Back to News
Advertisement
Advertisement

⚡ Community Insights

Discussion Sentiment

64% Positive

Analyzed from 3559 words in the discussion.

Trending Topics

#robot#robots#purpose#human#hyundai#humanoid#car#tasks#factory#robotics

Discussion (150 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews

giwookabout 2 hours ago
Back in December 2020, Hyundai purchased an 80% controlling interest in Boston Dynamics from SoftBank for $880 million, part of a transaction that valued the robotics company at $1.1 billion. That agreement included a put option allowing SoftBank to sell its remaining stake to Hyundai at a later date.

SoftBank has now exercised that option.

Animatsabout 1 hour ago
Oh. It's Softbank exiting humanoid robotics at Softbank's discretion. That's a lot different than " Hyundai buys Boston Dynamics". Hyundai bought them years ago. This is just the last 8%.
SoftTalker18 minutes ago
Seems like a mistake. AI in its current form has limited usefulness for most people. Not something I would pay for to use outside of work. But a household robot that could clean, wash and fold the laundry, do the dishes, maybe even be a chauffeur... that would be huge. I think a lot of people would pay new-car money for something like that.
OtherShrezzing8 minutes ago
> robot maid that could clean, wash and fold the laundry, do the dishes, etc. would be huge. I think a lot of people would pay new-car money for something like that.

Once you take maintenance of a machine with price-parity to a new car into consideration, it’s surely cost competitive to just hire a human to do all those things.

The price needs to fall drastically below new-car territory before it’s competitive with manual human labour.

whiplash45112 minutes ago
> Not something I would pay for to use outside of work

You wouldn't but apparently your employer would.

I don't disagree with you on robotics, though. For an empire like softbank, not buying an "insurance against the rise of robotics" also seems like a mistake to me.

That being said, they may expect robotics to rise through self-driving cars (hence their investment in Wayve).

fragmede3 minutes ago
All of finance is trading money for time. $1 million today vs $100,000 for the next ten years. Softbank needs the money today vs later.
dgellow23 minutes ago
That feels so low of a price when compared to the insane valuation people attribute to Tesla robots
criddell16 minutes ago
Yesterday I read about Cursor being sold for $60bn. Cursor being worth more than 50x Boston Dynamics seems insane.
dehugger5 minutes ago
I was trying to think about the why with Cursor, and the only thing that makes sense to me is they wanted experts in making harnesses so that they can pivot that expertise towards building harnesses intended for autonomous agents to use instead of humans. There's no world where a 60 billion IDE makes sense.
skipants5 minutes ago
Because it is.

The average (and above-average?) investor really does not understand tech.

readme10 minutes ago
Boston Dynamics robots can do gymnastics...

Hey, Hyundai isn't "just a car company"

gowld20 minutes ago
The insane valuation is for Elon meme vibes and the "vision" of "colonizing Mars", not any of the products.
downrightmike29 minutes ago
Softbank is bleeding money and they need cash, AI isn't shaping up to what they thought it would be
letmevoteplease16 minutes ago
Not sure how to square this post with recent headlines like "SoftBank posts $46 billion gain at Vision Fund driven mainly by massive OpenAI bet".
iterateoften9 minutes ago
Paper money vs cash
warumdarum11 minutes ago
Sometimes the first one to leave the casino is the last one to join an add hoc concert playing "smoke on the water" for the first time
Hugsboxabout 2 hours ago
I don't understand why they would implement humanoid robots instead of purpose-built robots. The human form is not the most optimal way to do most tasks, especially as it relates to manufacturing. Robots don't need to look like humans, they need to be useful. Seems like putting in an awful lot of extra unnecessary work to end up with a worse result.
ACCount37about 2 hours ago
I'm not sure how many times this has to be restated.

It's car manufacturing. Everything that could be done by a purpose specific robot arm bolted down to the factory floor is already done by a purpose specific robot arm bolted down to the factory floor.

What remains unautomated, then?

The long tail of tasks that are too minor, too finicky, too open-ended or too reliant on manual dexterity to be offloaded onto traditional robots.

This is where this new generation of robotics comes in. This is the kind of task they're designed to do: "a task that's still done by a human in a high automation environment". Universal robots are angling for the tasks that are impossible or uneconomical to automate with traditional industrial robots.

cpgxiiiabout 1 hour ago
> Everything that could be done by a purpose specific robot arm bolted down to the factory floor is already done by a purpose specific robot arm bolted down to the factory floor.

