Jump to content

npts2020

Senior Members
  • Posts

    1287
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Posts posted by npts2020

  1. 12 hours ago, Steve81 said:

    Seems like with all the waste heat associated with thermal power plants, there would be opportunities to use that energy for such a purpose via distillation

    This is how most ships get their fresh water. They also use seawater for flushing commodes.

     

  2. 23 minutes ago, iNow said:

    Gonna need much more to go on than that if you want a full review if costs and risks and timelines. 

    Then why are you commenting on it. I really did not intend to hijack the thread beyond saying AI could be used to automate our transportation system. The engineering and cost problems are relatively minor compared to overcoming the "big gubmint is going to take away muh car (freedom)" mindset.

  3. 39 minutes ago, iNow said:

    Depends entirely on the details of what you're proposing. What details would you like to share so we may have that conversation?

    I thought you already knew all of that, thus enabling you to claim:

    On 8/19/2023 at 10:12 PM, iNow said:

    No doubt, but you do your argument a disservice by ignoring the costs, time, effort, and lost opportunities elsewhere that come with solving some of these challenges. 

    At some point it’s simply wiser and more mature to accept that it’s not worth it and begin exploring different solutions (or accepting some of the solutions already in place to address these same needs). 

    ETA: You're also ignoring new problems this approach would likely create. Solving engineering problems on cars might create social problems and accessibility problems in neighborhoods, for example. 

     

  4. On 8/19/2023 at 10:12 PM, iNow said:

    Yes, most everyone of these issues is solvable. No doubt, but you do your argument a disservice by ignoring the costs, time, effort, and lost opportunities elsewhere that come with solving some of these challenges. 

    At some point it’s simply wiser and more mature to accept that it’s not worth it and begin exploring different solutions (or accepting some of the solutions already in place to address these same needs). 

    ETA: You're also ignoring new problems this approach would likely create. Solving engineering problems on cars might create social problems and accessibility problems in neighborhoods, for example. 

    What are the costs, time, effort and lost opportunities? Also, what are the new problems with society and accessibility? 

  5. 6 minutes ago, swansont said:

    At the indy 500 they scour the track for foreign objects, don’t run in bad weather, and have highly specialized vehicles. How much does it cost to run of those cars? It takes a pit crew to maintain it during the race. You get rid of the driver with an autonomous car but now you need a pit crew every ~100 miles to change the tires and do other maintenance? C’mon.

    We'll just have to disagree, then. I say those engineering issues are solvable but apparently you do not. For one thing, vehicles in an automated system will not have to be subject to the same constant high speed turns, braking and accelerating as a race car. For another, there won't be any technical (just physical) restrictions on design, weight, power, etc. and if the system is enclosed to separate the system from pedestrians etc, things like weather and foreign objects should mostly not be a major consideration.

  6. 9 hours ago, swansont said:

    Driver take-home is typically 1/3 of the fare. 

    https://work.chron.com/much-fare-taxi-drivers-keep-22871.html

    Even if you got taxi rates down to $1 per mile (it’s over $2 per mile where I live, plus the initial fee) a 20 mile commute is $20, which is a lot more than the subway fare

     

    Tires vs rails, for one. Cars tend to skid on roads in ways that trains don’t. 

     

    You tell me. You’re the one who said automated cars would mean mass transit would be unnecessary. 

     

     

    OTOH a cab will pick you up at your front door and drop you off wherever it us you are going at any time of day. Even if one lives next to a bus stop or train station and is going near another stop, there are frequently times and places where mass transit doesn't run. It would be interesting to see what the other 2/3 of the fare is and how much of it is the same for mass transit.

     

    Well, humans drive cars around in circles (actually ovals if you want to be technical) at 200 mph (average speed for the Indianapolis 500 this year was over 190 mph including pit stops and yellow flags). Are you telling me that in a system designed similar to railways AI can't go as fast? How many current railroads (especially in the US) go that fast?

     

    I would like to see a system anyone can access at any time. Why would we continue to have mass transit with such a personal transit system in place?

  7. AFAIK there are no federal regulations in the US about building your own boat other than the Coast Guard safety guidelines but most, if not all, states require boats to be licensed and some may have restrictions in order to get one.

  8. 13 minutes ago, iNow said:

    You tell me. You’re the one who asked why autonomous vehicles can’t be designed to go as fast as Japanese trains.

    And I asked, with similar system design, why cars couldn't go as fast, your reply is because some people might feel motion sickness? I have never been unfortunate enough to have motion sickness but I hear tell it happens in all manner of transport; boats, planes, human driven cars and even trains.

  9. 2 minutes ago, iNow said:

    Turns. People. Other similar obstacles and intrusions. 

    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?

  10. 2 minutes ago, iNow said:

    Is this a serious inquiry? Why can’t an auto out vehicle on city streets be designed to go as fast as a maglev train?

    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?

