Hacker Read top | best | new | newcomments | leaders | about | bookmarklet login

Siemens seems like it does not know what it had acquired or who they are speaking to. Basically a bunch of PR gobbledygook that answered very little.


sort by: page size:

This article is just a verbatim marketing piece from Siemens.

Their About Us page makes no mention whatsoever of technology. There is no CTO, no VP Engineering, etc. Quite odd. If they were relabeling something else, that could explain it.

And they don't really have anything useful. Their claims dont make any sense to someone in the field. Now I have to file ieee spectrum under "willing to pedal bullshit for money" like so many other publications.

Gotta love how painfully vague this is. Sounds like a PR piece for investors, not an engineering blog piece.

It's odd how little information is provided about the actual new technologies behind this.

Or it speaks to Repl.it's CEO's lack of understanding of the technical differences. I wouldn't assume anything about the viability based on this reaction.

What possesses a company to offer such an obviously dumb product? The article offers some speculation but nothing particularly convincing.

They're so far down the hype hole that they've completely failed to make a business case for their product. This isn't an announcement of anything at all, as far as I can tell, especially since all their stuff 'went live' at some indeterminate point in the past.

I repeat: what are we supposed to do with this information? Does anybody know?


In that case it would be helpful if news articles described what the company actually did. Maybe they don't understand themselves but any speed claim is useless without knowledge about the underlying technology.

>Without knowing which one is being used, there's not much of a discussion to be had. We can say nothing about practicality or environmental impact, not to mention a host of other issues.

Wouldn't this information likely be patented, which could explain much of the press release secrecy?


I completely agree. Their lack of disclosure about their technology is strange. It's been a "trade secret" for over a decade.

they seem to be doing something interesting, but documentation and company statement is very vague. Even the demo code does not work out of the box. The video on their homepage doesn't make any sense at all..

This seems like a case of non-tech PR/marketing selling a tech product without sufficient understanding of the industry terms they're throwing around.

Because there are no details beyond vague promises, and it entails serious restructuring and UX trade-offs that may affect revenue. At the moment, skepticism makes much more sense.

Thought it might discuss their tech stack, but no mention of any technical details.

You're claiming to know the intentions of the Boring Company based on the ordering and number of Frequently Asked Questions? Sorry, but that's not very compelling.

And there's quite a lot of facts on the page that are misleading or just plain wrong, particularly in the one question on tunneling.

That sounds actually substantive. Why not comment on those?


Do they really expect to market this without even listing whats in that thing? And why does not a single person in their team have any credentials in the area whatsoever?

Probably the person who wrote it is in marketing, gets handed down a list of talking points, and has no idea about the technical background of the decision.

Seems like these companies are rushing into this without fully understanding how the technology works or where it's going.
next

Legal | privacy