Could Amtrak Be Replaced With Something Better?

[Devil's Advocate]

A few months ago there was an editorial in the Wall Street Journal by a guy named Jenkins who predicted that truly autonomous vehicles that are 100% "driverless" are very likely decades away.  Everyone has become so wound up about driverless technology that they fail to see that.  There are just too many issues needed to address.

I'll never forget the story of how Henry Ford envisioned building a fleet of private automobiles to replace horse and buggy services.  It always starts off with several decades of sitting around waiting for Mrs. Journal to release her pearls and for Mr. Journal to replace his fallen monocle.

 

[Metra Electric Rider]

I don't see the driverless car being the big success it's promoters see - kinda like the segway which was going to "transform" urban planning. Things that are hyped often end up as flops (videophones, for instance, remember them?).

There are already plenty of driverless trains - lots of airport systems and numerous metro/subway systems (closed systems granted).

 

[OnlyMe]

I myself am wondering about Amtrak's sustainability.

I know the conversation somewhat drifted to talking about self-driving cars, but if any of you have the time you should look into another proposed project by Mr. Musk called the hyperloop. Its an interesting concept but if he does manage to get it running at a feasible cost and it does meet expectations. I could see that really being a thorn in modern day transportation's side. 

 

[jis]

Teleportation will replace everything eventually [emoji51]

 

[Devil's Advocate]

I don't see the driverless car being the big success it's promoters see - kinda like the segway which was going to "transform" urban planning. Things that are hyped often end up as flops (videophones, for instance, remember them?).

It's true that video phones made no sense in the POTS line era, but the consumer demand hype was real and those concepts eventually morphed into services like Skype and Facetime.  Services which have become ubiquitous worldwide.  The creator of the Segway is dead but multi-purpose streets with separate areas for walking, riding, and driving live on without him.  Nobody is rebuilding entire cities in a single generation, but designs for new and repurposed areas often reflect these changes.  Not to mention the explosion of powered scooters and bicycles urban centers are experiencing today. 

If you think antonymous cars don't have a big future then maybe you should consider this.   Roughly 90% of the time our private vehicles are sitting around collecting dust.  The rest of the time they're joining already clogged streets and freeways during rush hour to and from work.  That represents a huge waste of time and resources.  Antonymous vehicles aren't a miraculous invention, but if implemented properly they might be able to flip that script.  Imagine reducing the number of vehicles competing with your commute by half or more and yet still maintaining 90% productivity by making delivery runs outside of the commuter rush.

Teleportation will replace everything eventually

Yeah, they'll replace your original body with some sort of molecular replica.  Most of what we see in Star Trek would require a species that was able to devote a global focus toward science, technology, and cooperation without concern for color or race or nationality.  In other words, a species that was almost entirely unlike humanity.

 

[cpotisch]

Sttom & Group,

You know what, a few months ago there was an editorial in the Wall Street Journal by a guy named Jenkins who predicted that truly autonomous vehicles that are 100% "driverless" are very likely decades away.  Everyone has become so wound up about driverless technology that they fail to see that.  There are just too many issues needed to address.

Actually, from a technical perspective, Teslas are already pretty much completely autonomous. A Model S can literally drive off and park itself with no one inside, and can read all sort of street signs and road markings. It's just that the laws currently require someone to be at the wheel, which is actually a pretty dangerous middle ground, since neither the "driver" nor the car really know what their role is.

 

[cpotisch]

That scares me.  In my own personal, honest, humble opinion, driverless trucks should NEVER be allowed on the Nation's highways but that's just me.

If you look at actual science and statistics, you will see that self driving cars objectively have a significantly lower crash rate than human-driven cars. It might seem concerning to see a big scary truck driving by a computer, but that really just comes down to human psychology.

 

[sttom]

I myself am wondering about Amtrak's sustainability.

I know the conversation somewhat drifted to talking about self-driving cars, but if any of you have the time you should look into another proposed project by Mr. Musk called the hyperloop. Its an interesting concept but if he does manage to get it running at a feasible cost and it does meet expectations. I could see that really being a thorn in modern day transportation's side. 

The hyperloop is basically a maglev in a vacuum tube. Maglev technology already exists and could become viable if the Japanese have anything to say about it. Now self driving cars will become a reality, probably not as soon as the promoters say they will. But the hyperloop probably won't become a reality, but Maglevs are a hard eventually. 

 

[neroden]

Actually, from a technical perspective, Teslas are already pretty much completely autonomous.

Yeah, not really.  I actually own one, y'know.  And I've studied this stuff extensively.

Basically, there are a ridiculously large number of corner cases which "self-driving" fails to handle correctly.  It's going to take decades to get them all implemented.  Until then, you need a human to deal with the situations where the car goes "I don't know what to do", or worse, does something blatantly wrong.

It's pretty easy to implement self-driving on a well-maintained, standardized, Interstate-standards highway in good weather... and they haven't actually managed to do *that* reliably yet.  The railroad tracks are an even more heavily controlled and regulated environment, so self-driving works perfectly there.

The problem comes with the idiosyncractic, irregular, non-standardized environment of city streets and rural roads -- which is most of the country's roadways.  They're so far from functioning on these environments that Tesla specifically tells people NOT to use Autopilot in these areas.

Self-parking?  Again, working in VERY limited environments. Well-marked parking lots or extremely well-marked garages or very well marked curbsides.  The sort of places I park up here in Ithaca?  Not a *chance* and nobody with a Tesla here (there are lots) has gotten it to work.

 

[neroden]

If you look at actual science and statistics, you will see that self driving cars objectively have a significantly lower crash rate than human-driven cars.

That's largely because the average human is god-awful incompetent at driving.  In the US, even the absolute worst drivers who have records of running over multiple people are STILL GIVEN DRIVER'S LICENSES.  That brings the average for human-driven cars down a lot!

Current "self-driving" cars are objectively very bad drivers, much worse than anyone who actually really learned their professional defensive driving lessons.  Unfortunately, at least half of humans are even worse.  I think the solution is to massively restrict drivers' licenses, but our society thinks that people "need" to drive cars, even if they have a record of running people over.

People who aren't competent to get drivers' licenses should be on the streetcar, which gets us back to the GM/Standard Oil/Firestone Tire streetcar conspiracy and the need for more trains...