Hah! Hardly. I say this as someone whose first "real job" was in applying robotics research to automotive assembly - there are still a ton of assembly tasks that could be performed by a fixed-base robot arm, or a robot arm on a linear rail/fixed gantry. Wheeled mobile manipulators are only needed in a few cases, and humanoid form-factor is only "necessary" in very few cases (and I don't think the current crop of humanoids is particularly suited to these tasks).

In my opinion/experience, the impediments are that (1) the system integrators that are usually responsible for assembly-line robotics are too stupid to figure out how to apply robots to the problem, (2) the automakers themselves are often too short-sighted/stupid/unwilling to invest in increased automation (and particularly in building the in-house competency that they really need), (3) the hostile/exploitative relationship between (most) automakers and their main suppliers means that low-hanging improvements to parts/assemblies are a non-starter, and (4) the automaker C-suite (and investors) are too drawn to silver-bullet solutions (e.g. humanoids) than practical automation improvements.

ACCount3741 minutes ago
"Could be in principle" and "could be in practice, under technical and economical considerations in play" are two very, very different beasts.

Everyone in the industry learned that the hard way.

At a certain point, the tasks that remain stop being "dexterity" problems and start being "AI" problems. That is: a robot could do the task - if you either spent big $$$ on redesigning the entire task around the robot's intellectual limitations (uneconomical), or if you had an incredibly advanced AI capable of problem solving driving that robot (impossible with 00s AI).

The "universal robot" bet is the "incredibly advanced AI capable of problem solving" bet. That in 2020s, AI is finally capable. The body only has to be "good enough to make most tasks possible".

fookerabout 1 hour ago
How long ago was your robotics experience?

An Amazon warehouse or Tesla factory tour would likely change your mind.

I had to do both of these in the last year and not a lot of humans around…

looperhacksabout 2 hours ago
But if these tasks are too minor, too finicky, too open-ended or too reliant on manual dexterity for a purpose-built robot, how can a general purpose robot perform them better? If anything, they should be doing worse.

The only thing I can think of are tasks that are so rarely done, it's not economical to build a robot for. But I then I also don't see how another robot solves this problem.

vlovich123about 2 hours ago
A) the idea is that these robots do have dexterity capabilities a lot closer to human hands

B) there’s a long tail of individual tasks it’s uneconomical to build purpose-built robots for each individual task. But it’s economical to have 1 robot that can do all of them.

j-pbabout 2 hours ago
These robots operate on completely different principles.

One can lift insane weights, has insane torque, and absurd precision, and can do the same movement millions of times with virtually no deviation. You program these with an exact movement plan, just like you would programm a CnC with a tool path. They are basically cnc machines.

The other one is a inacurate, unstable, dynamic system controlled by neural networks and heuristics. It has massive deviation over each run, but that means that the programming must be able to account for it. Which makes it suitable to operate on problems that are messy, unrepeatable and human-shaped.

ai_criticabout 2 hours ago
Well, humans obviously do those jobs, so a clearly a general purpose robot (in this case, a biorobot) has been found to do the job better. Don't overthink it.
subyabout 2 hours ago
Because it is general purpose. We did not have the ability to create a single robot form which could do all of these minor, finicky, and opened ended tasks. Now that seems within reach. The nice property of humanoid robots is that the world is already made for human form, and so if you're trying to replace people naturally this is what you'd want.
sibabout 2 hours ago
>> how can a general purpose robot perform them better

Better than what? It seems that as long as they perform the tasks "better" (cheaper / faster / lower-error) than the humans that are currently performing them, that is an improvement for the factory owner.

IncreasePostsabout 2 hours ago
It's not a "general purpose" robot, it is a "human replacement" robot, with similar skills and shortcomings to a human. Humans are not general purpose.

All you need to do is look at a recent video of car manufacturing process, and watch what the humans are doing.

jollyllamaabout 1 hour ago
>It's car manufacturing. Everything that could be done by a purpose specific robot arm bolted down to the factory floor is already done by a purpose specific robot arm bolted down to the factory floor.

>What remains unautomated, then?

