oldenough Posted December 8, 2013 Share Posted December 8, 2013 (edited) . However I prefer to use my own judgement. John That's not very comforting for the rest of us...lol....... Sorry Taz...I couldn't resist... Edited December 8, 2013 by oldenough Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mallette Posted December 8, 2013 Author Share Posted December 8, 2013 Actually, I am seeing a number of folks who thing it is somehow limiting their freedom to not allow them to put others at risk. I am a freedom loving guy, but I definitely disagree here. So, I'd suggest this: Instead of disagreeing, offer an alternative to the millions of unnecessary injuries and deaths, billions in road construction while delays and drive times are projected to increase, and the billions of lost hours in productivity spent sitting in traffic jams. It is not enough to disagree. One should be prepared with a DOABLE alternative. My dad (born, 1903) didn't want to give up his horse. He got over it. Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shakeydeal Posted December 9, 2013 Share Posted December 9, 2013 No, I will not come around in ten years. Why don't we just all stay in our homes wearing bubble suits and helmets? That is surely safe. You cannot remove every danger in life. Let me guess. Gun control advocate too? Shakey Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldenough Posted December 9, 2013 Share Posted December 9, 2013 Actually, I am seeing a number of folks who thing it is somehow limiting their freedom to not allow them to put others at risk. I am a freedom loving guy, but I definitely disagree here. So, I'd suggest this: Instead of disagreeing, offer an alternative to the millions of unnecessary injuries and deaths, billions in road construction while delays and drive times are projected to increase, and the billions of lost hours in productivity spent sitting in traffic jams. It is not enough to disagree. One should be prepared with a DOABLE alternative. My dad (born, 1903) didn't want to give up his horse. He got over it. Dave Dave you are asking people to do something that our own government can't do, namely discuss and come up with a solution.....I guess we do get the government we deserve. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mallette Posted December 9, 2013 Author Share Posted December 9, 2013 Don't inject politics...but, no. In fact very much the opposite in the belief I have an inherent right to defend myself as I see fit. Including from people who insist on putting others at risk without regard to others rights. And, yes, it is quite possible to remove many dangers from life and to do so while increasing freedom rather than limiting it. I don't want to give up the freedom of movement I now enjoy just because I become too old, blind, or physically incapable of driving. Nor do I wish to be put at risk from others who wish to live in the past, a past that has killed millions and cost trillions. Frankly, I've never really been much of a flag waver for one cause or the other, but this one has ignited my passion. Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shakeydeal Posted December 9, 2013 Share Posted December 9, 2013 Actually, I am seeing a number of folks who thing it is somehow limiting their freedom to not allow them to put others at risk. I am a freedom loving guy, but I definitely disagree here. So, I'd suggest this: Instead of disagreeing, offer an alternative to the millions of unnecessary injuries and deaths, billions in road construction while delays and drive times are projected to increase, and the billions of lost hours in productivity spent sitting in traffic jams. It is not enough to disagree. One should be prepared with a DOABLE alternative. My dad (born, 1903) didn't want to give up his horse. He got over it. Dave Dave you are asking people to do something that our own government can't do, namely discuss and come up with a solution.....I guess we do get the government we deserve. Yeah, and we surely got it this time. Elections DO have consequences. Shakey Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shakeydeal Posted December 9, 2013 Share Posted December 9, 2013 Mallette, you seem like a good guy. We just don't agree on this. Shakey 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldenough Posted December 9, 2013 Share Posted December 9, 2013 . Let me guess. Gun control advocate too? Shakey Well it was no surprise that someone had to come up with that hairy old chestnut as part of the argument...lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mallette Posted December 9, 2013 Author Share Posted December 9, 2013 Dave you are asking people to do something that our own government can't do, namely discuss and come up with a solution.....I guess we do get the government we deserve. Well, for reasons that show in my avatar area, I will not go into politics in this thread or anywhere else on this forum. Let's just say I fully agree with Ben Franklin's "Those who would trade temporary security for essential liberty deserve neither liberty nor security." While government has to be a part of this, it, like all things, should be the will of the people. A people tired of drunk drivers, perfectly fine people falling asleep at the wheel, sleep deprived, amphetamine crazed truckers, SPEED LIMITS, endless construction that yields nothing, and 100 car pileups because humans don't realize they can't drive in smoke or fog. Frankly, I find it takes a great deal of patience to deal with naysayers and skeptics on this as the price as we piddle around is immense in life and treasure. Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mallette Posted December 9, 2013 Author Share Posted December 9, 2013 Mallette, you seem like a good guy. We just don't agree on this. Shakey I am good with that, Shakey. Seriously. But I think you will come around, and you have plenty of time to do so. This won't happen unless most people demand it. If so, then your believe in democracy...which I share...will win out. Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taz Posted December 9, 2013 Share Posted December 9, 2013 . However I prefer to use my own judgement. John That's not very comforting for the rest of us...lol....... Sorry Taz...I couldn't resist... I love it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mallette Posted December 9, 2013 Author Share Posted December 9, 2013 I am blessed with about the least onerous commute in Houston. I live in the Galveston Bay area and it is 25 miles into the city to my office. I usually leave about 5:50 AM and can expect to take about 35 minutes to make the drive. The freeways are busy, but rarely congested. Nonetheless, the speeds average 65 mph and there are frequent sudden lane changers for no apparent reason and people drive at a variety of speeds. It requires pretty close attention. I suspect I could easily take 10 minutes off that trip in an autonomous vehicle, and my guess is there'd usually be at 4 car lengths or more between vehicles and speeds of 90 or so. I am SO ready for that! Anybody who lives in a city and loves their commute experience needs a checkup from the neck up... Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CECAA850 Posted December 9, 2013 Share Posted December 9, 2013 And all this time I thought you were an analog guy Dave. I can see it now. Terrorist hackers controlling vehicles. Unmanned vehicles turned into bombs. Rush hour traffic coming to a complete halt with one push of a button. Let the government install the infrastructure, yeah it'll be safe. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mallette Posted December 9, 2013 Author Share Posted December 9, 2013 Carl, none of that is possible with this technology. You are thinking of central control, this is AUTONOMOUS control. AAMOF, such things become LESS likely. This is NOT monolithic computer driven, but a series of redundant subsystems that link to others around and yet remain independent. Very much like modern airliners, but given we are talking very slow (comparatively) speeds and only 2 dimensions, much more reliable. Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mallette Posted December 10, 2013 Author Share Posted December 10, 2013 So, Metro North is adding automatic braking in response to the sleeping drivers. What a concept! If I had to ride that train I'd be just as happy if the drivers stayed home and slept in.... Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Richard Posted December 11, 2013 Share Posted December 11, 2013 First, lets implement such a system (that nearly exists today) for the railroads, and try that to see how well it works. It would be easier to begin with a more controlled environment like the RRs than to start with multilane highways. Eventually a system like the one Dave is talking about will be the reality for road travel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators dtel Posted December 11, 2013 Moderators Share Posted December 11, 2013 I want it, and a van with tinted windows just for what the title of this thread ask, among other things your not supposed to do while driving. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mallette Posted December 11, 2013 Author Share Posted December 11, 2013 (edited) I want it, and a van with tinted windows just for what the title of this thread ask, among other things your not supposed to do while driving. Yeah. And some other things, too... Dave Edited December 11, 2013 by Mallette Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mallette Posted December 11, 2013 Author Share Posted December 11, 2013 (edited) First, lets implement such a system (that nearly exists today) for the railroads, and try that to see how well it works. It would be easier to begin with a more controlled environment like the RRs than to start with multilane highways. Eventually a system like the one Dave is talking about will be the reality for road travel. Don that's ancient history. First one was in 1967. What possible purpose would a human driver be on a high speed train? None of them use them. Dave Edited December 11, 2013 by Mallette Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Richard Posted December 13, 2013 Share Posted December 13, 2013 First, lets implement such a system (that nearly exists today) for the railroads, and try that to see how well it works. It would be easier to begin with a more controlled environment like the RRs than to start with multilane highways. Eventually a system like the one Dave is talking about will be the reality for road travel. Don that's ancient history. First one was in 1967. What possible purpose would a human driver be on a high speed train? None of them use them. Dave Considering recent derailments and other train mishaps it seems all of the RRs should begin rapid implementation on passenger lines, freight trains, commuter trains etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.