Green, ethical, energy issues in the news

zeupater wrote: »

if you think that's bad, try and get a parcel delivered to houses with a name & a postcode, but no number!!

Or in the case of any of our neighbours, even quoting a house number doesn't necessarily mean that delivery drivers will find them ! Approximately 40 houses share our postcode; some of them almost half a mile away. But anyone reliant upon typing in a postcode and a number will find themselves abandoned at our gate (which just happens to be the centre of the postcode area). The 'problem' is that the houses in our vicinity are not numbered in a recognisable geographical sequence (I suspect they were numbered in order of sale of the plots in 1920) so Ordnance Survey (or whoever it is that creates the computerised maps used by satnavs) haven't worked out how to process the last few yards.

Well we live in a new build (2014) and delivery drivers can never find our house. Our address is '5 (house name), road name' but google maps will just take everyone to '5 road name'.

I have tried to get google to change it several times, but they just say they disagree that the point I mark on the map is actually a house.

As for shops, I don't live in a desolate area but it would take me over an hour to get milk without a car. The nearest shop isn't too far away, but it is at the top of quite a large hill, and there isn't a direct route.

silverwhistle wrote: »

It's a complicated issue, that's for sure, but one of the things I'd highlight is 'need'. I have a car and sometimes use it because of 'want', but if I didn't, as was the case for many years, the solutions would be different. I'm constantly amazed at how short some of the journeys are for which people use their cars, and how different people's 'wants' and 'needs' are. Having said that, it's only 3.5 miles to football training later tonight, but I'm sorry, I'm not using the pushbike!

Frankly the example of running out of milk I still don't reckon to be a good one, but my blood pressure tablets might qualify, even though running out would be an equal example of bad organisation!:-)

Transport, like the grid, needs a multi-mode solution, depending on circumstances, and that is something most of us would agree on, I suspect.

Hi

As mentioned earlier, for 'milk' you could substitute literally hundreds of situations where the inconvenience of having to wait for an autonomous vehicle to arrive would be either inconvenient or unacceptable ... a telephone call in the middle of the night from an elderly relative might be better, but it's not the actual situation that matters because there are so many different ones which could apply .. milk was simply anecdotal ...

Regarding 'wants' & 'needs' ... well I'd agree that there's a difference, however this is the 21st century and modern living has created a grey area between the two ... do we really 'need' central heating, carpets, computers, fridges, watches, kettles, TVs or even dining rooms & spare bedrooms ? ... probably not but try to ban them and there'd be riots on the streets!

The thing is that cars have now also become consumer items rather than a personal method of transport & people have become used to that being the case. Do we 'need' a car in our household, probably not if public transport was reliable and frequent or private hire vehicles were cheaper & nearer than they are ... but, they're not and that's a source of inconvenience which to many people isn't really a point open to compromise ...

I have a pretty decent understanding of AI, self-learning & automated systems and have direct experience of various forms of this kind of technology spanning at least three decades which leaves me more than a little worried about system reliability, fault redundancy and misinterpretation at the moment. If £100million airliners which are serviced extremely regularly have had the ability to take-off, fly to a destination and land fully automatically for decades but still need a fully crewed cockpit because a technical failure could result in hundreds of fatalities, how on earth can an autonomous vehicle without a similar frequency automation-equipment (sensors, processors, power etc) checking regime, or even a second-hand mass market, be allowed to exist when each and every one of those vehicles could certainly result in similar numbers of casualties as a plane crash ?? .... I'd certainly be looking to divest from automotive & insurance stocks if I had investments in these market sectors as the initial/early risk would be huge and undoubtedly someone in these sectors will be the first to be caught-out and suffer critically ...

I really appreciate the vision of those driving these projects, however, in understanding the fundamentals of high-availability and mission-critical systems - I'll look & wonder at the technologies involved, yet not look to buy or even get into an autonomous vehicle for decades, if ever ... more than that, I'd probably even invest in a driverless car proximity alarm system when someone develops one! ... :cool:

HTH
Z

Dave_Fowler wrote: »

I'd be more concerned about all the rubbish that thoughtless people would leave behind in the autonomous car. Take a car from the town centre to their house complete with a take-away and leave all the packaging and left-overs in the car, or worse still, return from the pub having drunk far too much - since they don't have to drive. The car won't know what's been left behind on the seats or the floor. You wouldn't want a car like that to arrive at your home to pick you up for a journey.

Dave F

Hi

... and there was me wondering why Friday & Saturday late night cabs had a much stronger leather-polish aroma than the rest of the week! ....

Z

Exiled_Tyke wrote: »

A brilliant significant step forward.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-42190358

100-megawatt, but at what cost of supply and what cost of periodic replacement? This could be a case of technology being ahead of the market.