REMINDER: Our user survey closes on Friday, please submit your responses here.
London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
9
Harish R Ramalingam
Lead Software Engineer at Seeing Machines
https://www.linkedin.com/in/harishrramalingam/
Why, we want the info as a reflection of business dynamic, couldn't care less about individuals, why provoke that ?
Maplinman,lol mildly disinterested is a massive improvement, I lost all interest with the dearth of info by february, there is only so many days in a row you can check for rns reports before the absence becomes ridiculous, but things are coming together now so mildly interested/disinterested is fine by me
On the road to autonomy, the crucial role of FPGA – Interview with Willard Tu is a Senior Director at Xilinx who has been known to 'like a Mr Big4 Linked-in post or two.
https://www.i-micronews.com/on-the-road-to-autonomy-the-crucial-role-of-fpga-interview-with-xilinx/?cn-reloaded=1
https://www.linkedin.com/in/willard-tu-87689a/?miniProfileUrn=urn%3Ali%3Afs_miniProfile%3AACoAAAAhgVoBJBR7gUcCOgquqzBhbLgHFHRuho8
Continental relies on Xilinx expertise for auto-driving computer platform
At CES 2018, automotive supplier Continental will be presenting a computing platform for automated driving and processing huge amounts of data. The platform, developed in close cooperation with FPGA heavyweight Xilinx, offers flexibility and adaptability to the changing market requirements for automated driving, such as machine learning, sensor technology and configuration.
The Assisted & Automated Driving Control Unit enables customers to introduce automated driving to the market faster because it is based on the Open Computing Language (OpenCL) interface of the Khronos Group, an industry consortium committed to creating open standards in the multimedia sector. The platform offers heterogeneous data processing with a main processor (Central Processing Unit, CPU), a graphics processing unit (Graphics Processing Unit, GPU), a digital signal processor (Digital Signal Processor, DSP) and now also with Field Programmable Gate Array (FPGA) in cooperation with Xilinx. This enables developers to optimize their software with the appropriate processing engine or to create their own hardware accelerators with the programmable logic of Xilinx. The result is the greatest possible freedom in performance optimization with the lowest latency and low power dissipation without having to forego the possibility of freely shifting software algorithms via the integrated chips.
https://www.eenewsautomotive.com/news/continental-relies-xilinx-expertise-auto-driving-computer-platform
JC, spot on imo. The eagle eared amongst us will have noticed Paul (I assume he got written permission signed in duplicate) heap praise on Danny for improving the engineering team. So that was phase one, Danny bringing in people he either knew or was confident in their ability.
Number 4 is separate I think, job title suggests its a number two to Nick.
What it tells me is people in big roles at Xilinx, Conti and Thales want to move to SM, I don't see it as an internal takeover, I see ambitious automotive professionals seeing where the next big opportunity in the industry is coming and moving to the best.
IMO/total IKN Guess -1/2/3/5/6/7/8 came over early as senior people to establish a Conti/SEE team. Then Mr Big 4 who has been running the show makes his move. He has worked for Visteon/Ford for 10years and Conti for 20. Now as development timelines move into near view focus he joins a small Australian company as VP Automotive .
OK so lets assume that Conti started a brand new and contains of around dozen engineers in the summer of 2014 to look at DMS and interior sensing. 1 left in 2016 (Number 8)
Also in Singapore but in a different team - left in 2016
and another left in 2012 and worked in many unrelated companies
There are also a batch of Conti engineers working in Melbourne
Conti also do instrument clusters, Ododmeters etc, these are computerised and have lots of staff working on them too, could be User Interface programmers, or team leaders
1 left in 2016 and went to Thales first before See
Danny left in 2016 and came to See
another left in 2016 and went to BAe then came to SEE
1 in the USA is now our VP
So different reasons for leaving? not all the same teams, but may have known each other. Maybe 2016 became important as we started advertising jobs and paying well. and friendship networks brought across more colleagues , or perhaps things in Conti were not looking so good?
Possibly it is all cloak and dagger and was arranged by Conti, maybe they shut down a joint Singapore/Melbourne team and suggested that it would be helpful for staff to transfer to a partner company - it appears that one person currently works for both companies at the same time (but that could be an innocent mistake)
Thanks JC for sticking the pictures on the big board so that we can join up with string and pins
8
Tri Nguyen
A passionate embedded system optimizer
https://www.linkedin.com/in/huutringuyen/?miniProfileUrn=urn%3Ali%3Afs_miniProfile%3AACoAAAw8fUcBtBQwoIJx9R_bl1WHz6wsvcg_KJ4
Curiouser, maybe you should change your name to 'Mildly disinterested'? lol
red - Mate, i'm not arguing with you. John asked for opinions and I'm offering my opinion.
