REMINDER: Siteowner has no obligation to monitor the Forums. However, Siteowner reserves the right to review the Materials submitted to or posted on the Forums, and remove, delete, redact or otherwise modify such Materials, in its sole discretion and for any reason whatsoever, at any time and from time to time, without notice or further obligation to you. Siteowner has no obligation to display or post any Materials provided by you. Siteowner reserves the right to disclose, at any time and from time to time, any information or Materials that Siteowner deems necessary or appropriate to satisfy any applicable law, regulation, contract obligation, legal or dispute process or government request. To further read the rules and terms of agreement of this Forum, click here.

Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 11 of 13 1 2 9 10 11 12 13
Re: AOC: Building high speed rail so that air travel is no longer necessary in the next 10 years [Re: Sharkbiscuit] #2910903
02/08/19 09:15 PM
02/08/19 09:15 PM
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,754
LA
B
bird. Offline
Phil Edwards status
bird.  Offline
Phil Edwards status
**
B

Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,754
LA
Originally Posted By: Sharkbiscuit
Ethical is an archaic word that means legal.


Disagree with this, but I do understand the point that you're making that government regulation would be part of addressing this.

Re: AOC: Building high speed rail so that air travel is no longer necessary in the next 10 years [Re: bird.] #2910911
02/08/19 09:20 PM
02/08/19 09:20 PM
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 7,426
Jacksonville Beach
S
Sharkbiscuit Offline
Phil Edwards status
Sharkbiscuit  Offline
Phil Edwards status
**
S

Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 7,426
Jacksonville Beach
Originally Posted By: bird.
Originally Posted By: Sharkbiscuit
Ethical is an archaic word that means legal.


Disagree with this, but I do understand the point that you're making that government regulation would be part of addressing this.


I'm asserting that government regulation would be the only part of addressing this.

Re: AOC: Building high speed rail so that air travel is no longer necessary in the next 10 years [Re: Sharkbiscuit] #2910915
02/08/19 09:23 PM
02/08/19 09:23 PM
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,754
LA
B
bird. Offline
Phil Edwards status
bird.  Offline
Phil Edwards status
**
B

Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,754
LA
Originally Posted By: Sharkbiscuit
Originally Posted By: bird.
Originally Posted By: Sharkbiscuit
Ethical is an archaic word that means legal.


Disagree with this, but I do understand the point that you're making that government regulation would be part of addressing this.


I'm asserting that government regulation would be the only part of addressing this.


Which comes first, the governmental regulation or the decisioning programmed into self-driving vehicle tech?

Also, could self-driving and traditional cars share the same roads as the number of self-driving vehicles on the road grows? I suppose that could come down to government regulation, but there are a lot of practical hurdles there to overcome first.

Re: AOC: Building high speed rail so that air travel is no longer necessary in the next 10 years [Re: bird.] #2910919
02/08/19 09:33 PM
02/08/19 09:33 PM
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 7,426
Jacksonville Beach
S
Sharkbiscuit Offline
Phil Edwards status
Sharkbiscuit  Offline
Phil Edwards status
**
S

Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 7,426
Jacksonville Beach
Originally Posted By: bird.
Originally Posted By: Sharkbiscuit
Originally Posted By: bird.
Originally Posted By: Sharkbiscuit
Ethical is an archaic word that means legal.


Disagree with this, but I do understand the point that you're making that government regulation would be part of addressing this.


I'm asserting that government regulation would be the only part of addressing this.


Which comes first, the governmental regulation or the decisioning programmed into self-driving vehicle tech?


The latter, due to fear of the former?

How is Uber's testing in Arizona going since they punted a pedestrian into the dirt? Kickbanned? By Uber, or by the Government?

Do Uber and Lyft think people should be able to have self-driving cars for personal use? Or is that a market they want to corner for themselves?

https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/2632...ars-urban-areas

I'm pretty sure we've had an ideological disagreement about ethical/legal in the past, but specifically in the context of Amazon/Fakebook/Google/Uber/Tesla, I'm not trusting it until Zuckerberg/Musk/Bezos etc. head is in an Oculus Rift with a special chainsaw rigged to it that will saw his face in half the instant something goes wrong.

Re: AOC: Building high speed rail so that air travel is no longer necessary in the next 10 years [Re: bird.] #2910921
02/08/19 09:35 PM
02/08/19 09:35 PM
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 7,426
Jacksonville Beach
S
Sharkbiscuit Offline
Phil Edwards status
Sharkbiscuit  Offline
Phil Edwards status
**
S

Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 7,426
Jacksonville Beach
Originally Posted By: bird.

Also, could self-driving and traditional cars share the same roads as the number of self-driving vehicles on the road grows? I suppose that could come down to government regulation, but there are a lot of practical hurdles there to overcome first.


The tally is one dead pedestrian (Uber), a few dead drivers (Tesla), and practical does not mean ethical. Everything in development for widespread adoption has practical concerns; that's never going away.