Stuff that can be done by purpose specific robot arms on wheeled platforms, which is very difficult, but will be much more feasible than a humanoid robot doing anything.

dopa42365about 1 hour ago
What you need then is a better arm (or even just hand), not a human.

Or a new take on car design with automated production in mind regarding all the wiring and what not (easier said than done, I'm sure many have tried and failed, but eventually someone will succeed).

not_a_bot_4shoabout 1 hour ago
> I'm not sure how many times this has to be restated.

This strike me more as a repeated internet myth more than anything else. There is near endless opportunity for purpose-specific robot forms.

LanceHabout 1 hour ago
> What remains unautomated, then?

And the tasks that change from day to day.

colordropsabout 1 hour ago
Naw, the real answer is that factories have been built around human labor - they weren't built to be forward-compatible with purpose-built robots, so during the transitional period where we build these purpose-built robots, you need humanoid robots to fill in the parts where the factories were geared for human labor.
ranger_dangerabout 2 hours ago
They're just one of today's lucky ten thousand.

https://xkcd.com/1053/

ASalazarMXabout 2 hours ago
According to this widely cited comic strip, if you are over 30 and didn't know it, you should be ashamed.
nradovabout 2 hours ago
I took a tour of the BMW Group Plant Spartanburg body shop. It's heavily automated with industrial robots inside safety cages. But they still have human workers pick up parts from rolling carts and place them into templates for the robot arms. BMW has been running a trial with Figure humanoid robots to automate that remaining piece. Apparently those robots haven't worked very well, but presumably Hyundai thinks they can do it better?

https://www.bmwgroup.com/en/news/general/2024/humanoid-robot...

MysticOracleabout 1 hour ago
BD was training Atlas for Hyundai factory in Savannah, Georgia for a while:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CbHeh7qwils

notahackerabout 1 hour ago
Some colleague of mine visited the Mini plant earlier this week. Apparently they had a Boston Dynamics dog patrolling simply to spot stuff that had been left where it wasn't supposed to be left
moffkalastabout 1 hour ago
Can't you just, you know, stick another robot arm on the damn carts and have it offload itself? Surely there's a simpler way.

Maybe what they're actually acquiring is Handle, not Atlas.

terramexabout 2 hours ago
Humanoidal robots make sense when they need to operate in spaces designed for humans bodies. Cars are designed and built to be used and serviced by humans, especially their interiors so you need humanoid robot to automate building them. Car exteriors are not built for humans to interact with so they are already being built by specialized robots.
jrfloabout 2 hours ago
Custom built robots are expensive (basically an R&D project in themselves) and inflexible, if you want to update the process you have to redesign your automated system. The dream of humanoid robots is they can adapt to new manufacturing processes like human workers.
bigmadshoeabout 1 hour ago
Two things: 1) we have abundant training data for humanoid embodiments (watch humans do things), and 2) the world is already designed for humans.
ckemereabout 1 hour ago
Training data of task completion. See, e.g., robots doing backflips. Presumably there’s an optimal robot for gymnastics but if you start with humanoid form you can train based on many videos of human movement. The alternative - world model sim with physics and loss functions- perhaps ends up being too unconstrained when you add in optimization of the robot form…
gowld17 minutes ago
AI watching videos of humans seems an incredibly inefficient way to solve acrobatic balance. It is just physics and engineering. The hard part is in the materials and assemblages for enabling complex and subtle movements and the fine motor control, not knowing what the motions are.
saltcuredabout 1 hour ago
I understand the sentiment, but you assume they are planning to build humanoid robots to walk around the human-oriented space in the factory.

Perhaps they want to put some of the sensing and control features in, so a humanoid-like dexterity or adaptability for the business end of a floor-mounted robot arm?

post-itabout 2 hours ago
Because a humanoid robot can replace (theoretically) any human worker, whereas a purpose-built robot can only replace one kind of worker. Or at least that's what Asimov said in Caves of Steel.
marctaabout 1 hour ago
Maybe it's like Formula 1: it's a purposefully-extreme goal, which drives new development and makes "lesser" goals feel more achievable.
Etheeabout 2 hours ago
I'm spitballing here as I don't actually have a concrete answer for you. But from my understanding automobile manufacturing is one of if not THE most advanced 'purpose-built' robotics sectors. While I agree with you that having a purpose-built thing usually wins out for assembly line manufacturing, I wonder if this isn't an attempt to branch out away from single-purpose robotics into more general or multi-faceted manufacturing.
ramses0about 2 hours ago
I'm looking for a better video of it (from one of the engineers), but look at the NASA robot hand. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vfDXzkFHnz0

https://www.google.com/search?q=nasa+robonaut+video+hand+why...

