I can see one person with a non auto car speeding up and slowing down yo-yo ing the whole system.
Autonomous vehicles someday,
- Thread starter JimPghPA
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: spasm3
I can see one person with a non auto car speeding up and slowing down yo-yo ing the whole system.
You'll need a Cray in the trunk. And beware those who tell you it will pay for itself. I've heard that before. And if the governemt decides that you SHOULDN'T go to that demonstration.... oops, shunted off somewhere.
I can see one person with a non auto car speeding up and slowing down yo-yo ing the whole system.
You'll need a Cray in the trunk. And beware those who tell you it will pay for itself. I've heard that before. And if the governemt decides that you SHOULDN'T go to that demonstration.... oops, shunted off somewhere.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: HerrStig
You'll need a Cray in the trunk.
In a couple years you will have a TerraFlop in your cell phone.
You'll need a Cray in the trunk.
In a couple years you will have a TerraFlop in your cell phone.
I don't see it 100% replace what we have in human involvement. I see it as usable on selected route like raised highway (to avoid pedestrian or animals) on dedicated lane first, like those carpool only lane we have today with divider limiting entry and exit points. Then gradually loosen it to allow many lanes and recognize other vehicles (via radio or vision) with enough safety margin so they will not be a liability.
I think we are a long way from full deployment. It will be a feature just like cruise control with laser guidance. In order for it to work we have to mandate a lot of radio communication between cars and a critical mass of them, so the school of automated cars would avoid non automated ones with enough safety margin. Then you need a fast enough vision / heat / laser / sonar system that works in bad weather and avoid road hazards, pot holes, fallen trees, things fallen off a pick up truck, etc.
Those are the hard things, following dotted line with good human drivers around you is easy.
I think we are a long way from full deployment. It will be a feature just like cruise control with laser guidance. In order for it to work we have to mandate a lot of radio communication between cars and a critical mass of them, so the school of automated cars would avoid non automated ones with enough safety margin. Then you need a fast enough vision / heat / laser / sonar system that works in bad weather and avoid road hazards, pot holes, fallen trees, things fallen off a pick up truck, etc.
Those are the hard things, following dotted line with good human drivers around you is easy.
Why not, we have become or are becoming a nanny state. Nobody knows whats best for us better than the Gov't.
By the way, that's not a general slam against "drivers." Driving is a skill set and/or a sport. I compare it to skiing, bowling, shooting, etc. It's something nearly everybody has to do, however, very few are actually good at it. Most cars these days take a lot of whatever challenge is left out of the activity and you are just stuck dealing with other low-skilled drivers who do not think like you, do no act like you, and may be seriously distracted from the activity. Most never push their vehicles and therefore know very little about what they can actually do.
This has been discussed before and the opinion I expressed was that we will eventually get to the point at which we either have to automate or move more to mass transit. Automated roadways would be an interesting hybrid of individual vehicles and mass transit, actually.
You can't really solve traffic issues just by adding more lanes. You bump against diminishing returns very quickly.
This has been discussed before and the opinion I expressed was that we will eventually get to the point at which we either have to automate or move more to mass transit. Automated roadways would be an interesting hybrid of individual vehicles and mass transit, actually.
You can't really solve traffic issues just by adding more lanes. You bump against diminishing returns very quickly.
As I have observed before, the liability issues are numerous. The geeks haven't yet figured out how to keep TRAINS from running into each other.
And will this system ALSO go into motorcycles? Sure.
OK, folks who live to shoot down ideas...
What do YOU think will be the long term solution to the eventual complete gridlock in almost all metropolitan areas of this country?
Just learn to live with it?
Leave for work at 4:00am?
Expect logical, courteous, and sensible behavior from "The American People?"
What do YOU think will be the long term solution to the eventual complete gridlock in almost all metropolitan areas of this country?
Just learn to live with it?
Leave for work at 4:00am?
Expect logical, courteous, and sensible behavior from "The American People?"
Mass transit run in a consumer friendly way.
^Not bad, whatever "consumer friendly" means. But, we have some mass transit here. It works well in more concentrated urban areas but not well for suburban sprawl. Our current metropolitan model is mostly post WWII and based upon the individual car as the primary means of transportation.
There isn't a mass transit system in America that makes money, much less breaks even. This makes these systems a part of welfare. Because mass transit systems don't have to make money and are subsidized by people that don't use them, the resources they consume WILL be poorly allocated.
The reason they loose money is because most people don't want to use them. Third party observers, that want to impose their own view of how society should work, don't like that and continue to build these monuments to themselves that the general population doesn't want.
The reason they loose money is because most people don't want to use them. Third party observers, that want to impose their own view of how society should work, don't like that and continue to build these monuments to themselves that the general population doesn't want.
That's one point of view. I have observed that in some places, New York City for example, it's about the only practical way for the masses to get around. That doesn't mean that they like using it. Where I live the system has limited usefulness and people who can afford to use their own cars generally don't use it, with exceptions.
Your argument about the systems not making money is moot in my view because highways and roads don't make money, either. Mobility is one of those things that we can reasonably expect our tax dollars to pay for. Unless, of course, we plan to build a totally private road system. That's about what they're trying to do in my state. You're gonna pay to have mobility no matter how it's accomplished.
Your argument about the systems not making money is moot in my view because highways and roads don't make money, either. Mobility is one of those things that we can reasonably expect our tax dollars to pay for. Unless, of course, we plan to build a totally private road system. That's about what they're trying to do in my state. You're gonna pay to have mobility no matter how it's accomplished.
Quote:
Your argument about the systems not making money is moot in my view because highways and roads don't make money, either.
