The tipping point is just a few years out

Never going to happen for me and if it does then I'll move elsewhere since I have zero interest in that much population density.
Speaking of which: the best thing we could do for this planet is stop producing people, not producing better ways for them to get around.
 
john61ct said:
. . . . pro-corporate brainwashing that government is not an efficient provider of services.

What about the brainwashing that the government has EVER been any good at providing services? You LIKED the Soviet Union?

Same problem as the robot EMS, the robot government packs compassion.
 
Dauntless said:
What about the brainwashing that the government has EVER been any good at providing services?
ATC and the FAA work pretty well. Ditto the FCC. NASA has been pretty successful. Most people appreciate roads, water systems and sewers.
 
The government only provides what it has to that's clearly obvious due to lots of areas becoming run down and left behind it's these areas that will not be covered by this vast AI car network, look at cell phone towers even after 30 years there's areas in highly developed country's that still rely on a wired connection and yet 5g is rolling out in the city's.

We once had a great transport system with vast links when it was deemed to costly sir beecham axed most of the lines and British government put their eggs in the tarmac basket and built motorways.

There's pictures of the valleys in the 60's with barely a car in the street only the rich had them but that changed when the uk invaided Saudi they colnised 100 years later it delivered oil to itself in vast quantity till an uprising that led to gas shortages in the 70's and a number of silly micro cars like the peel 50.

I'm not saying there can't be change but people won't let go of what they have grasped easily even if it is for the greater good as more see it as pissing in the wind far too late it's like pressing the brakes as you see the stationary car 10 feet away but your still in the motorway going to plough into a big accident.

Climate change is the stationary car earth is the vehicle on the collision course and we are the driver /passengers doomed trying to press the brakes to limit the accidents carnage but we are not acting in a controlled manner we missed the brake pedal and butter fingered the steering wheel it's over.
 
Ianhill said:
The government only provides what it has to that's clearly obvious due to lots of areas becoming run down and left behind it's these areas that will not be covered by this vast AI car network, look at cell phone towers even after 30 years there's areas in highly developed country's that still rely on a wired connection and yet 5g is rolling out in the city's.
Cellphone providers are private companies - not government.
 
Ianhill said:
..... it's like pressing the brakes as you see the stationary car 10 feet away but your still in the motorway going to plough into a big accident.

Climate change is the stationary car earth is the vehicle on the collision course and we are the driver /passengers doomed trying to press the brakes to limit the accidents carnage but we are not acting in a controlled manner we missed the brake pedal and butter fingered the steering wheel it's over.
We have only ever been passengers in that car, never the driver.
And the brake pedal and steering wheel are not connected to any useful control mechanism.
But also, ..that stationary car might just be an illusion ??
 
Hillhater said:
Ianhill said:
..... it's like pressing the brakes as you see the stationary car 10 feet away but your still in the motorway going to plough into a big accident.

Climate change is the stationary car earth is the vehicle on the collision course and we are the driver /passengers doomed trying to press the brakes to limit the accidents carnage but we are not acting in a controlled manner we missed the brake pedal and butter fingered the steering wheel it's over.
We have only ever been passengers in that car, never the driver.
And the brake pedal and steering wheel are not connected to any useful control mechanism.
But also, ..that stationary car might just be an illusion ??

I'm afraid fella outside of the sensationalism of the media the car is real and warming is still going to happen just like the AI cars but just like reality it will be slower climate change over 150 years or so and AI cars will gather pace in 20 years or so after wide spread EV adoption and better more wide spread infrastructure in place but again all this manufacturing will release gases in a closed loop.

Those gases got to go somewhere maybe carbon capture wells etc will buy us time but a very serious look at this issue needs to be done world wide we need to unite at a time of division it looks bleak for our grandchildren in a world of 15 billion + people the hive will have to be vastly different to have any hope of being sustainable.
 
Chalo said:
They offer a massively increased potential beyond that-- because each one can serve many more passengers per car, they will obey traffic laws, and they can coordinate with each other to an unprecedented degree.

Agree on the second two points - there should be a reduction in traffic as it should flow more smoothly with multiple vehicles coordinating their movements. However, I live out in the sticks and I can't not turn up to work because of a shortage of self-driving taxis in the morning. So, to guarantee ~99.9% availability* there will have to be almost one driverless taxi per person - a marginal improvement in vehicle reduction.