The gist of it is that all tools on the spacecraft (eg: space-drill, space-coffee-maker, space-airlock) are all designed to fit a gloved human astronaut hand. Waaaaay more complicated to make a robo-hand than a robo-suction cup or robo-claw, but then you are matching the environment, and guarantee tool compatibility against all extant tasks!

We already have specialized robots on earth... paper slicer, lawn mower, bazooka, whatever. They're all machines that are specialized for the task at hand, we're not making a humanoid robot that gets down on all fours and individually plucks blades of glass.

The car factories already have specialized robots... they're not mimicking a human hand holding a can of spray paint, shaking it up, and painting the car that way... it's a 6-axis arm, or a whole "grab the car and flip it while spraying paint" system.

It's not about inventing purpose-specific robots, it's about handling that long-tail of "stuff with tools that a human is designed to be able to use." Go over there, push that button. Go move that box from table1 to table2. Etc.

For well defined tasks in the factory domain, make a "real robot". For ad-hoc tasks in the interim... strap an LLM to a camera, battery, robo-legs and arms, cross your fingers, and hope for the best?

stephc_int13about 2 hours ago
I think the rationale is that they are already using typical car factory automation, but they see a huge potential market for general purpose robotics in the coming decades, they don't need the humanoids, they are simply dogfooding a future product.

I think this is smart and not very risky. Tesla is playing a similar game with Optimus, for now Hyundai/Boston Dynamics is at least 5 years ahead.

PeterStuerabout 1 hour ago
Our'legacy' world is built for human shsped operation. So a generic operator will hsve to mimic human shape.
Jegberabout 1 hour ago
The human form IS the most optimal way to do most tasks
gowld16 minutes ago
Most human tasks. Earth-movers and mining-trucks aren't human form.
bombcarabout 1 hour ago
The first somewhat general purpose humanoid robot will sell like gangbusters to the rich, even just as a parlor toy/trick.
sgtabout 2 hours ago
That's like saying there's no need for a generic CPU. The only way forward is a ASIC. Once a generic CPU does everything well enough, it's extremely versatile.
cucumber3732842about 2 hours ago
They have god knows how manny bajillion dollars tied up in machinery designed for human use, a human can step in when the robot breaks, and they can buy more robots if the humans get uppity. Those seem like a bunch of good reasons to me.

The humanoid form factor is certainly may not be ideal but I guess they think the flexibility is worth it

itsamarioabout 1 hour ago
Patient complex moves first.
Dumblydorrabout 2 hours ago
You don’t understand because you’re not an expert? First off they have numerous non-humanoid robots if you follow them at all. Second, Clearly they’ve got strong reasoning, they’ve just been bought. Third, out of thousands of attempts at humanoids, their robots are seemingly the best we’ve yet seen in this class. They must be doing it right when so few others got any traction.
dyauspitrabout 1 hour ago
This same nonsensical question again. Because the world is built for humans, because these are general purpose to replace a human laborer. It can immediately go from picking up parts in a factory to mowing the lawn in the same day.
justsomehnguyabout 2 hours ago
> they need to be useful

They would be. When everything what could be done would be done by a robot. 24/7. Even without the lights on the floor.

samptonabout 2 hours ago
Why do you need software when FPGA can solve everything.
stavrosabout 2 hours ago
It's much cheaper to create one general-purpose robot for everything than many different robots, each optimized to each task.
RajT88about 2 hours ago
Robot Chicken had a fairly cynical take on this. I won't link it here.
sottolabout 2 hours ago
I don't think this is solely tied to car manufacturing automation. Even though Hyundai Motor Group is acquiring them, I would imagine they'd be well-positioned to commercialize general-purpose robotics and not just for car manufacturing, if Tesla is anything to go by.

