What a driverless world could look like | Wanis Kabbaj
Вставка
- Опубліковано 14 лис 2016
- What if traffic flowed through our streets as smoothly and efficiently as blood flows through our veins? Transportation geek Wanis Kabbaj thinks we can find inspiration in the genius of our biology to design the transit systems of the future. In this forward-thinking talk, preview exciting concepts like modular, detachable buses, flying taxis and networks of suspended magnetic pods that could help make the dream of a dynamic, driverless world into a reality.
TEDTalks is a daily video podcast of the best talks and performances from the TED Conference, where the world's leading thinkers and doers give the talk of their lives in 18 minutes (or less). Look for talks on Technology, Entertainment and Design -- plus science, business, global issues, the arts and much more.
Find closed captions and translated subtitles in many languages at www.ted.com/translate
Follow TED news on Twitter: / tednews
Like TED on Facebook: / ted
Subscribe to our channel: / tedtalksdirector - Наука та технологія
*TED:* How to design a walkable city
*Also TED:*
Complex solutions that require a lot of money or healthy vibrant cities that are economically siund
underground passage and a bridge across the street could fix that
@@tukangpempek5390 That's fine for able bodied people, that don't sweat in hotter and longer summers. But what about elderly or people in wheelchairs? Do people on bikes have to carry them up and down stairs for every intersection? That intersection he showed should only happen in very limited situations.
@@tukangpempek5390 Would you want to live in a city where you had to climb up stairs every time you wanted to cross the street? Is that a pleasant walking experience? Would you want to go on long walks? Would old people and the disabled be able to go anywhere? How would bikes cross the street? It's been tried and it's a failed solution. It's a band-aid solution to "fix" the problem of cars killing people. Don't treat the symptom, and instead get rid of the root cause, the car. They don't belong in cities because they can kill you.
@@tukangpempek5390 just look at what underground and bridge crossing done to your country. Nothing gets done.
If they came up with vehicles that could drive themselves at speed between oncoming cars at intersections, they'd better have a toilet paper holder.
Well there goes my screen and my coffee. Thanks green silver
And something to clean the blood of the pedestrians and bikers
It wont matter in a very short time Sure, we have to get use to it; but if this was installed tomorrow. the young generations would never know anything different.
You could just ditch the windows or close your eyes and have Morning Mood by Edvard Grieg playing on the speakers. :D
I bet the people from 100 years ago would say the same thing about airplanes.
This feels like the outdated thinking of city planners from the 50s and 60s when the car was the future and putting motorways through everything was the solution, while completely forgetting about pedestrians, cyclists or just humans in general. This has resulted in a lot of cities where you need a car to get anywhere, but you are still stuck in endless traffic.
Places like the Netherlands have already solved most of this, by reducing the amount of cars (the source of the problem) and making places easily accessible by public transport, bikes or on foot. The solution isn't self driving loud cars flowing like blood, but to stop car centric thinking and simply copy what the Netherlands has been doing for years when planning their cities.
Americans desire comfort. We don't want to bike to work in the heat, cold, rain, and blizzards. We don't grind 40 hours a week only to bike to work. Europeans don't desire comfort as much as Americans that's why they smell much worse. Also you still need roads for logistics so might as well optimize them as much as possible. The Netherlands GDP per capita is much lower than the US for a reason The US is a nation centered around individuals. Most of us don't desire to bike alongside strangers or sit next to them on trains and there's nothing wrong with that. Europeans desire collectivism which isn't wrong but it's good to have both ideologies.
I love how this simulation doesn't even take pedestrians into account
Or cyclists.
Yeah, ridiculous. Though one solution would be that the autonomous cars could sometimes be more efficient by driving slow enough to never have to stop at intersections. Probably better than the "hurry and wait" situation we're always in.
they never take people into consideration
I mean when they talk about taking advantage of the vertical dimension, it includes pedestrian tunnels as well, so I guess it would be more efficient to put all pedestrian crossings underground.
@@breadw7490 But woulnd't it be better doing it the other way around then. Pedestrian above ground, vehicular transportation below ground. That way, when you walk you actually get to enjoy the walk.
I can already imagine myself dying of a heart attack because of how scared I'll be that my car is literally running into a filled intersection.
Also this concept seems to take pedestrians out of the equation.
Very cool and exciting. I'm a little sad he didn't mention bicycles or pedestrians at all.
In the future there will be no such things, that's why.
But I like cycling and walking. I don't want to get in a vehicle when I can walk a few minutes.
@Derpster Are you kidding? Of course, there will be pedestrians & bicyclists. In some highly built-up areas, bicyclists may be harder to accommodate.
