| I don't disagree but I also don't see your point. Android licensees have paid more to Microsoft than Google[1], Drummond was on the board but was never an engineer[2], and Google's inability to execute on its Driverless car vision is eerily reminiscent of Google attacking Microsoft Office [3] or stealing key employees [4]. My point is that I understand it is a very competitive and "when they do it, it's bad, when I do it, it's strategy" kind of world. And I completely understand why Levandowski might just say (note he didn't, I just can imagine that he might) "Screw them I'm the one making this happen, I deserve all this money and it is my data, I created it or caused it to be created."[5] Google already paid huuge sums of money to these engineers[6]. And they have been unable to make any money here or nearly as much progress as others. So one wonders if this is actually an 'Overture' maneuver[7]. Where they agree to settle for 10% of Uber's stock which they will sell all of at the IPO. Netting back their investment in self driving, and a nice bonus. Then they dump the whole thing on Fiat Chrysler and move along. These things are fun to watch, they don't often happen quite so visibly. [1] http://www.zdnet.com/article/microsoft-is-making-2bn-a-year-... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Drummond_(Google) [3] http://www.businessinsider.com/google-plan-to-beat-microsoft... [4] WARNING - autoplaying video https://www.cnet.com/news/microsoft-sues-over-google-hire/ [5] The three conditions of the fraud triangle, opportunity, pressure, and rationalization -- http://www.hrzone.com/hr-glossary/what-is-the-fraud-triangle [6] http://www.theverge.com/2017/2/13/14599186/google-waymo-self... [7] http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/10/business/technology-google... |