I don't think the general consensus is perplexed at all.
By the way, could you send me one of these driver-less cars you speak of? Maybe some other vaporware?
I've seen driverless cars driving, without human input, on city streets and highways in the Bay Area for over a year. You can't possibly call it vaporware just because it's not being sold immediately -- with the risks involved, they'll probably need 10-20 years of validation before they hit the market. We need more companies thinking that far out, not fewer.
In a similar capacity, the B&MGF/IV have a laser that blasts mosquitoes out of the air. However despite it actually existing, it would be perfectly reasonable to refer to it as vapor ware at this point. You'd even be excused for asserting that it was just a PR stunt and funding sink.
Your comment is irrelevant. My point is that Google is "trying to foray into other ventures" (my exact words). I never claimed self-driving cars are available to consumers right now.
You seem to be completely failing to understand o0-0o's objection.
Your example of another Google "venture" is, at this point, vaporware. Now we are told that Facebook is moving into a new "venture"? Why are we to believe that this will be any less vaporware? The only thing that matters to us, the potential consumer, is if they can ship. Everything else is irrelevant.
