Brad Ideas - Futurism - Comments

Away from coal

brad — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 22:47:30 -0800

Coal generated electricity is indeed a problem that must be solved. But using 1/10th the energy is still a win. Instead of 10 gallons gasoline it means the coal equivalent of half a gallon of gas and the NG equivalent of 1/5th of a gallon of gas.

And how do you generate

drill now — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 14:44:59 -0800

And how do you generate electricity? The efficiency of generation is about 60%, plus variable losses in transmission. Over 50% of electricity is generated by coal, so don't give me all this crap about "saving the planet".

Correct

brad — Sat, 16 Jan 2010 15:01:29 -0800

Would you buy from a site and trust the reviews if there were no negative reviews on the site? The store cares that you buy, not what you buy.

Make no mistake, even the non famous will be able to have their negative say which is good. However, the semi-famous will get more attention and more chances to go viral and be really dangerous.

Amazon & Newegg

Joel Upchurch — Sat, 16 Jan 2010 13:00:12 -0800

I don't know about other people, but I've changed my buying decisions many times based on bad customer reviews on Amazon or NewEgg. Of course, if there are only a few reviews, then you have actually have to read them to sift out the sore heads. I've changed my mind a few time based on a single comment about a problem or feature that was especially relevant to me.

It is interesting that online retailers leave negative comments up on their web sites. I guess they want to sell you something, but they don't really want to sell you junk, since it discourages repeat business.

redefining an abstract

Wizderfoz — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 22:58:18 -0800

The problem isn't the term or the miss use of a term rather it's a misunderstanding of an abstract. One person alluded to the fact that there was an assumption that people would be able to recognize it as it passed and yet an another tried to redefine that moment again. Where the problem truly lies is in the idea that in that defining moment there exists something that didn't exist before and the possibility that there might evolve yet something else. From an literal point of view it's impossible to view and abstract no matter what other name you assign to it. The other side of it is that same abstract can be considered and defined from a completely separate perspective for a completely different reason and indeed still be the same abstract. That is an intersection not an event horizon or singularity. Perhaps defining moment would be a better term.

i totally agree, i would

Anonymous — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 08:59:45 -0700

i totally agree, i would love robotic cars in certain areas say in an electric bus lane, but i would like to drive my own 911 when i own it thank you!

its amazing that people are thinking about giving up thse things, technology is there to guide us not to take over a gps and detailed map is good enough but why robots?

Where do retired boomers

MattYoung — Sun, 12 Apr 2009 14:44:46 -0700

Where do retired boomers live and where to they go? Much of it is from gated communities to controlled private strip malls. These are controlled traffic situations, and we have automated traffic solutions for these today. Automated taxis are being deployed in airports; and factories have automated delivery around the factor campus.

Now, what is the public road between the strip mall and the gated community? Most of it is about a quarter mile of public roads. That is the constraint, how to deal with the bureaucracy on that quarter mile.

Matt

Great for those who cannot drive

Alec C — Fri, 10 Apr 2009 06:06:07 -0700

Having seen how much my parents lives closed down when they ceased to be able to drive, I am strongly hoping that robocars come along by the time I cease to be able to drive (maybe another 20 years, if I am lucky).

Also, I have several friends who cannot drive (epilepsy, seriously impaired vision) and have their lives significantly restricted by this. Robocars would give them a freedom the rest of us enjoy.

Finally, as someone who enjoys a beer or three, I would be very pleased not to have to have the "who is not drinking tonight" discussion. While I don't get drunk, I certainly go far beyond the safe level for driving (essentially, none) and an inexpensive robotaxi would be wonderful. (Yes, there are taxis here, but a manned taxi home can double the cost of the evening).

But, local traffic is the economic constraint

Mattyoung — Wed, 01 Apr 2009 09:22:10 -0700

We are in a depression precisely because the economy cannot find a path that reduces the cost of suburban shopping. The fixed transportation cost of a grocery shopping trip is about $50 when the consumer pinches pennies to save his suburban home. The suburban home owner has elastic substitutes, for his commute, even in suburbia. But the home owner only has one method to pick up groceries, the automobile. So, when money is short, he uses other methods for his commute, his car sits in the driveway at $300/month in fixed costs and he uses it oly five times a month when gas prices are high. So we can see why Detroit is dead.

Right now, we are actually suffering this deepening depression because our local politicians will not allow us to automate home delivery. It is the essential constraint of our time, either automate suburban streets or abandon suburbia.

Main benefit on the highways

Scott — Wed, 01 Apr 2009 07:57:53 -0700

The main benefits will come from robocars on the highways. This is where the high speed accidents occur, and thus the majority of fatalities, as well as where most of the traffic congestion is. Once the majority of cars on the highways are computer controlled, traffic accidents will be greatly reduced, and the resulting congestion reduced as well. Fewer cars slowing down to rubberneck, and fewer erratic drivers will also help to reduce congestion.

Your ideas about robocars on city streets and the resulting improvements to society are interesting and well thought out, but I think this is much farther down the road. By the time it becomes practical, many things will have changed which we simply cannot predict. In addition, I think there will be a great deal of resistance of people to completely giving up control of their vehicles.

