|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#81
|
|||
|
|||
Is Elon Musk ready for the straitjacket ?
On Saturday, 14 October 2017 01:02:56 UTC+2, Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy wrote:
Perhaps he's really talking about forcing all the *people* out of cities, too. That's as likely to happen. Cities seem to be more popular than rural living right around the globe. Perhaps AI and robotics will allow rural living for the mass unemployed which will inevitably follow. Many car journeys are very short as the human race becomes ever more lazy. Short journeys in stop-start traffic are the worst for pollution since the car never really warms up. Alternative, short range transport for the masses is not nearly as attractive as the whim-ready private car. In comparison, electric bicycles/scooters/mopeds are ridiculously expensive. They offer little protection from the weather and have very poor load carrying capacity. Adding a fairing, roof or bubble enclosure makes them bulky, unwieldy and very unstable in windy conditions. Gyroscopic stability is possible though the Segway hasn't remotely taken off for mass transport. "Micro" electric cars might offer some advantages but are still vehicle sized. So they are still a waste of space on grid-locked city roads and still need parking places. Employment and access to shops is the usual reason for city living. If the work is taken away then the city becomes attractive for crime. Largely thanks to its high concentration of potential victims. The human race has tried most forms of village, town and city living without ever achieving a perfect solution. The larger they grow the more [the desperate] need for transport. Traffic noise makes life hell for those living near artery roads and for walkers and cyclists. A network of well separated cycle paths is arguably the best response to usual, very short car journeys to the local takeaway. If home delivery gets any easier [worse] then lifelong isolation, ill-health, obesity and sloth will become the global norm. Perhaps Soylent Green really is people, in the end? At least it would cure global overpopulation. AGW cured... [eventually.] |
#82
|
|||
|
|||
Is Elon Musk ready for the straitjacket ?
On Fri, 13 Oct 2017 23:19:09 -0700 (PDT), "Chris.B"
wrote: "Micro" electric cars might offer some advantages but are still vehicle sized. So they are still a waste of space on grid-locked city roads and still need parking places. I expect that within a few decades at the most, the only vehicles allowed inside the denser parts of cities (and indeed, maybe everywhere else as well) will be fully automated. There is no gridlock with such a system. With electrics there is little noise. With shared personal vehicles, there is little need for conventional parking. |
#83
|
|||
|
|||
Is Elon Musk ready for the straitjacket ?
"Chris.B" wrote in
: On Saturday, 14 October 2017 01:02:56 UTC+2, Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy wrote: Perhaps he's really talking about forcing all the *people* out of cities, too. That's as likely to happen. Cities seem to be more popular than rural living right around the globe. To varying degrees. Perhaps AI and robotics will allow rural living AI and robotics will not provide social contact, nor will it provide convenient shopping. for the mass unemployed which will inevitably follow. Evidence suggests you are as full of **** as usual. -- Terry Austin Vacation photos from Iceland: https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB "Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole." -- David Bilek Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals. |
#84
|
|||
|
|||
Is Elon Musk ready for the straitjacket ?
Chris L Peterson wrote in
news On Fri, 13 Oct 2017 23:19:09 -0700 (PDT), "Chris.B" wrote: "Micro" electric cars might offer some advantages but are still vehicle sized. So they are still a waste of space on grid-locked city roads and still need parking places. I expect that within a few decades at the most, the only vehicles allowed inside the denser parts of cities (and indeed, maybe everywhere else as well) will be fully automated. There is no gridlock with such a system. You're smoking the Kool-Aid again. When you have 1,000,000 cars in a system designed for 500,000 (or, in the case of LA, 20,000,000 cars in a system designed for 500,000), there is *always* gridlock. Less, perhaps, with a system that has no ego drive narcissism and road rage, but once you exceed the capacity of the system, there will certianly be gridlock. (And road rage, too, evne if it is transferred to one's own vechidle. And then you have the additional gridlock of having damaged cars blocking traffic.) -- Terry Austin Vacation photos from Iceland: https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB "Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole." -- David Bilek Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals. |
#85
|
|||
|
|||
Is Elon Musk ready for the straitjacket ?