I do think this might be tied to South Korea's demographics, by 2040 the working-age population is projected to decline 25% from 2020 and keep declining almost linearly until leveling out around 17M around 2065, a 50% drop total in < 50 years. I would think HMG / Hyundai sees a huge business opportunity or this might be a national-level political priority but I don't know the specifics.

tmach32about 2 hours ago
Wait, haven’t they already owned them for years? Edit: right, they’re just buying the remaining 9%.
Zigurdabout 2 hours ago
Hyundai bumped their ownership up to 100%, and took the opportunity to reset expectations about when Atlas would be working in Hyundai factories.

While Atlas is the best humanoid robot so far, it still isn't useful in a car factory that's fully equipped with the latest factory robots that are strong enough to juggle car engines and are bolted to the floor.

Everyone knows the killer app for humanoid robots is building the Mars colony amirte?

idiotsecantabout 2 hours ago
There are plenty of tasks a relatively weak humanoid robot is well suited for. Basically any task that is 'human shaped' and not worth an automated line.
whiplash4518 minutes ago
"weak" in what sense?
mlmonkeyabout 2 hours ago
I still think dumping BD was one of the biggest mistakes of Sundar's career. And that's saying something.
NitpickLawyerabout 2 hours ago
There's got to be something wrong at the core of BD. They've been pawned off a bunch of times, and they still don't have products out the factory line like they should. I think the tech community has been impressed by their videos, but the fact that their most sold thing is a toy dog at a luxury car price point says a lot about the company.

My personal take is that one of the reasons is their posture against ML. They've been very "GOFCT" and have only recently started to incorporate ML concepts.

TuringNYCabout 1 hour ago
>> There's got to be something wrong at the core of BD. They've been pawned off a bunch of times,

Well...there is the uncanny similarity to the T-800 and and uneasy realization that the owner of BD could become Cyberdyne Systems IRL. Perhaps some companies like that notoriety but not sure if many want that.

https://terminator.fandom.com/wiki/T-800

calfabout 2 hours ago
What is Gofct and does robotics industry generally just have had a slower adoption of ML because of the realtime domain requirements, I'm just curious and wondering aloud here.
NitpickLawyerabout 1 hour ago
Sorry, I wanted to make a pun for GOFAI (good old fashioned AI). CT stands for control theory.
sahilaabout 2 hours ago
Per this sale, BD is worth $3.25B. Just recently, Google paid $2.7B for two years of Noam Shazeer through the Character.ai deal.

This seems like a small correction if they wanted to reacquire and clearly the market isn't valuing BD all that high.

Why do you think it's one of Sundar's biggest mistake?

TheGrassyKnollabout 2 hours ago
Iuliohabout 1 hour ago
Can we go on a small tangent and wonder how we don't know when the guy was born?
modelessabout 2 hours ago
Yeah. Google was too impatient and forced BD to productize prematurely (Spot, Handle), then dumped them when it didn't work out immediately. AI just wasn't ready yet. Imagine if Google had let BD focus on research until DeepMind was ready with the AI side of things. I think with the right joint research program they could have already been deploying humanoids today.
Iuliohabout 1 hour ago
Google dumping a project when it does not produce instant results?

That seems out of character

gowld14 minutes ago
2017 was shortly before Google stopped being afraid of being pegged as an AI killbot company.
SequoiaHopeabout 3 hours ago
It’s so weird to use an AI generated image for this article when there are so many images of Atlas out there.
achronoabout 2 hours ago
Take a step back and look at this article's diction and the rest of this entire website. Completely AI generated.

All those tokens have to go somewhere

bayindirhabout 2 hours ago
Generating an image from an already open tab is faster than making a search engine query and selecting a good, high resolution image.

Who cares about quality. Speed is the new black.