But you wouldn't use the same roads - sort of like the lymbic system.
Also, have you ever seen a traffic jam with humans? Even in places with the most pedestrians on earth like the Times Square in NY or the Shibuya Crossing in Tokyo the flow almost stays at maximum velocity.
Humans on foot are much more nimble and have a much better feeling of their surroundings (except when occupied whith their smartphone) so they aren't nearly as big of a traffic problem.
MrBaronmoll : I think you meant "lymphatic". They're very different things...
A bit of an oversimplification comparing traffic flow to the flow of red blood cells. The reason red blood cells are fully utilized is because they don’t have set destinations and don’t need to return to exactly where they started. They move around randomly. If human drivers could take the nearest path of least resistance and destination wasn’t a priority, I’m sure our roads would be less congested.
Good point
One we have autonomous vehicles, people will stop buying cars. For a monthly subscription, an autonomous vehicle will show up to your destination through an app. Once you’ve been dropped off, it will pick up someone else who has summoned it. There are, of course, other problems which we will face, but the car will not just sit there in a parking lot, as it does now.
that's what he said.. that blood cells are shared between organs. If they were restricted to specific organs, there would probably be traffic jams. that's why he moved into talking about modular buses and traffic flow.
Thats the idea behind public transport, there is no specific destination but a series of stops along a path
Thank you! I was like why is he even saying that.
My thought : driverless cars will bring the downfall of human transportation; from destroying our social cultures to destroying our lives.
We should understand the limits of technology as we take the right steps in its growth.
The transport module of using mass transit or private vehicles will always be unpredictable.
1. There are people with many cars but will wake up one day and choose to take the bus.
2. There are others who have lots of money but don't see the point of buying a car when they can just lease at way cheaper costs giving them a chance to explore all brands without large costs.
3. There are others who use transit on weekdays because they don't have enough money for maintainance and decide to use their cars only on weekends.
...And the diversity of human kind keeps widening
As a society we should seek a world with diverse options that harmoniously synchronizes together. Not a bias world that looks to widen profits of a few big companies.
I personally don't trust coded programs to drive me from one place to another. They are CODES.
Main disadvantage of driver cars
-Prone to accidents due to unfocused driving . Solution - use codes to stop accidents by altering speeds or directions of the car where necessary
Main disadvantage of driver less cars
- they can be hacked at any time to cause accidents.
Solution - none since there is no driver nor driver mechanism
Please people support right choices for our planet. We only have one.
7:18 "all the adiotional space we will have to enjoy our cities"
10:40: "fast as autobahns with Mumbais intersections"
@jan simonides Do you really or do you just think that you do? You're constantly staring at asphalt, lights, and metal boxes, and when you get going, you're going too fast to enjoy the architecture. And you won't smell the smells, hear the sounds, or meet the people of each neighborhood. It's just you in your metal cocoon.
I also love looking at CD's from the sky
Steven Arvizu *rolls eyes*
Steven Arvizu so shiny ~~~+
CD's NUTS XD
Steven Arvizu hahaha that's what I thought he said at first. I was confused
Steven Arvizu You should drop to your knees and thank God that English is the current Lingua Franca for our planet. Just think if you had to learn to speak Mandarin. I wonder how your pronunciation would be.
10:32 that is what a driverless world would look like
Dipsy Teletubbie internet bless you
Dipsy Teletubbie already looks like this in asia lol
Well, if that is the case, India is way ahead of everyone ;) They have been driving like this forever!
Yea, but, not as fast though.
no thats just what it looks like without women driving
Some ideas for decreasing traffic:
1) Stagger work hours more.
2) Start now with structuring closer home and work spaces in growing cities where possible. A total restructuring of existing layouts may be too expensive unfortunately.
3) Increase remote worker force among employees. Any job where people CAN work at home instead of the office should be a remote job. Defense against nonworking employees should be tied in with production value. If their production/work completion is too low=warn them, then fire them if necessary. Even if they try to do other things than their job while at home, this will certainly make them work.....if they want their job. And, I think most do.
4) Increase public transportation access. If I could design a city it might be something like concentric circles of public-use bicycles, trollies, and buses. Crossing the circles from one side of the city to the other can be sky rails. This is obviously for non-structured cities like ATL. NYC is obviously an excellent model for its subway system which rides along in parallel strands providing stops almost everywhere throughout the city.
5) Car pooling is another one worth mentioning.
What I got from this video is that underground train tunnels etc are real life blood vessels and moving traffic are blood cells.. Really fascinating
As long as pedestrians can still cross the street safely then yay!
