Congrats to DARPA robotic car challenge finishers

Uncategorized 1 Minute

Wired blog has the details on the robotic car race. Tartan Racing (joint effort of General Motors and CMU) came in first, Stanford University, second. Two million dollar and one million dollar prizes, respectively.

Anyway, if you didn’t catch this interview, now might be a great time. It’s with the guy who runs the algorithms on Stanford’s entry.

This is a 60-mile race that is completed by computers. Pretty darn cool technology and a pretty big challenge for computers and the people who program them.

UPDATE: Popular Mechanics has details on the winners.

Published by Robert Scoble

I help entrepreneurs build their technology business' story, help with getting ready for investors, with other launch plans, and many other strategic things that can help your new startup. Call to talk: +1-425-205-1921 (text first).

Published

16 thoughts on “Congrats to DARPA robotic car challenge finishers”

  1. Actually, none of the top 3 finishers had any traffic penalties. CMU finished 20 minutes ahead of Stanford. (The CMU car crossed the finish line a minute after Stanfords, but it started 30 minutes after Stanford — the race was staggered).

    Like

  2. Actually, none of the top 3 finishers had any traffic penalties. CMU finished 20 minutes ahead of Stanford. (The CMU car crossed the finish line a minute after Stanfords, but it started 30 minutes after Stanford — the race was staggered).

    Like

  3. Pingback: Robotic Cars race it to the end « web pruned by monkeys

  4. Stanford’s car also took more time.

    Based on the headlines from yesterday, which all but declared Stanford had won, along with the stories from last year, which seldom gave mention of Thrun’s connection to CMU, it’s very clear who has the best PR machine.

    Like

  5. Stanford’s car also took more time.

    Based on the headlines from yesterday, which all but declared Stanford had won, along with the stories from last year, which seldom gave mention of Thrun’s connection to CMU, it’s very clear who has the best PR machine.

    Like

  6. There is some awesome footage of CMU’s vehicle navigating the course, as well as a few crash scenes of other vehicles. I posted some on my blog as well. I say this will see widespread use in a military role used as a cargo transport vehicle or a refueling vehicle in extreme/dangerous arenas.

    Like

  7. There is some awesome footage of CMU’s vehicle navigating the course, as well as a few crash scenes of other vehicles. I posted some on my blog as well. I say this will see widespread use in a military role used as a cargo transport vehicle or a refueling vehicle in extreme/dangerous arenas.

    Like

  8. As a CMU alum, I’m waving my Tartan high today.

    Great school, but I sure wish our mascot wasn’t a… piece of fabric.

    Like

  9. As a CMU alum, I’m waving my Tartan high today.

    Great school, but I sure wish our mascot wasn’t a… piece of fabric.

    Like

  10. I’ve been following this one for years. The first year or two was a total bust. It takes time for new technologies to take off. Early success doesn’t require perfection.

    Like

  11. I’ve been following this one for years. The first year or two was a total bust. It takes time for new technologies to take off. Early success doesn’t require perfection.

    Like

  12. Your orginal interview was great.

    I could imagine a follow-up with some retrospective by the Stanford team and some discussion of future challenges might be quite interesting. In particular, if you collect reader questions upfront. (It was quite clear in the original interview that a robotic car is not your kind of shiny new object…)

    For example, I would like to know whether the CMU and Stanford teams really had such different size as it appears of the pictures (and as the Wired blog hints at).

    Also: Stanford used 8 cores. How is the software structured? Functional programming languages? (invite your old colleague Charles for that 😉

    Like

  13. Your orginal interview was great.

    I could imagine a follow-up with some retrospective by the Stanford team and some discussion of future challenges might be quite interesting. In particular, if you collect reader questions upfront. (It was quite clear in the original interview that a robotic car is not your kind of shiny new object…)

    For example, I would like to know whether the CMU and Stanford teams really had such different size as it appears of the pictures (and as the Wired blog hints at).

    Also: Stanford used 8 cores. How is the software structured? Functional programming languages? (invite your old colleague Charles for that 😉

    Like

  14. Astonishing technology in this stuff. I’ve been cutting code for nearly twenty years, and I can safely say I wouldn’t know where to start with a project like this.

    Then again, if we look at it from a live mapping and tracking point of view… right! Time to start wiring up the Saab!

    Like

  15. Astonishing technology in this stuff. I’ve been cutting code for nearly twenty years, and I can safely say I wouldn’t know where to start with a project like this.

    Then again, if we look at it from a live mapping and tracking point of view… right! Time to start wiring up the Saab!

    Like

  16. Pingback: All We Got Was Web 1.0, When Tim Berners-Lee Actually Gave Us Web 2.0

Comments are closed.