Everyone uses roads, even if they don't own a car. The building materials in their house, the food they eat, the plumber that comes to their house to fix a toilet...that all gets to the consumer via roads. The same is not true of a mass transit system.
The NYC subway system was originally a private enterprise, until it was taken over by the city.
Your argument about the systems not making money is moot in my view because highways and roads don't make money, either.
Everyone uses roads, even if they don't own a car. The building materials in their house, the food they eat, the plumber that comes to their house to fix a toilet...that all gets to the consumer via roads. The same is not true of a mass transit system.
The NYC subway system was originally a private enterprise, until it was taken over by the city.
Mass transit infrastructure isn't cheap. One reason we don't have a high speed (despite what AMTRAK says) service from Boston to New York is because the railroad was constructed long ago, follows the coast, and is filled with so many twists and turns that the Acella can only reach full potential on a small straight section in Rhode Island. Relocating that roadbed will cost TONS of money, and the other big user, the CFX freight system, isn't interest in 150 mph freight haulers. There's still a GRADE crossing in downtown New London, (on a rail line carrying trains which can go 150mph). Nevertheless, other countries have constructed NEW high speed rail not bound by the objections of every NIMBY and Enviroweenie on the planet. Ironic, isn't it, that the save the planet types object to EVERYTHING.
I remember when the "digital community" claimed that "telecommuting" was going to reduce traffic. Not that I can see. Perhaps it slowed the rate of growth.
The government claim that raising the costs and fees associated with car operation will reduce traffic is "somewhat misleading" , it's just an excuse, seems to me, to grab money for other uses while telling car owners more money is needed or the pot holes will NEVER get fixed.
I'm not expecting driverless cars anytime soon. Running around the desert dodging rocks is NOT the same challenge as dealing with the variables of three or four lanes of commuter traffic. Have we given UP on improving driving skills?
I remember when the "digital community" claimed that "telecommuting" was going to reduce traffic. Not that I can see. Perhaps it slowed the rate of growth.
The government claim that raising the costs and fees associated with car operation will reduce traffic is "somewhat misleading" , it's just an excuse, seems to me, to grab money for other uses while telling car owners more money is needed or the pot holes will NEVER get fixed.
I'm not expecting driverless cars anytime soon. Running around the desert dodging rocks is NOT the same challenge as dealing with the variables of three or four lanes of commuter traffic. Have we given UP on improving driving skills?
Tempest, good arguments. I like a civil discourse.
HerrStig, yes, I (meaning me, can't speak for others) have given up on overall improvement of driving skills. Even if some had good skills, the ones that are too distracted to even shut off a turn signal after a lane change would foul it all up. The vast majority of drivers would have to become good at the activity to see improvement there. Pardon my use of colloquialism, but it ain't gonna happen.
My fondness for the concept of automated roads is just that. It's a fantasy. I'd rather enjoy my fantasy a bit than expend a lot of energy shooting down the concept. Hey, folks, I KNOW that this is not going to become reality.
Interestingly enough, some of the companies most public in their support of telecommuting are backpedaling a bit these days. I'm sure you have heard that in the news this week. I can think if a few ways in which companies can support and encourage carpooling and flexible hours, but again, I don't see it making much difference in the growing traffic issues in areas like mine. At some point there is critical mass.
HerrStig, yes, I (meaning me, can't speak for others) have given up on overall improvement of driving skills. Even if some had good skills, the ones that are too distracted to even shut off a turn signal after a lane change would foul it all up. The vast majority of drivers would have to become good at the activity to see improvement there. Pardon my use of colloquialism, but it ain't gonna happen.
My fondness for the concept of automated roads is just that. It's a fantasy. I'd rather enjoy my fantasy a bit than expend a lot of energy shooting down the concept. Hey, folks, I KNOW that this is not going to become reality.
Interestingly enough, some of the companies most public in their support of telecommuting are backpedaling a bit these days. I'm sure you have heard that in the news this week. I can think if a few ways in which companies can support and encourage carpooling and flexible hours, but again, I don't see it making much difference in the growing traffic issues in areas like mine. At some point there is critical mass.
Originally Posted By: Tempest
There isn't a mass transit system in America that makes money, much less breaks even. This makes these systems a part of welfare. Because mass transit systems don't have to make money and are subsidized by people that don't use them, the resources they consume WILL be poorly allocated.
The reason they loose money is because most people don't want to use them. Third party observers, that want to impose their own view of how society should work, don't like that and continue to build these monuments to themselves that the general population doesn't want.
This is NOT a point of view, it is a fact.
There isn't a mass transit system in America that makes money, much less breaks even. This makes these systems a part of welfare. Because mass transit systems don't have to make money and are subsidized by people that don't use them, the resources they consume WILL be poorly allocated.
The reason they loose money is because most people don't want to use them. Third party observers, that want to impose their own view of how society should work, don't like that and continue to build these monuments to themselves that the general population doesn't want.
This is NOT a point of view, it is a fact.
OK. Does it matter whether it's a POV or FACT? If every person commuting in NYC drove an individual car, like we do here in DFW, what would that look like? So, NYC has to be able to provide that mobility. So, perhaps it's not as easy to backtrack to the cost of highway travel, but many NYC-based companies owe their existence to mass transit. And, the employees owe their livelihoods, directly or indirectly, to mass transit.
Not everything can be boiled down to an income statement or balance sheet.
This is truly a no-win sort of argument for me because it's all based upon opinions. You know what they say about opinions, don't you?
Not everything can be boiled down to an income statement or balance sheet.
This is truly a no-win sort of argument for me because it's all based upon opinions. You know what they say about opinions, don't you?
- Status