I suspect that will be done, cross walks will go away, and jaywalking will come off the books so you can cross any where. You almost won't even have to look both ways. I mean really, that is huge chunk of steel moving pretty quick, try not to put it to the test.
IsYitzach Yeah, that is what concerns me. Inertia is still a thing. lol
I would imagine they would build crosswalks and sidewalks above the road to accommodate pedestrians. That way there would be no chance of anyone getting hurt even accidentally.
Shelby M. That sounds difficult for people in wheelchairs unless it's a little elevator of some kind.
Then why don't they do that more often now? They do it some now, but not very often at all.
If you look closely at 1:04 you still see how Berlin was split into east and west by the color of the light.
krux02 why is that?
Because when Germany was split, almost nobody was allowed to move to the other side of Germany. While West Germans were allowed in East Germany the other way around was not. Therefore trading or even sharing technology was not possible. East and West Berlin therefore used a slightly different technology for street lights. And that's still visible today.
Ben Israel second world war
East has sodium vapor lamps, west has fluorescent lamps. Interesting. Apparently this was brought to people's attention by Chris Hadfield who took a photo of Berlin from the ISS.
krux02 ii
just one human on that traffic grid will spoil entire system lol!
Just one bug in the daily software would do it as well.
Or one mechanical problem.
Absolutely texas. However, there are less bugs and mechanical failures then stupid people. There tech has been taking over out jobs since the creation of the plow. We suck. At literally everything. So as we learn how to break down the stuff we do into the smallest steps, more accurate and less mistake making machines are made to take over.
@@wylie2835
True.
I find the best arguments for automated cars is that it may have technical problems.. The worst being that they simply don't trust them.
"The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration estimates 103 people are killed in the US in motor-vehicle accidents every day, and more than 94% of crashes are due to driver error. Autonomous vehicles could virtually eliminate an entire category of lethal accidents." - Quartz News
Driverless cars are going to evolve while human drivers are still on the road; they'll be forced to deal with human error before the roads even get to being fully autonomous.
I trust a computer to do my job more efficiently and safely than myself. It's not self-interested, it doesn't get distracted, and it doesn't make decisions based on any amount of unstable emotion.
I heard someone actually complaining, when she was 80 and had problems seeing clearly... Amongst other health problems, that her license was taken from her.
Old people on the road is another huge contributor to wanting autonomous vehicles... Nothing against them personally, but I don't think they have any business driving if they can't pass a driver's test made for 15 y/o's.
The actual solution: design easy to walk cities. A place where you go to the groceries by foot, your kids walk to school, your job is a bicycle ride away and entertainment is a few short blocks from your home. Cars would be deincentivated. Instead of being practical, they'd be inconvenient, an unnecessary luxury to go through narrow streets full of pedestrians. This ALONE is a game changer.
A grid this automated will have no signs or lights, making it impossible to navigate without a self driving car.
I’m going to get a car (stick shift) and preserve it to keep it for when the are no more actual cars for drivers. For me driving is fun I hop in turn the key listen the engine pur, find my favorite road my favorite playlist and it is just my escape from the every day monotonous routine. I’m not a commuter I’m a driver.
You’re not a commuter, you’re a nuisance. Don’t get in the way of technology and progress because you like the way primitive tech “feels”. That has never worked.
Zach Hipsley
The closer we get to technology the further we get from humanity
Zach Hipsley I really hate people like you, you can't fathom a world where people choose not to bow down to the stupid tech companies that you fanboy over. If anything, it's people like YOU who are holding the world back
it worked for the amish
@@streamtrollmike5348 strong language from both of you, but yes compromises need to be made, but especially on highways and larger cities autonomous vehicles need to be put in sooner than later, it's such a an easy way to save 100s of lives daily and save days of people's lives yearly
it's easy, all you gotta do is imagine a road with no cars.
deep.
joeycommet45 or any city ~120yrs ago
***** Just imagine a railroad, with no trains
joeycommet45 How about a runway?
Analytic31 So imagine a runway, with no planes
ok without traffic lights how do i get across the frogger death level?
Eric Beach Maybe small Bridges or Tunnles
I love that he asks as "if walking in a city with [early parts of talk] was not exotic enough? [you also get the frogger death level]"
Have you seen the experiments with dutch intersections where there are no traffic lights or anything else?
The rule is pretty simple.
Cars HAVE to give way to pedestrians.
Contrary to what you might expect, that's both safer and more efficient it turns out.
You can't make a bridge every 20 meter or so. Now in the city it's nice to cross the street wherever you want. I don't think people will like it when they can only cross the street via bridges and tunnels every 500 meters... "Hey, let's go to that shop across the street" "Ok, let's walk another 500 meters, i think there is a bridge and then walk 500 meters back." ... No, people just want to keep on crossing streets wherever they want.