Highway-only robocars, however, may be viewed as just an extension of the current cruise control, so people may be more willing to accept them. You could drive yourself onto the freeway and activate the computer control. You then relax or attend to other business while the car navigates through the freeway interchanges, and then lets you know when it's close to the exit that you need to take. You then take over control, exit the freeway, and continue to your destination. This is a much easier problem than dealing with intersections and city streets. And we're much closer to that reality now, with adaptive cruise control and lane sensing technology, so it's easy to see this happening in the near future. And it could also become mandatory for people wishing to talk on a cell phone while on the highway to put their car under computer control.

I like this blog, and can't

MattYoung — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 22:12:53 -0700

I like this blog, and can't wait for a response, so I reply to myself. But I am reading the comments.

The Home Delivery Vehicle is a benign creature. It has wide, ovals vinyl bumpers atop inflated air and they travel about 20 MPH or less through the neighborhood. They do the reverse waste pick-up, and drop boxes of consumable on your curbside.

Delivery Bots don't prefer all electric or hybrid, but they do 90% of the last mile for freight on electric if asked. There is always a human operated diesel electric ready to convoy the delivery bot from warehouse to home, so the bot need only auto-route for two miles or less.

The delivery bot and the taxi bot remove about $200 in fixed cost for consumer freight. They are a great efficiency gain, and available today in factories, airport, demonstration rallys, competitions, etc.

The bot vehicles would like a little green paint and a cooperative DMV. These two supports would put the bots in gated communities and some adventurous communities next year.

That reduction of $200 in fixed expenses, and probably another $100 savings in variable costs, all related to transportation, represents the gain in utility of the American home over the utility or human operated vehicles. So, due to technology gains, homes should indeed be more valuable, especially in America where asphalt roads are the standard fare.

The green paint is an agreement between the human vehicle and the bots. It identifies likely places where bots might make a left turn, follow a lane, leave a box of groceries, or maneuver in a parking lot.

Bots are benign to light weight, lower speed vehicles, like smaller electric cars, scooters ad bicycles. Hence we might see greater efficiencies of use if we provide cocrete barriers for this class of silicon and light weights. Thus, lowering the total fixed cost of moving stuff drtops again as the utility of light weights gains along with the bots. Some commuter lanes in major freeways would be protected for the lightweights and bots.

Once communities try it out, they will like it; and the general consensus will provide a 15 year growth engine for America as we re-purpose out asphalt roads to efficiency multipliers in the rage of 3 to 7.

Home Delivery

Matt Young — Thu, 26 Mar 2009 19:35:21 -0700

The killer app. The idea is to make the self-checkout stand at the grocer mobile. Order over the Internet,wait an hour, and the robovan shows up at your curbside.

A variant of the idea is the autonomous electric cargo van. The cargo van can guide itself for a mile using battery, but for long hauls, the cargo vans align themselves,and electrically connect. Then diesel electric hauler powers the convoy up and moves them down the road, to the next freight switching lot. Any parking lot becomes an automated freight yard. Cargo vans can be dropped off at the grocer where they drive themselves to the unloading dock.

Old or new?

brad — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 23:02:30 -0700

Robocars will be one of those junctures that often turns industries upside-down and brings in new companies. There have been many barriers to entry in the car biz for some time, keeping it in the hands of big players. Time might be ripe for change.

I see more distributed manufacturing, because electric cars are much simpler and easier to make modular. Get a chassis from one place, motors from another. Get somebody to fab your body. Connections are no longer so mechanical, they are either digital (for controls and sensors) or high-power electrical (for main power system connection to wheel motors and batteries.) This makes it easier to make parts that can be interchanged. Drop in things you like on a dashboard, get seats from anywhere.

The main barrier is getting the whole thing safety certified. That is the one factor that big manufacturers will try to control so that they can retain their positions. They will lobby the government to make it hard to get certified, using safety as their excuse.

Can robo-cars save the car manufacturing industry?

Stuart Lynne — Mon, 09 Mar 2009 18:38:00 -0700

The current condition of the various car manufacturing companies world wide and the impact of that on the rest of various economies is illustrative..

Assuming that huge public investment in mass transit could effect a huge change in car ridership, this is the impact that would have on these industries and various service sectors.. for better or worse.

RoboCars on the other hand could be (probably will be) manufactured by the existing car manufacturers, serviced by the same service sector, on roads built by the same contractors... etc. It provides a way to move most of the current industry and service sector employment forward into new areas with the least disruption. And as pointed out without huge public investment (that mass transit requires).

Robocars are also useful everywhere... not just in areas where sufficent density exists to justify mass transit.

Yes, it must be safe first

brad — Sun, 22 Feb 2009 14:39:42 -0800

Only the more forward thinking of those groups will lobby for this. Most of the public will want proof it’s safer than a human before they lobby for it. Certainly it will have trouble going on the roads until then. However, some advanced thinking groups will say, “This looks like it has the potential to be safer than a human driver, so let’s do more R&D on it today, and let the designers know that once they make it safe enough, the law will not stand in their way.”