Re: AOC: Building high speed rail so that air travel is no longer necessary in the next 10 years [Re: Sharkbiscuit] #2910928
02/08/19 09:46 PM
02/08/19 09:46 PM
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,754
LA
B
bird. Offline
Phil Edwards status
bird.  Offline
Phil Edwards status
**
B

Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,754
LA
Originally Posted By: Sharkbiscuit
Originally Posted By: bird.

Also, could self-driving and traditional cars share the same roads as the number of self-driving vehicles on the road grows? I suppose that could come down to government regulation, but there are a lot of practical hurdles there to overcome first.


The tally is one dead pedestrian (Uber), a few dead drivers (Tesla), and practical does not mean ethical. Everything in development for widespread adoption has practical concerns; that's never going away.


Right, but the ethical part was only half of what I mentioned. This part has to do with technological shortcomings.

Regardless, this leads me to believe we're pretty much in agreement:

Quote:
I'm pretty sure we've had an ideological disagreement about ethical/legal in the past, but specifically in the context of Amazon/Fakebook/Google/Uber/Tesla, I'm not trusting it until Zuckerberg/Musk/Bezos etc. head is in an Oculus Rift with a special chainsaw rigged to it that will saw his face in half the instant something goes wrong.

Re: AOC: Building high speed rail so that air travel is no longer necessary in the next 10 years [Re: ifallalot] #2910929
02/08/19 09:50 PM
02/08/19 09:50 PM
Joined: Jan 2016
Posts: 13,668
S
StuAzole Offline
Tom Curren status
StuAzole  Offline
Tom Curren status
**
S

Joined: Jan 2016
Posts: 13,668
Originally Posted By: ifallalot

The most-used problem is having the computer make the decision to sacrifice one life in order to save three others and similar situational problems to that.


I don't think I understand what the future of driverless cars looks like to opine here. If all the computers are working together, my assumption has always been there wouldn't be the need for those sorts of decisions. But I'm also thinking about the end result, not the decades leading up to a completed driverless car system.

Either way, I don't see any morality in what you described. Almost 40,000 people died in the US last year in car accidents - I don't recall seeing morality discussed with any of those (maybe except in cases of DUI?).


Bock you
Re: AOC: Building high speed rail so that air travel is no longer necessary in the next 10 years [Re: StuAzole] #2910934
02/08/19 10:04 PM
02/08/19 10:04 PM
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,754
LA
B
bird. Offline
Phil Edwards status
bird.  Offline
Phil Edwards status
**
B

Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,754
LA
Originally Posted By: StuAzole
Originally Posted By: ifallalot

The most-used problem is having the computer make the decision to sacrifice one life in order to save three others and similar situational problems to that.


I don't think I understand what the future of driverless cars looks like to opine here. If all the computers are working together, my assumption has always been there wouldn't be the need for those sorts of decisions. But I'm also thinking about the end result, not the decades leading up to a completed driverless car system.

Either way, I don't see any morality in what you described. Almost 40,000 people died in the US last year in car accidents - I don't recall seeing morality discussed with any of those (maybe except in cases of DUI?).


Are you suggesting pedestrians will all be outfitted with computers in constant communication with the driverless vehicles in their vicinity? Wildlife too?

The difference between current accidents and future driverless accidents is that currently, our fck ups aren't decided upon by software.

Re: AOC: Building high speed rail so that air travel is no longer necessary in the next 10 years [Re: bird.] #2910941
02/08/19 10:12 PM
02/08/19 10:12 PM
Joined: Jan 2016
Posts: 13,668
S
StuAzole Offline
Tom Curren status
StuAzole  Offline
Tom Curren status
**
S

Joined: Jan 2016
Posts: 13,668
Originally Posted By: bird.
Originally Posted By: StuAzole
Originally Posted By: ifallalot

The most-used problem is having the computer make the decision to sacrifice one life in order to save three others and similar situational problems to that.


I don't think I understand what the future of driverless cars looks like to opine here. If all the computers are working together, my assumption has always been there wouldn't be the need for those sorts of decisions. But I'm also thinking about the end result, not the decades leading up to a completed driverless car system.

Either way, I don't see any morality in what you described. Almost 40,000 people died in the US last year in car accidents - I don't recall seeing morality discussed with any of those (maybe except in cases of DUI?).


Are you suggesting pedestrians will all be outfitted with computers in constant communication with the driverless vehicles in their vicinity? Wildlife too?

The difference between current accidents and future driverless accidents is that currently, our fck ups aren't decided upon by software.


I'm suggesting that your car will stop automatically at a red light and that it will have sensors to help detect cars and people around it.

I also don't see a morality issue related to who or what decides our driving fuckups. Why does it matter?


Bock you
Re: AOC: Building high speed rail so that air travel is no longer necessary in the next 10 years [Re: Surfdog] #2910967
02/08/19 11:04 PM
02/08/19 11:04 PM
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 3,531
Santucky, Ca
P
Phi1 Offline
Michael Peterson status
Phi1  Offline
Michael Peterson status
**
P

Joined: May 2002
Posts: 3,531
Santucky, Ca
Originally Posted By: Surfdog
I want public transportation to take me to Blacks or Lunada Bay or Mammoth or Big Bear, with my surfboard or snow board on a whim.

