I love this approach. It would be great to have 100s of these on more or less predefined trajectories, but without a set schedule. Just press a button and one shows up a few minutes later, perhaps with already some passengers going similar routes. It could help anchor urban development, something a pure self driving car would not too, and the absence of a set schedule removes the biggest drawback of public transportation. They can also just use existing roads, no need to construct a separate track. I hope these things would help introduce affordable public transportation in many US cities, and actually be useful and practical.
> the absence of a set schedule removes the biggest drawback of public transportation.
I'm wagering that most everyone who thinks this way is mentally comparing against their most familiar American city. In Germany and Switzerland (and probably others), the trains and buses run on a schedule, and if a train is more than about 30 seconds late, you'll see the locals starting to anxiously cross-check their watches with each other.
When you can plan down to the minute, using public transport becomes much more convenient and efficient (This is easier with trains than buses, though the buses do stop and wait at stops until it's time for them to proceed).
> the absence of a set schedule removes the biggest drawback of public transportation
I’d argue that having no schedule is even worse.
With a set schedule, I can just go to the stop, wait a minute, and a bus will come – most lines are running every 5 or 10 minutes anyway (or 15 to 20min in the suburbs).
With this, the situation would get a lot worse, I’d have higher waiting times, less of a guarantee that one would come (what if there’s not enough demand?), etc.
The tech is neat and I'm sure this is just the beginning of these kinds of driverless vehicles. Dubai even has driverless cars on the road.
What's really scary is that all signs point to the end of the blue collar workforce being near. Drones to do construction, to operate the trains, planes and automobiles, so that us and our cargo get where they need to go. What's the plan for replacing work after this new era arrives?
Futurists popularized that we would have robot servants for generations and it's becoming true. They didn't popularize the notion that 1% of the population would own all the robots.
> What's the plan for replacing work after this new era arrives?
Who cares? Anybody sees a problem with automating away so many jobs that unemployment rises to 50% and beyond? Unemployment is not a problem. It's how we deal with it that is. You just can't expect everyone to work when machines do all the work.
So… how about we all work less? What about a 4 days work-week, or even 3? How about automating so much work that voluntary community service becomes enough?
We need to think about it soon, because the current model is not pretty: just let the jobless starve, and lock them up (or out) when they start to demand jobs or (gasp!) money. And if things get ugly, send the army bots. "Shoot on sight" is pretty easy to automate, if you don't care to discriminate.
> hey didn't popularize the notion that 1% of the population would own all the robots.
The heart of the problem, really. To this, I see only one solution: abolishing lucrative property, communist scare crow be dammed.
I'm sure lots of people would appreciate not having to work 3 jobs up to 60h/week. Scaling back to max 30-35 hours like in more progressive countries sounds interesting. c.f. Michael Moore's "where to invade next" (I usually don't like his style, but I liked that movie)
A few countries are in talks about converting most types of social benefits into a flat garanteed minimum revenue (which is then taxed). Countries considering this include Canada and a few EU countries (Switzerland are probably the most advanced in this discussion).
Instead of racing to the bottom, competing for bad jobs, we should level the playing field and give people more options in order to adapt to this new economy. Although I guess it's obvious by now that I'm Canadian :)
I can't find any more recent news, or mentions on the Sion public transport site, so my guess is they are still in testing and their planned rollout in "spring 2016" has been delayed.
This strikes me as an interesting approach that could maybe be generalized by a company like Uber.
We know some of the biggest problems with self-driving cars are:
- Needing extremely precise, up to date maps
- Inclement weather / conditions
Which suggests to me that if you chose a particular city, mapped it out extensively, and then only allowed these cars on the road during good weather conditions...you could deploy these things much, much more rapidly
And of course since consumers wouldn't buy a car that they can't use much of the time or take outside the city limits, the natural use-case of this is as an on-demand taxi service, like Uber or Lyft.
Never thought that I would learn something about my small school town on HN !