*I was going to put 99% but that would make everyone late for work about three days per year, which is probably too much unless employers become more flexible in light of the new transport revolution. By comparison availability of person vehicle for commuting has been better than 99.9% (could be 100% if I trust my memory). Perhaps I'm biased by the typical experience of rural taxi services being expensive and unavailable at busy times.
 
billvon said:
Ianhill said:
The government only provides what it has to that's clearly obvious due to lots of areas becoming run down and left behind it's these areas that will not be covered by this vast AI car network, look at cell phone towers even after 30 years there's areas in highly developed country's that still rely on a wired connection and yet 5g is rolling out in the city's.
Cellphone providers are private companies - not government.

Major company's are the funding force of government election campaign with the thought processing to look good for today these same people united screw our country in the interest of business not the people.
 
Ianhill said:
Major company's are the funding force of government election campaign with the thought processing to look good for today these same people united screw our country in the interest of business not the people.
Unless you are a shareholder in that company. And with today's mutual fund 401k's, that's not unlikely for many people.

But yes, everyone wants government to do what they want. Big corporations want tax breaks for corporations. The rich want tax cuts for the rich. The middle class wants tax breaks for the middle class.

And of course there's all that money the government spends. Bike lovers want more money spent on bike infrastructure. Bird lovers want bird sanctuaries. Drivers want potholes fixed. Golf courses want cheaper water. Hawks want more bombs. Who is "right?" Whoever contributes the most money.
 
Punx0r said:
However, I live out in the sticks and I can't not turn up to work because of a shortage of self-driving taxis in the morning. So, to guarantee ~99.9% availability* there will have to be almost one driverless taxi per person - a marginal improvement in vehicle reduction.

Yes, people living outside the city-- who work in the city every day-- is a kind of derangement predicated on the assumption that everybody has his own car and doesn't mind wasting his life driving it (and paying for it). When that assumption goes away, people will do a better job working close to where they live, or telecommuting.

I think the overall trend will be that of people moving inwards towards city centers, but there will surely also be a countertrend of suburbs and exurbs developing more life support and economic activity.
 
Chalo said:
Punx0r said:
However, I live out in the sticks and I can't not turn up to work because of a shortage of self-driving taxis in the morning. So, to guarantee ~99.9% availability* there will have to be almost one driverless taxi per person - a marginal improvement in vehicle reduction.

Yes, people living outside the city-- who work in the city every day-- is a kind of derangement predicated on the assumption that everybody has his own car and doesn't mind wasting his life driving it (and paying for it). When that assumption goes away, people will do a better job working close to where they live, or telecommuting.

I think the overall trend will be that of people moving inwards towards city centers, but there will surely also be a countertrend of suburbs and exurbs developing more life support and economic activity.

I got i agree with your ideas but I can only speak for the UK and there it's been the very opposite people are traveling further than ever before to reach large enterprise zones for work, with rising house prices in the populated areas and wage stagnation there been little growth for 20 years some even travel to London from Wales every morning 175 miles one way to work that's not for me I hate traffic jams and wasting time but I do like driving it's not a pain in the arse to me I even enjoy it and go out occasionally just to chill out that's what I'll miss the most.
 
billvon said:
Ianhill said:
Major company's are the funding force of government election campaign with the thought processing to look good for today these same people united screw our country in the interest of business not the people.
Unless you are a shareholder in that company. And with today's mutual fund 401k's, that's not unlikely for many people.

But yes, everyone wants government to do what they want. Big corporations want tax breaks for corporations. The rich want tax cuts for the rich. The middle class wants tax breaks for the middle class.

And of course there's all that money the government spends. Bike lovers want more money spent on bike infrastructure. Bird lovers want bird sanctuaries. Drivers want potholes fixed. Golf courses want cheaper water. Hawks want more bombs. Who is "right?" Whoever contributes the most money.

I get there's a pecking order I've been at the bottom of it long enough to see that money flows up the tree and the top is all the power with leaves but the roots are in decay and there's disease stopping the flourishing summer buds reaching their potential.