  11. On 8/16/2023 at 7:37 AM, swansont said:

    There are people who take mass transit, which you would eliminate, who do so because they can’t afford to own a car. You can’t just assume they can borrow a car (which they aren’t currently doing) and taxis are more expensive than mass transit. And not everybody with a car buys new - lots of them get used cars. What do they do?

    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.

     

    On 8/16/2023 at 8:12 AM, Sensei said:

    Trains can go much faster than any non-sport car.. See trains in Japan, France or South Korea etc.

    Why couldn't an automated system be designed to go just as fast?

    On 8/16/2023 at 8:28 AM, swansont said:

    I don’t think the issue of more roads was tied to elimination of mass transit. You would definitely have more congestion if you replaced mass transit with individual cars, just based on how much space multiple cars take up as compared to a bus. Or the added cars replacing commuter trains.

    And we’ll still have to pay for roads and the cars.

    Are we replacing the current system or just putting automated vehicles on it?

     

    On 8/16/2023 at 12:20 PM, iNow said:

    Who owns and manages this fleet of vehicles large enough to provide rides to every human being?

    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.

  12. 47 minutes ago, iNow said:

    Why are your assertions so often nonsequitur?

    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?

  13. 13 hours ago, iNow said:

    Not everyone will be able to afford autonomous cars or have a place to store them, and I doubt you'll be outlawing ownership in favor of socialistic sharing. 

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

  14. 1 hour ago, wtf said:

    But "too many roads already?" Well if you look at the gridlock around most major cities during rush hour, and you ADD a whole bunch of autonomous cars, it's pretty clear that we need MORE roads. That's the argument (which I'm reporting, not defending). That autonomous vehicles will increase demand for roads and decrease mass transit.

    The reason people want transit is that they don't want to drive their car to work. But if the car drives itself while they surf the net, they'll want cars and not transit. You'd see a lot of unintended consequences, one of which would be increased demand for roads. 

    How can you say you want more autonomous vehicles, then say we have too many roads? When autonomous vehicles are ubiquitous, there won't be nearly enough roads. We'll have to pave over whatever green space is left.

    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?

  15. 4 hours ago, TheVat said:

    Absolutely!  If stress is extreme, like being thrown in a dungeon in chains, follicular hair production increases tenfold.  You will have a full beard in about three days.  That's why dungeon dwellers in  magazine cartoons always have long beards.  There is a similar effect with young women who are locked up in high towers, except that it's head hair instead of facial hair.  The hair grows quite long and more rope-like.

    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.

  16. 37 minutes ago, studiot said:

    I wonder what happens when one of these automated vehicles simply runs out of fuel ?

     

    If the AA or RAC are to be believed this is not an uncommon occurrence on UK roads with human drivers.

    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?

  17. 5 hours ago, swansont said:

    It’s not just the roads. You have to update all the cities, too.  Rail and subway trains don’t make 90 degree turns with pedestrians potentially blocking the way. And cars are not connected and hit each other. You don’t have trains where only one car stops to discharge passengers or unload cargo. Or have the cars go at different speeds. They don’t pass each other. One train car doesn’t stop short.

    Some of these issues are mitigated if all of the cars are automated, but how do you get to that point? Do you mandate that everybody get one? Is the government going to buy all of the conventional vehicles that would be worth far less under such a mandate? What of the people who can’t afford a new, rather expensive car?

    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.

  18. 8 minutes ago, swansont said:

    I will reiterate that rail and subways are significant differences from roadways. It seems obvious to me. Do I need to explain these differences?

    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.

  19. 8 hours ago, swansont said:

    So you need to have a roadway system with no pedestrians - not even after the passengers leave the car. A city with no inhabitants. Plus no construction, or downed trees, or any other random obstacle. The navigation has to rely on the centralized automation rather than visual cues. 

    It can only work if all the cars are automated, and you have to drive everywhere.

     

    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.

  20. 7 minutes ago, studiot said:

    And there's me thinking that his works were of great length!

    🙂

    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".  :)

  21. 4 hours ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

    Clearly a very significant performance gap remains for XY and XX elite level athletes, regardless of their declared gender, medical interventions notwithstanding. If there is something inherent motivating gender declaration, it clearly doesn't show as being significant compared to XX vs XY.

    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.

  22. 1 hour ago, Peterkin said:

    What will it cost?

    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.

    9 minutes ago, swansont said:

    Transit systems yes - rail systems, for example - but we were specifically talking about self-driving cars. Roadways are very interconnected.

    And it’s not just the isolation of the system. The discrete nature of trains simplifies the problem, as opposed to the many cars and many destinations of road systems. 

    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.

  23. On 8/10/2023 at 6:18 PM, sethoflagos said:

    Me too. Das Kapital is essentially the algebra of capitalist microeconomics and should imho be essential reading in any education system. It is not particularly 'political'.

    The Communist Manifesto should also be essential reading in view of its historical impact and amazing prose, but it is definitely a child of it's time.

    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.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.