It's true that you can go almost everywhere on foot in a reasonable amount of time but some interesting places (for example pond where you can do BBC and drink) are remote and walking one hour just to get there sucks. Ordering a bus to get you and your friends there would be perfect
On a separated, fixed guideway it's not too difficult to have an autonomous systems. Airports, metros, and even "personal people movers" like in Morgantown all work without a driver on board. As you said, moving to the chaos that is a street is a different story.
[+] [-] trgn|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sokoloff|10 years ago|reply
I'm wagering that most everyone who thinks this way is mentally comparing against their most familiar American city. In Germany and Switzerland (and probably others), the trains and buses run on a schedule, and if a train is more than about 30 seconds late, you'll see the locals starting to anxiously cross-check their watches with each other.
When you can plan down to the minute, using public transport becomes much more convenient and efficient (This is easier with trains than buses, though the buses do stop and wait at stops until it's time for them to proceed).
[+] [-] kuschku|10 years ago|reply
I’d argue that having no schedule is even worse.
With a set schedule, I can just go to the stop, wait a minute, and a bus will come – most lines are running every 5 or 10 minutes anyway (or 15 to 20min in the suburbs).
With this, the situation would get a lot worse, I’d have higher waiting times, less of a guarantee that one would come (what if there’s not enough demand?), etc.
[+] [-] godzillabrennus|10 years ago|reply
What's really scary is that all signs point to the end of the blue collar workforce being near. Drones to do construction, to operate the trains, planes and automobiles, so that us and our cargo get where they need to go. What's the plan for replacing work after this new era arrives?
Futurists popularized that we would have robot servants for generations and it's becoming true. They didn't popularize the notion that 1% of the population would own all the robots.
[+] [-] loup-vaillant|10 years ago|reply
Who cares? Anybody sees a problem with automating away so many jobs that unemployment rises to 50% and beyond? Unemployment is not a problem. It's how we deal with it that is. You just can't expect everyone to work when machines do all the work.
So… how about we all work less? What about a 4 days work-week, or even 3? How about automating so much work that voluntary community service becomes enough?
We need to think about it soon, because the current model is not pretty: just let the jobless starve, and lock them up (or out) when they start to demand jobs or (gasp!) money. And if things get ugly, send the army bots. "Shoot on sight" is pretty easy to automate, if you don't care to discriminate.
> hey didn't popularize the notion that 1% of the population would own all the robots.
The heart of the problem, really. To this, I see only one solution: abolishing lucrative property, communist scare crow be dammed.
[+] [-] mgbmtl|10 years ago|reply
A few countries are in talks about converting most types of social benefits into a flat garanteed minimum revenue (which is then taxed). Countries considering this include Canada and a few EU countries (Switzerland are probably the most advanced in this discussion).
Instead of racing to the bottom, competing for bad jobs, we should level the playing field and give people more options in order to adapt to this new economy. Although I guess it's obvious by now that I'm Canadian :)
[+] [-] krapp|10 years ago|reply
There is no plan, beyond the rich getting richer.
[+] [-] kome|10 years ago|reply
Communism.
[+] [-] raus22|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] thibaut_barrere|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] fiatjaf|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] kristopolous|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jacalata|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Futurebot|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] darawk|10 years ago|reply
We know some of the biggest problems with self-driving cars are:
Which suggests to me that if you chose a particular city, mapped it out extensively, and then only allowed these cars on the road during good weather conditions...you could deploy these things much, much more rapidlyAnd of course since consumers wouldn't buy a car that they can't use much of the time or take outside the city limits, the natural use-case of this is as an on-demand taxi service, like Uber or Lyft.
[+] [-] icefo|10 years ago|reply
It's true that you can go almost everywhere on foot in a reasonable amount of time but some interesting places (for example pond where you can do BBC and drink) are remote and walking one hour just to get there sucks. Ordering a bus to get you and your friends there would be perfect
[+] [-] elorant|10 years ago|reply
http://www.ekathimerini.com/201509/article/ekathimerini/comm...
[+] [-] ratsimihah|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Animats|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jimktrains2|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] fiatjaf|10 years ago|reply