Ya, that's gonna happen.

And if public trans can't do it, my electric car will.

If it's not too cold, or too hot......

"Cold temperatures can sap electric car batteries, temporarily reducing their range by more than 40 percent when interior heaters are used, a new study found.

The study of five electric vehicles by AAA also found that high temperatures can cut into battery range, but not nearly as much as the cold. The range returns to normal in more comfortable temperatures.

Many owners discovered the range limitations last week when much of the country was in the grips of a polar vortex. Owners of vehicles made by manufacturers including Tesla, the top-selling electric vehicle company in the U.S., complained on social media about reduced range and frozen door handles during the cold snap."

>> AAA: Cold weather can cut electric car range over 40% <<

The grim realities of life on batteries.


I think that's because most everything is geared towards gas or diesel, or propane in rare cases.

If electric cars and refuelling stations were designed around EVs I would envision standardized battery cells that are hot swappable. Like gigantic AA batteries. So you don't recharge, you replace.

Re: AOC: Building high speed rail so that air travel is no longer necessary in the next 10 years [Re: Phi1] #2911082
02/09/19 07:36 AM
02/09/19 07:36 AM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 15,114
Oceanside,CA
S
Surfdog Offline
Duke status
Surfdog  Offline
Duke status
**
S

Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 15,114
Oceanside,CA
I remember reading about that replaceable battery concept in Popular Science about 20+ years or so ago (when I used to subscribe).

Teslas would have a hard time re-inventing their batteries to do that. Their batteries are like giant flat cell phone batteries that take up almost the entire floor-board. Makes for a great low center of gravity and handling, but replacing on a daily or 2 basis, not so much.

Those EV batteries are VERY heavy as one unit. You'd need heavy lift equipment to slide one out, and re-insert a fresh one each time. Can you imagine the stock-pile of these engine sized (or multiple ones for larger vehicles) of charged batteries needed on hand on a given day during rush hour in the AM in larger densely populated cities? You'd need a warehouse of them like you see gas stations on each corner. Watch a busy gas station for an hour and count how many cars go in and out. Imagine all those and more needing to exchange batteries? Imagine how many batteries they would need each and every day or week?

Interesting idea in concept, but on a large scale, quite a challenge to pull off efficiently.

Mass transportation on batteries in a large scale is not like charging your little cell phone.

And talk about toxic waste when the batteries lose their charge cycle efficiency. They "could" be recycled, to an extent, but many components/materials will end up in a land-fill, further polluting the environment and ground water tables.



Add millions of dead batteries and in a decade or 2 dead solar panels to the environment and you'll see what REAL pollution does to humans globally. Meanwhile we'll be waiting for the oceans to rise and force over millions of people on the coasts to flee, wondering "where is it"? rolleyes


Surf 'em if you got 'em
Re: AOC: Building high speed rail so that air travel is no longer necessary in the next 10 years [Re: casa_mugrienta] #2911103
02/09/19 12:23 PM
02/09/19 12:23 PM
Joined: Apr 2016
Posts: 8,161
Your mom�s house
D
Duffy Online content
Kelly Slater status
Duffy  Online Content
Kelly Slater status
**
D

Joined: Apr 2016
Posts: 8,161
Your mom�s house
Also, the EROI on photovoltaic solar panels is less than break even.

In other words it takes more energy to produce a solar panel than the panel will produce in its lifetime.


�No eternal reward will forgive us now for wasting the dawn�

- The Wasp
Re: AOC: Building high speed rail so that air travel is no longer necessary in the next 10 years [Re: casa_mugrienta] #2911115
02/09/19 01:29 PM
02/09/19 01:29 PM
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 29,969
Vagina Point
A
Autoprax Online content
Duke status
Autoprax  Online Content
Duke status
**
A

Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 29,969
Vagina Point
What do you guys this of using more efficient systems to conserve resources?

I've noticed that some people on the right see conservation and efficiency as commie plots.


incompetence is preferable to malice.
Re: AOC: Building high speed rail so that air travel is no longer necessary in the next 10 years [Re: casa_mugrienta] #2911125
02/09/19 02:03 PM
02/09/19 02:03 PM
Joined: Jan 2017
Posts: 14,709
B
BillyOcean Offline
Tom Curren status
BillyOcean  Offline
Tom Curren status
**
B

Joined: Jan 2017
Posts: 14,709
I drive my cars into the ground

Thats effficiency

No commie social engineering required

Re: AOC: Building high speed rail so that air travel is no longer necessary in the next 10 years [Re: casa_mugrienta] #2911128
02/09/19 02:13 PM
02/09/19 02:13 PM
Joined: Feb 2018
Posts: 5,719
M
mundus Offline
Phil Edwards status
mundus  Offline
Phil Edwards status
**
M

Joined: Feb 2018
Posts: 5,719
Just think how much cheaper it would be to drive with fuel economy standards?

Page 11 of 13 1 2 9 10 11 12 13

Moderated by  Groundswell, Nameless60, r32