LargeWuabout 2 hours ago
Letting AI generate your image also dances around the issues of attribution and licensing, for better or worse.
fnordpigletabout 2 hours ago
ai generated imagery can’t be copyrighted while all other photography can and generally needs to be treated as it is. Therefore you likely have to pay a royalty to Getty or other asset outlet. Of use AI.
nativeitabout 2 hours ago
…who have quite conveniently already stolen and trained on all the copyrighted images. Thanks AI!
babypuncherabout 2 hours ago
and tech companies wonder why consumers hate AI
s1artibartfastabout 2 hours ago
What seems to be the problem here? Why is it offensive that someone didnt spend more time hand selecting a picture for the article?
kaonwarbabout 2 hours ago
The text reads LLM-ish as well.
dyauspitrabout 2 hours ago
And figure out usage and licensing and all that crap. So much easier to just generate a brand new image.
AJ007about 2 hours ago
Little appreciated fact is news orgs have full time employees just dealing with licensing all day long, and they pay out millions of dollars when someone fucks up.
dyauspitrabout 1 hour ago
Yeah, now they don’t need that department.
travocabout 3 hours ago
If only they could make an engine or transmission that doesn't blow up at 80,000 miles.
mikestorrentabout 2 hours ago
So true. I hear they replace more engines than any other brand. I'm surprised they sell so well; a used Toyota would be a far better choice than a new Hyundai
pixl97about 3 hours ago
Luckily they have a 10 year 100k mile warranty.
linksnapzzabout 2 hours ago
...which AFAIK isn't transferable. IOW, used Hyundais are cheap for a reason.
glitchcabout 2 hours ago
Are you sure? The warranty is on the car, not the owner. Almost all manufacturers (except Tesla) transfer automatically and are based on mileage.
kristofferRabout 1 hour ago
Hyundai EVs are great though, the Hyundai Ionic 5N is probably the best EV there is (for car enthusiasts).
LanceJonesabout 2 hours ago
So this appears to mean that Hyundai is effectively taking BD's humanoids "off the market" (B2C/B2B markets). And Softbank wants to take a different humanoids stake in OpenAI's plans.
san4musabout 1 hour ago
Hyundai could be the first owner that can actually turn BD's robotics in real product
bilsbieabout 2 hours ago
BD always seemed more like an R&D company to me or even a university lab. Doesn’t seem like a good fit for a car company.
Advertisement
conceptionabout 2 hours ago
Just a note for the thread Hyundai Motor Group makes cars and a lot of other heavy industry things - trains, defense, plant. Rolling robotics fully into their motor group makes complete sense.
zuzululuabout 1 hour ago
rnteresting part is defense although the economics and power/range limits its practicality.

the other timing here is the increasingly belligerent union who are demanding pretty outrageous compensation for what a typical American worker would make. I think the goal is to immediately automate the workforce and move the plants out of korea speaking to insiders.

moondownerabout 2 hours ago
`buys` sounds like they have just purchased BD, should be `takes full control` or something similar.
shevisabout 2 hours ago
I’m pretty surprised to see no mention of Agility in the conversation about other humanoid companies
ChrisArchitectabout 2 hours ago
Title really should clarify: Hyundai takes full control of Boston Dynamics

Rest is previously reported stuff.

Related from earlier in the year:

Hyundai Introduces Its Next-Gen Atlas Robot at CES 2026 [video]

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46520508

And old discussions when the intial buy happened:

2020: Hyundai to acquire Boston Dynamics

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25363981

2021: Hyundai acquires controlling stake in Boston Dynamics for $880M

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27588047

androiddrewabout 2 hours ago
Boston Dynamics gets passed around again
dyauspitrabout 2 hours ago
Nope, Hyundai already owned it, they’re just going to 100%
SilverElfinabout 2 hours ago
BD always felt like they had some awkward demos but never really revolutionized anything. Now they seem far behind Chinese companies. What happened?
ms_by_pdabout 2 hours ago
nice
jansanabout 2 hours ago
This is a bit disappointing, isn't it? Boston Dynamics had the coolest robots and everybody was marveling how they would take over the world eventually. Turns out the market isn't gigantic and the use cases are limited, at least for now.

However, let's hope they will keep on doing cool stuff under their new owner.

darksim905about 2 hours ago
Outside of some military applications and maybe search and rescue, a lot of people kind of freaked out about Boston Dynamics. They have cool robots, sure, but at what cost if they are implemented by a bad actor? No thanks.
DennisPabout 2 hours ago
I don't think that follows. Hyundai could well sell these after they've dogfooded them for a while.

Car factories seem to be a pretty good initial market, given that Tesla is doing Optimus and Figure has humanoids in a BMW factory. But the whole point is that these are general purpose robots, and there are lots of other factories. By the time that market is saturated they'll be capable of more.

jeffbeeabout 2 hours ago
If it's disappointing then it's been disappointing for over 5 years, since Hyundai has owned the company for 5 years.