On Sat, 14 Oct 2017 12:26:25 -0700, Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
wrote: Chris L Peterson wrote in news On Fri, 13 Oct 2017 23:19:09 -0700 (PDT), "Chris.B" wrote: "Micro" electric cars might offer some advantages but are still vehicle sized. So they are still a waste of space on grid-locked city roads and still need parking places. I expect that within a few decades at the most, the only vehicles allowed inside the denser parts of cities (and indeed, maybe everywhere else as well) will be fully automated. There is no gridlock with such a system. You're smoking the Kool-Aid again. When you have 1,000,000 cars in a system designed for 500,000 (or, in the case of LA, 20,000,000 cars in a system designed for 500,000), there is *always* gridlock. No there isn't. You can put 10 or 20 times more vehicles on the roads, and never experience gridlock. Cars can drive a few centimeters apart, at higher speeds than current driving allows, with optimized routes, considerably reduced wait times at intersections, and synchronized in all directions. Less, perhaps, with a system that has no ego drive narcissism and road rage, but once you exceed the capacity of the system, there will certianly be gridlock. Why would you exceed the capacity of the system? Cities already have the roads necessary to carry far more traffic than there's likely to ever be demand for. And then you have the additional gridlock of having damaged cars blocking traffic.) Rare. The accident rate will drop to near zero (which will be one factor pushing the adoption of such technology), and the hardware is very reliable (and in most cases won't fail catastrophically). |
#86
|
|||
|
|||
Is Elon Musk ready for the straitjacket ?
Chris L Peterson wrote in
: On Sat, 14 Oct 2017 12:26:25 -0700, Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy wrote: Chris L Peterson wrote in news On Fri, 13 Oct 2017 23:19:09 -0700 (PDT), "Chris.B" wrote: "Micro" electric cars might offer some advantages but are still vehicle sized. So they are still a waste of space on grid-locked city roads and still need parking places. I expect that within a few decades at the most, the only vehicles allowed inside the denser parts of cities (and indeed, maybe everywhere else as well) will be fully automated. There is no gridlock with such a system. You're smoking the Kool-Aid again. When you have 1,000,000 cars in a system designed for 500,000 (or, in the case of LA, 20,000,000 cars in a system designed for 500,000), there is *always* gridlock. No there isn't. Yes. There is. There is a maximum capacity for any road system. You can put 10 or 20 times more vehicles on the roads, and never experience gridlock. It may well be higher for self driving cars for the same number of square feet of pavement, but there's still a maximum capacity. And when you exceed it, you will have gridlock. Unless, of course, being a retard, you have redefined "gridlock" to mean something that normal people will point and laugh at you for. Cars can drive a few centimeters apart, at higher speeds than current driving allows, with optimized routes, considerably reduced wait times at intersections, and synchronized in all directions. Aside from your insane, retarded belief that self driving cars will *never* *ever* suffer mechanical breakdowns, resulting in massive, many car pileups because everything is moving 90 miles an hour at centimeters distance, there is still a maximum capacity to the road system. Places like Los Angeles are *so* far behind in keeping that capacity up with demand that no amount of automation will keep demand from exceeding capacity. Hint: We have cars that are, literally, inches apart *now*, for hours at a time, and waiting lines to enter the freeway (there are trafic lights at the on ramps to control this - you don't get on until someone gets off somewhere down the road). It is literally impossible to put more cars on the road than that. Automation might make them move faster - until there's a many car pileup with dozens dead, anyway - but there are still more people than will physically fit on the freeways at one time come rush hour (which lasts 3-4 hours in the morning, and usually longer in the afternoon). Less, perhaps, with a system that has no ego drive narcissism and road rage, but once you exceed the capacity of the system, there will certianly be gridlock. Why would you exceed the capacity of the system? Cities already have the roads necessary to carry far more traffic than there's likely to ever be demand for. You're smoking more Kool-Aid again, I see. No, many cities have nowhere near the capacity to handle the amount of traffic *now*. Average speed on the 405 freeway in Los Angeles is less than 10 mph for six hours a day, every weekday, and often on weekends, too. Assuming there's no accidents. If there is one, it's more like the 405 parking lot. And there is *no* *possible* *way* to *ever* build enough freeways to handle the demand *now*. Not when freeways cost over a billion dollars a mile, and take a decade or more worth of lawsuits to even break ground. You are, literally, hallucinating a world you'd like to live in, to the point of being incapable of interacting the real world. This is, of course, not unusual for you. And then you have the additional gridlock of having damaged cars blocking traffic.) Rare. The accident rate will drop to near zero (which will be one factor pushing the adoption of such technology), and the hardware is very reliable (and in most cases won't fail catastrophically). Keep smoking that Kool-Aid, son. Auto accidents are caused by mechanical failures now, and always will be. Adding in computer automation will not eliminate that. Plus, of course, no one alive today will live long enough to see completely automated cars. The technology isn't even *close*, despite the marketing claims of companies looking for government subsidies or investment dollars for a product they know thye have no idea how to produce. (People like Elon Musk). There isn't a car in existance today that can drive itself safetly on streets that haven't been mapped down to a resolution measured in inches (or less), much less in the raid, or snow, or anywhere near a construction crew. Or even on a well mapped street with new traffic signs. And there won't be, for a long time. The current hallucination that we're close to truly automated cars will last until the first death caused by something that would have been trivial for even a bad human driver to avoid, like running down a traffic cop directing traffic around an accident. Then the companies making self driving cars will go out of business, and rightly so. -- Terry Austin Vacation photos from Iceland: https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB "Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole." -- David Bilek Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals. |
#87
|
|||
|
|||
Is Elon Musk ready for the straitjacket ?