Look at the current world debt crisis governments are majorly in debt to someone and they have the power to control and manipulate as they like we all run around the stock market like headless chickens there's no long term stability for ideas as democracy means when the other party gets in they wreck everything, and in turn they are both as bad as each other UK or USA and many others and thats the humian country's of the world not the self destructing ones with all the arms we keep supplying them.
 
Hillhater said:
Grantmac said:
Capitalism has always been the driver and all it cares about is how fast it can go.
So, which alternative to Capitalism would you propose ?
Socialism ?
Communism ?
Fascism ?
Etc ?
Etc ?
Careful what you wish for !

That sounds like something a citizen of a socialist, Communist, or Fascist country would say to one of their countrymen.

Just because it's what we know best doesn't make it best, or even decent. And it doesn't mean that it works in favor of the majority, or even in its own favor over the long term. Left to its own tendencies, capitalism eats its seed corn, burns its furniture for heat, sells its own home, robs its neighbors, and abandons its children. Y'know, because that's what gives good results for the upcoming quarterly report.
 
Hillhater said:
So, which alternative to Capitalism would you propose ?
Socialism ?
Communism ?
Fascism ?
Etc ?
Etc ?
Careful what you wish for !

The only one that's ever improved life for the working class: socialism.
 
Hillhater said:
So, which alternative to Capitalism would you propose ?
Socialism ?
Communism ?
Fascism ?
I propose our mix - capitalism with some socialism and communism mixed in. Take the best of each one and reject the worst.
 
Wait a minute, what are you guys even discussing? It's not just Bill this time.

Well, okay, there's no such thing as 'Mixing in' a little arsnic, (Socialism), fascism, (Cyande), starvation, (Communism), as though you can come up with a healthy mix. Do you even think about how little poison actually kills you? As long as the basic premise of the three is violent enforcement they'll never coexist with anything.

I forgot the title, I stopped reading because it was so insipid, but a recent book touting it's not as bad as it seems was saying that once the newly unemployed lose their houses and starve to death, once the people who lost their health insurance because of Obamacare drop dead, the rest of us are just supposed to giggle and pick over the remains like good communists.

And the only was Socialism has ever improved things for the working class has been by dying out. (U.S.S.R., China, European countries. . . .)

So is it when all the class warfare fails that this ripping point can come?
 
Dauntless said:
Well, okay, there's no such thing as 'Mixing in' a little arsnic, (Socialism), fascism, (Cyande), starvation, (Communism), as though you can come up with a healthy mix.
So public roads, national parks, the US military, air traffic control, the CDC, the FAA, the NTSB, the US patent and trademark office, police and fire departments - these are all "poison?"

I am glad most people are not like you.
 
Hillhater said:
Bill, All your examples are the result of a Capitalist system
No problem then. All the "socialist" programs people are complaining about are also the result of a mostly capitalist system, so we're good.

But good to see you don't follow the asinine claims that such things are "poison."
 
Dauntless said:
Wait a minute, what are you guys even discussing? It's not just Bill this time.

Well, okay, there's no such thing as 'Mixing in' a little arsnic, (Socialism), fascism, (Cyande), starvation, (Communism), as though you can come up with a healthy mix. Do you even think about how little poison actually kills you? As long as the basic premise of the three is violent enforcement they'll never coexist with anything.
<snip>

It is funny that you bring up arsenic. It is an essential dietary element for a number of animals and it is unclear what its role is in humans but it might very well turn out to be essential.

While I'm a big fan of and proponent of capitalism, I also recognize that there are practical limits in applying it. The simplest and most obvious are things like ownership of the air, land and water surfaces and things that fall into the economic category of being a "public good."

In general, I'd caution against being quick to treat such broad reaching concepts like capitalism, socialism and so forth in a strictly binary way. I agree that advocating the mix of these "isms" is problematic. But the reality is that all approaches and solutions are problematic. That seems to be unavoidable.
 
billvon said:
But good to see you don't follow the asinine claims that such things are "poison."

Agreed. But frequently they are not the best solution and they over-reach in their influence and effect. But that will be the ongoing debate in a probably necessary mixed system. People will tend to disagree on what the best mix is based on their own personal biases.
 
Back
Top