KCRag Forum

.

.

.

The implications of the near future of driverless, self-automated vehicles, is mind-boggling.

The impact on cities, and mass transit, will be dramatic.

How Uber’s Autonomous Cars Will Destroy 10 Million Jobs And Reshape The Economy by 2025

http://tinyurl.com/nu7qkko

FangKC wrote:The implications of the near future of driverless, self-automated vehicles, is mind-boggling.

The impact on cities, and mass transit, will be dramatic.

How Uber’s Autonomous Cars Will Destroy 10 Million Jobs And Reshape The Economy by 2025

http://tinyurl.com/nu7qkko

replace "autonomous cars" with "robots" or "internet" and subtract 20 or 30 years, respectively.

.

pash wrote:Starting with articles from the Wall Street Journal and the Financial Times last week, rumors have been flying about Apple getting into the automotive business. Seems slightly absurd, but it's clear that Apple has already hired at least a couple hundred people with strong automotive backgrounds, including the ex-CFO of General Motors Europe and a lot of battery people; they're definitely putting together a team that's working on something pretty big.

WSJ and the FT both claim straight out that Apple is building an electric car, wanting to bring it to market around 2020 if things go to plan. I guess when you have $170 billion in cash just sitting around, it might actually make sense to try something like this. ...

And so far John Gruber of darringfireball.net has not poo-poo'd the news, so I'd say there's something to it.

It's amazing seeing history repeat itself in such a short amount of time. There have been endless quotes from auto CEOs and the like about how hard of a time Apple will have entering this market. It's like we've traveled back 10 years and Nokia, LG and Motorola are telling Apple how hard the mobile phone industry is.

.

The thing I find most interesting about the article is how it will affect cities. Less need for parking will completely change the ability of the older parts of the city to regenerate themselves.

It also has huge implications for seniors who no longer drive, and the disabled. They will be less dependent on others to drive them.

I've been seeing, in the past couple years, friends getting rid of their cars and using a combo of buses, bike, cabs and Uber. Now that I finally have a car that was made in the last decade, it's easy to see how you could do that and come out way ahead, forgoing the initial cost ($12,000 used), maintenance, comprehensive insurance, gas, etc. And it's only slightly less convenient.

It would free up a lot of people's incomes for other things.

I know that I don't use my car that much. Somewhere between 1000-2000 miles annually. Mostly to get groceries, and other larger items, or to go places where the bus doesn't go. If I could summon a car to my house anytime I wanted, and the same at the grocery store, and it would be cheaper than a cab, I would certainly consider giving up my car.

Google Streetview has certainly curtailed my driving a lot. I used to do a lot of driving around looking at things around the City. Now I can see almost anything I want online without leaving the house.

.

You will drive to St. Louis because your meeting is at 3:00 and the train won't get your there until 4:00. And you will have to spend the night since the next train back home won't be until the next morning. Instead you can have a dinner after the meeting, drive home, and be in bed by 11:00.

.

Who said anything about speed. It is a matter of when the trains run, their schedule. And yes, one drive point-to-point faster than taking Amtrak.
As I said the meeting in StL is at 3:00 but the train arrives an hour later. Yeah, take the train and be an hour late. Oh, forgot about the travel time from the station to the place of the meeting.

.

It has nothing to do with travel times. My example at first had to do with the time of the meeting and the arrival time of the train, which was "after" the meeting time. So what good does taking the train do if you are late to the meeting? And then the next train leaving for home isn't until the next morning?

Are you changing the train schedule so that one leaves every hour so it doesn't matter what time the meeting is? BTW, not using current schedule for times, times are just examples. Anyway, if you want to use the current schedule the travel time between KC and StL is 5 hrs 40 min. In addition if you use the current schedule and the meeting ends after 4:00 you will have to spend the night in StL and won't get back to KC until 2:55 in the afternoon the day after the meeting.

Using the current schedule again your meeting is at 1:00 but the train doesn't get you there until 1:55. Yeah, that does you some good.

.

Why is Amtrak such a money loser?

NDTeve wrote:Why is Amtrak such a money loser?

- legacy cost structure (labor, outdated equipment, debt load)
- host railroad interference (drives up labor and fuel costs)
- limited connections when people arrive without a car (although you can rent cars near the KCY and STL stations)
- limited frequency everywhere except northeast and california

also, why are highways such a money loser? all that modot does is ask for MOAR money!