npts2020

Again you are comparing apples to oranges. What maglev system in the world has any of those things where the train goes as fast as a car?

You are comparing apples to oranges, it is precisely because "it is on city streets". If you had a similar design as a maglev, why couldn't it go just as fast?

How much more per passenger mile do you estimate an automated system would be vs a comparable rail system? Taxis are expensive primarily because you have a driver to pay. Why couldn't an automated system be designed to go just as fast? Are we replacing the current system or just putting automated vehicles on it? Since a modern system would likely have to be owned and operated by a government entity of some kind (similar to the postal service), the US will not likely be a leader in this kind of thing. This would not have to preclude people from owning their own vehicle but I can't imagine many people wanting to go through the expense to do so.

Because you are dragging irrelevancies into the discussion. In case you don't know, there are already people who use the current road system who can't afford/store/want a vehicle. Things like car rentals, taxis or borrowing. Why would this necessarily change in an automated system? Also, in a system where the vehicle arrives at your doorstep and takes a person directly to the doorstep of their destination any time they like, who is going to go to a bus stop or train station, wait on a train or bus (if they happen to be running at that time), then have to get from wherever they are dropped off to where they are going?

Why would everyone have to own their vehicles and why would you outlaw having your own?

When autonomous vehicles become ubiquitous (especially if they are in a self-contained and self-powered system), there will be no need for mass transit or railways because everyone will be able to access them, not just those with drivers' licenses and/or the ability to haul loads. I think Peterkin and iNow adequately explain why even more roads will not be required but I can further elucidate if needed. Why would a single automated transit system be worse than the current paradigm where we pay for roads, railroads and all of the local transit systems?

I thought it might be but sarcasm doesn't necessarily translate to print very well and there are those who would believe such a thing...

Citation? I was always under the impression that stress caused slower growth of all types of hair due to increased corticosterone levels hindering that growth.

Seems like AI could "know" whether fuel/recharging is necessary before arriving at the desired destination and take appropriate steps. Why wouldn't this be preprogrammed?

I agree, but none of this explains why it can't be done. It is simply why it won't happen in the US first.

No. Simply explain to me why roadways, being centuries old technology, can't be updated to be more like rail and subways. The USDOT in the 1970's thought it was a good idea to automate the highways and should be done ASAP but the computing power for control technology didn't exist at the time. We have had the required tech for at least a couple of decades, now.

That is one of the silliest and least imaginative things I have ever seen you write on this forum. How do they have high speed rail or subways without pedestrians, even after they leave the trains? Do they have to take trains everywhere where such things are available? Same with the other things you mention and bad weather, most of which would be eliminated if the system is enclosed (or at least mostly so). The bold part I completely agree with, however.

Pretty funny I didn't catch that because I do editing and frequently have to get the same sort of changes made in manuscripts. I probably should have said, "one of the few pontificators of economics".

Doesn't that depend on the sport? In equestrian events and auto racing men and women compete against each other and I would say Simone Biles is as good as any gymnast in the world.

Well, about 15 years ago I estimated the cost of rebuilding most of the roads in the US to accommodate an automated system at around $3-4 trillion. A vast sum, to be sure, but a good deal less than we collectively paid for the then current system (which we still have). By coincidence, the amount of paved roads in the US is almost exactly the same as the area of solar panels required to power the entire country. All of this is an entirely different discussion from the OP, tho. In a system where ALL of the vehicles are automated and you don't have other random obstructions, AI could easily deal with varying speeds for local or long distance commuting and safely put vehicles in their proper lanes.

Or at least a "Cliff Notes" of both. I find Marx to be very repetitive but one of the few economic writers who actually make sense.

At present, they are not but it isn't impossible to make transit systems self contained.

Exactly. That is why a self contained system will be required, otherwise you are trying to automate a system that is centuries old...

I guess you are right, computer controlled vehicles can't operate as safely as humans. You need to let the space shuttle people know so they can put human pilots in charge next time to be safer.

These deaths are NOT in an automated system! They are result of trying to mix predictable automation with unpredictable human action. This is why you build "fail-safe" shutdowns into the system.

Language can be as precise or ambiguous as you choose. Science generally has pretty universally well defined definitions for terms used and where there isn't agreement the narrator should define the terms in context of their narrative. One reason scientists (especially in the same field) seem to understand each other very well. Politicians, on the other hand, like ambiguity...

It could be used to automate the entire transit system to cut the ~40,000 annual fatalities to nearly zero and allow everyone to use the system.

Do you think there is any level of greenhouse gases that could cause global warming? If so, at what point would that be?

Mostly C-Span but when I need to know what I am supposed be upset about on a given day; PBS, local tv or once in a while fox, AP, Reuters, Deutsche Welles, BBC or RTV.

Near as I can tell, you haven't been stopped from saying anything (or even going on saying nothing other than how you aren't allowed to say anything). In this forum, however, you are expected to make a topic, discuss it, and back up whatever you DO say with things like maths and/or experimental evidence.