Linkedin offers a real world insight into company internals. It's an invaluable resource of information which should be shared on this board. I'm not suggesting such information shouldn't be shared
Just abbreviate the name ffs. It isn't that difficult to do. What is important is the company (Continental AG for example) to company (SEE) relationship not the actual identity of the employee
Enuff from me. It's a closed matter
Redindi,
I couldn't agree more. This is quality research, as ever from JC. It's in the DNA of this board is that everything is up for discussion. That's why it is the best board I've ever come across. Kudos once again to those dudes who go the extra mile in researching for us all.
Echoing the sentiments of S2020 and ST. Fantastic pieces of research piecing together an establishment of another "Super" Team being developed within SM and in a company based in Oz.
Mirabeau
Give it a break, we are not talking about price sensitive information. We are talking about information in the public domain, open for all to see if one joins LinkedIn and you are saying we should get permission to post freely available information?
The last thing we need is a change in social media policy that restricts use by employees because of an overly zealous PI bulletin board.
Think it's best to keep the research high level (good to know we are picking up employees from big Tier 1s, that's it) and move on to another field of research.
Don't shoot yourselves in the foot!
red - I'm deadly serious! LOL. When Safestocks posted a recent article about Volvo and SEE the company felt the need to respond to that
Be aware that sometimes what's posted on a BB can constitute price sensitive information. I have seen this phenomena myself
Getting permission can protect oneself from any potential legal action.
Just saying
Mirabeau
Are you serious? Ask SEE? This is the LSE BB, and other than this is where SEE is discussed has absolutely nothing to do with SEE!
How about sending an email to SEE and asking the company if posting Linkedin info on a public board is acceptable to employees? That then would remove any issue relating to privacy
Just a thought
johnchucka - i like everyone else appreciate all your hard work and your willingness to share on this board. Sterling effort. Keep it up.
Other people on the board - people are asking where the line is on reposting info about junior employees. Here is my take: Linkedin info IS publicly available. Reposting that info is not doing anything wrong. I think the line is on making subjective judgements on junior people. "Bill Bloggs used to work at Continental" is fine. "Bill Bloggs" sounds like he isnt a very good programmer" isn't fine, for me. I'd say "Bill Bloggs sounds like he is a great programmer" isnt fine either.
The board work for us, the shareholders, and it is part of our job to assess their performance and make subjective judgements about them (within reason) and they have the ability to respond through company communications if they so wish.
Junior employees should not have to defend themselves publicly and making subjective judgements about them would be placing them under too much pressure, distracting them from their work, and discouraging them from working within the company so we'd be shooting ourselves in the foot. So. For junior employees - factual reposting of publicly available info with their real name - fine by me.
Cur
They probably do and if they do, I really wouldn't be bothered. If I was, I'd restrict viewing. Simple.
Good morning Gents,
There is some great research going on in the background here. It is good to know that x, y & z have a history with Conti, it means that if we were to work with them again it would work well and they would know many of the people and procedures.
Of course the reason why so many of the SEE employees have similar backgrounds is because they have what we need. There are only soo many employees with those skills and that all are mostly doing that sort of job in the larger firms, or are researching in Universities, but don't have all of the practical automotive experience.
As for confidentiality, this is all publicly sourced data that they have published themselves. We are just monetizing it just like fb, Google or LinkedIn do. You can join the dots to fill in many blanks with likes and posts.
I started to do this on linked in for some Eyeris employees, but it is a desert, hardly any likes but there were some connections with China, and a 1 like of a future unveiling of a BMW 3 series. It could be cultural,or an instruction to stay quiet. But they dldont even like their own posts!
All that I'm saying is dont include the names, it's much more likely to trigger someone restricting their profile, What would you do if your details appeared on a speculative bulletin board? irrespective of the quality of the research
So where do you draw the line? If something is open to the public, what harm is there repeating the info? If it's sensitive it wouldn't be open to the public. Are we going to arrange a committee to debate whether a post meets certain guidelines?
No one is attacking JC Seeing, the issue isnt the quality of his research, Linkdin is not a public resource you have to sign up, you have access if you do but there are rules of professional courtesy, if they blocked their profile because of stuff like this we couldn't do any background work
I'm not attacking JC. I applaud his efforts and thank him for his work.
Maybe abbreviate the employee's name is the probably an appropriate solution?
I genuinely appreciate all research for the greater good