though. Maybe Google is thinking that when humanoid robots are finally "ready" as a consumer product, they can just buy a company and get back in the game. Or maybe they feel that Boston Dynamics costs too much and can't compete in the free market. Their robots did lose the Darpa Robot Challenge to research universities, after all.

      --
      Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
  5. Re:Quelle surprise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Your hairbrush idea intrigues me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

  6. Re:Quelle surprise by phantomfive · · Score: 3, Informative

    The robots they've built are really quite nice looking. If you haven't seen the video, you should check it out.

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  7. Too much money by 110010001000 · · Score: 2

    This is what happens when a company has too much money and has delusions of grandeur. All the execs start buying stuff without having a clue what they are going to do with it.

  8. Re:Startup? LOL by mwvdlee · · Score: 2

    They're only 17 years old; not even adult yet.

    --
    Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
  9. Intellectual Property? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Google bought Motorola, took the patents that they wanted, and sold the rest to Lenovo a few years later.

    It's probably the same deal with Boston Dynamics.

    1. Re:Intellectual Property? by bangular · · Score: 2

      I live in South Florida and know a few ex-Motorola employees. They don't have a very nice opinion of Google...

  10. Boston Dynamics? by RavenLrD20k · · Score: 2

    And here I was hoping for them to really take off under Google's tutelage to the point where they could be renamed Massive Dynamic.

  11. Re:Startup? LOL by bev_tech_rob · · Score: 2

    In other words, the shareholders have spoken.

    --
    You're messin' with my Zen Thing, man.....
  12. Adnvaced Research != 2 years by flink · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If your timeline for generating revenue is "a few years", then you should not be in the business of doing advanced research. You're just going to be disappointed.

  13. Why is google doing autonomous cars then? by tekrat · · Score: 3, Interesting

    That's a field where you're spending a ton of dough, and you won't have a product for 10 years. At least, that's how long it's going to take for the adoption and legalization of autonomous vehicles -- hey google -- when a person with no driver's license can step into a taxi that has no driver, let me know.

    --
    If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
  14. robotics projected bad PR by e**(i+pi)-1 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The article hints at other reasons. The latest youtube boston dynamics video showing the robot doing human work, was not only impressive, it was frightening. Not that we don't know that it is going to happen (not only in transportation, or manufacturing but also in service, consulting, transportation, delivery, military, health care or teaching), it was scary to see a bot doing things so well, to walk around, do errands. For a company, to be associated or identified with a job eliminator, this is a PR disaster in the long term. Its more subtle in AI or other domains of automation, where we don't see it. And then the article mentions also the lack of short term profitable products and leadership problems. But its interesting to see how non-technical factors start to matter more and more. But as mentioned before, the most important asset which google probably got from the company is the know-how, the top notch engineering, the human potential which can do be used also in non-robotic things. But whoever buys the company, the technology will continue change the future. Amazon is interested. Imagine all the packing and delivery work done by such droids. Maybe they should dress them as minions to make it more acceptable ...