On Saturday, 14 October 2017 16:20:26 UTC+2, Chris L Peterson wrote:
I expect that within a few decades at the most, the only vehicles allowed inside the denser parts of cities (and indeed, maybe everywhere else as well) will be fully automated. There is no gridlock with such a system. With electrics there is little noise. With shared personal vehicles, there is little need for conventional parking. Breaking the connection between private vehicle ownership and pride in that ownership would certainly help. Sharing the available fleet of clean, comfortable, but completely anonymous transport, is the most likely way to gain real improvements in average road speeds. Removing the pointless commuter cycle by distance working would also help. Bringing workers together in one place, for greater manufacturing efficiency, is a historical throwback to the dark, satanic mills. It cleared away the vast excess of agricultural workers with no more work to do when the 1st generation robots arrived. |
#88
|
|||
|
|||
Is Elon Musk ready for the straitjacket ?
Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy wrote:
Chris L Peterson wrote in : On Sat, 14 Oct 2017 12:26:25 -0700, Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy wrote: Chris L Peterson wrote in news On Fri, 13 Oct 2017 23:19:09 -0700 (PDT), "Chris.B" wrote: "Micro" electric cars might offer some advantages but are still vehicle sized. So they are still a waste of space on grid-locked city roads and still need parking places. I expect that within a few decades at the most, the only vehicles allowed inside the denser parts of cities (and indeed, maybe everywhere else as well) will be fully automated. There is no gridlock with such a system. You're smoking the Kool-Aid again. When you have 1,000,000 cars in a system designed for 500,000 (or, in the case of LA, 20,000,000 cars in a system designed for 500,000), there is *always* gridlock. No there isn't. Yes. There is. There is a maximum capacity for any road system. You can put 10 or 20 times more vehicles on the roads, and never experience gridlock. It may well be higher for self driving cars for the same number of square feet of pavement, but there's still a maximum capacity. And when you exceed it, you will have gridlock. Unless, of course, being a retard, you have redefined "gridlock" to mean something that normal people will point and laugh at you for. Cars can drive a few centimeters apart, at higher speeds than current driving allows, with optimized routes, considerably reduced wait times at intersections, and synchronized in all directions. Aside from your insane, retarded belief that self driving cars will *never* *ever* suffer mechanical breakdowns, resulting in massive, many car pileups because everything is moving 90 miles an hour at centimeters distance, there is still a maximum capacity to the road system. Places like Los Angeles are *so* far behind in keeping that capacity up with demand that no amount of automation will keep demand from exceeding capacity. Hint: We have cars that are, literally, inches apart *now*, for hours at a time, and waiting lines to enter the freeway (there are trafic lights at the on ramps to control this - you don't get on until someone gets off somewhere down the road). It is literally impossible to put more cars on the road than that. Automation might make them move faster - until there's a many car pileup with dozens dead, anyway - but there are still more people than will physically fit on the freeways at one time come rush hour (which lasts 3-4 hours in the morning, and usually longer in the afternoon). Less, perhaps, with a system that has no ego drive narcissism and road rage, but once you exceed the capacity of the system, there will certianly be gridlock. Why would you exceed the capacity of the system? Cities already have the roads necessary to carry far more traffic than there's likely to ever be demand for. You're smoking more Kool-Aid again, I see. No, many cities have nowhere near the capacity to handle the amount of traffic *now*. Average speed on the 405 freeway in Los Angeles is less than 10 mph for six hours a day, every weekday, and often on weekends, too. Assuming there's no accidents. If there is one, it's more like the 405 parking lot. And there is *no* *possible* *way* to *ever* build enough freeways to handle the demand *now*. Not when freeways cost over a billion dollars a mile, and take a decade or more worth of lawsuits to even break ground. You are, literally, hallucinating a world you'd like to live in, to the point of being incapable of interacting the real world. This is, of course, not unusual for you. And then you have the additional gridlock of having damaged cars blocking traffic.) Rare. The accident rate will drop to near zero (which will be one factor pushing the adoption of such technology), and the hardware is very reliable (and in most cases won't fail catastrophically). Keep smoking that Kool-Aid, son. Auto accidents are caused by mechanical failures now, and always will be. Adding in computer automation will not eliminate that. Most accidents are caused by human error. Plus, of course, no one alive today will live long enough to see completely automated cars. The technology isn't even *close*, despite the marketing claims of companies looking for government subsidies or investment dollars for a product they know thye have no idea how to produce. (People like Elon Musk). There isn't a car in existance today that can drive itself safetly on streets that haven't been mapped down to a resolution measured in inches (or less), much less in the raid, or snow, or anywhere near a construction crew. Or even on a well mapped street with new traffic signs. And there won't be, for a long time. We already have this: https://www.gov.uk/government/public...0-supplement-1 This current hallucination that we're close to truly automated cars will last until the first death caused by something that would have been trivial for even a bad human driver to avoid, like running down a traffic cop directing traffic around an accident. Then the companies making self driving cars will go out of business, and rightly so. That seems a contrived reason. Until self driving cars can avoid pedestrians they won’t be allowed. In this case the policeman is just another pedestrian. |
#89
|
|||
|
|||
Is Elon Musk ready for the straitjacket ?
On Fri, 13 Oct 2017 16:01:48 -0700, Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
wrote: The best thing for the cities would be to get automobiles out altogether. By some definitions of best, maybe. By others, likely far more popular, "best" would involved tracking down all the extremist whackjob enivronmentalists and rendering their bodies down into hydrocarbon fuel. Are you seriously proposing mass murder as the best solution? Some 70+ years ago, a guy named Hitler implemented such a "solution". He ended up killing himself, and causing a cstastrophy over almost a whole continent. |
#90
|
|||
|
|||
Is Elon Musk ready for the straitjacket ?
On Sunday, October 15, 2017 at 12:02:10 PM UTC+1, Paul Schlyter wrote:
On Fri, 13 Oct 2017 16:01:48 -0700, Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy wrote: The best thing for the cities would be to get automobiles out altogether. By some definitions of best, maybe. By others, likely far more popular, "best" would involved tracking down all the extremist whackjob enivronmentalists and rendering their bodies down into hydrocarbon fuel. Are you seriously proposing mass murder as the best solution? Some 70+ years ago, a guy named Hitler implemented such a "solution". He ended up killing himself, and causing a cstastrophy over almost a whole continent. Now,now, Hitler was implementing empirical policy and not a solution - "At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace, the savage races throughout the world. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes, as Professor Schaaffhausen has remarked, will no doubt be exterminated. The break between man and his nearest allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilised state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as now between the negro or Australian and the gorilla." -- Charles Darwin (1871) The Descent of Man In case readers don't know or for those like yourself where English is a second language, an anthropomorphous ape was an empirical invention where black people look like apes hence the bridge between white skin academic trash and baboons. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Elon Musk ... Genius | Double-A[_4_] | Misc | 0 | August 14th 17 10:45 PM |
Elon Musk and Mars | Greg \(Strider\) Moore | Policy | 19 | August 3rd 13 06:43 AM |
Elon Musk other ideas:) | bob haller | Policy | 33 | July 27th 13 12:03 AM |
BBC interview with Elon Musk | David Spain | Space Shuttle | 3 | January 4th 13 11:05 AM |