Look at the Las Vegas strip. That system already exists.
If somebody created a group on Facebook, against the «driverless car dream» i would join it for sure. I like driving. it gives a person so much freedom, to travel anywhere whenever they want. The feel of being in control of a vehicle its amazing!
I love being in control of a vehicle going 10 mph in highway traffic
I love long drives, I love listening to podcasts on my way to work.
Imagine playing frogger on that animation at the end...
A very Utopian view of things.
No such thing as a utopia. Just like there's no best laptop that we come up with and stop evolving. Next year it'll be thinner, faster, more powerful. Cameras used to use film, now they're digital. There are no fixed notions. Everything changes and evolves. A utopia is impossible. What is possible is doing what we know and have been exposed to.
"A utopia is impossible" - Thats my point.
Yeah I'm agreeing with you. And I don't think that saying it's utopian means it's not possible. (By my definition of utopia it is)
1. We both agree that a utopia is impossible (And btw I meant to say I can't accept the notion of utopia)
2. We both don't agree that what he's saying is not possible.
3. The technology he presents has been around for a while, and is easily achievable.
I don't think it's utopian at all. In comparison to something like The Venus Project (which gets that comment more often), The Venus Project is on a way higher level than the stuff he's talking about here. Honestly the tech he's talking about is so simple.
As long as we're aware of the idea we can create it. If we don't know about it, we won't be able to create it.
In other words, the ideas he presents are very achievable with current technology.
Imagination is the essence of discovery.
Youssef Good one, but I was replying to the OP. My point was that there's no way we can develop our infrastructure without having grand thoughts.
I really hate... when public speakers... feel the need... to pause after each few words... to make it seem... like it's more inspirational... than it really is... thank you.
Techniques for successful public speaking for dummies = sad.
Bahahaa! Nailed that one.
To give the audience time to absorb and process the information better?
:-B Why would you do that? Are you depressed?
Well he is not a native English speaker, he is giving a talk to a lot of people, some might be slower than others and he is talking about something relatively different so that might require some thinking to grasp. I think he did the right thing.
Don't you love when the speaker is actually a good speaker?? This guy is great, good talking and gets the point across without nerves. There are a lot of TED speakers than cannot say the same.
loved the detachable train idea
Jared Hall good idea… will take a lot of work to get there.
Only said that to say it will probably be a while before we get them if we do. Driverless cars are happening right now though… I feel like thats pretty much the same thing
I want to see when this happen, accident rate would be very close to zero and there would be nobody pissing you off on the road.
Sirapob Klarod Exactly!
" accident rate would be very close to zero"
$50 says they'll still make you buy insurance for it.
Grumblebuggy Spergamatron You'd still want insurance, incase of a storm etc or if someone broke into your car.
Frank'sConception They don't make you buy insurance for either of those instances. Not in my state, anyway, and I can't remember ever hearing about someone needing anything more than liability insurance to drive legally.
That's not to mention all the extra work you could get done in the car.
Personally I wouldn't want too many flying cars considering how people maintain their cars and how people litter out of their cars
The human blood circulatory system is not a very good analogy for traffic flow. Blood flow is entirely one-way, there are no intersections with two-way traffic and particles making left- hand turns across an opposing flow. Red blood cells are also not looking for parking spaces.
you wont need parking spaces in the future if a fleet of cars is fully autonomous theyll drop you off at your dfestinantion and move onto the next customer like Uber. When you're ready to leave you hail a ride and the next available autonomous vehicle is notified and leaves the stream of driverless cars. It then picks you up and merges back into the stream of driverless cars on its way to your destination, completely friction less transport.
WHY human blood circulatory system is so effcient? Because everything flow...and cells are semi-solid.
i just want a self driving car because then i could just play videogames on long trips or sleep
And if it's like a larger RV type mode with a bed and bath you could continue on with your life in general, how cool is that?
Don thats would also be cool. would be fun for road trips with friends and family. however the car version in my mind would probably be like a international first class seat. an individual pod with tv and bed.
I agree, it's all you need for those short commutes. This is exciting but at the same time, I can't help but be concerned over potential hacking or AI malfunctions. It's likely manual driving options will be eliminated for optimum "safety" but that puts you at risk of getting your vehicle essentially hijacked and driven off a cliff while the hijacker is sitting miles away, hands on keyboard. Then there's potential for totalitarian government abuse by restricting movement within and outside of the city.
Please don't drive. save a life now...
You know you could just take the train/plane/bus for that. ;)
Umm..where are the pedestrians in that picture?
On elevated sidewalks above the road.
VoxelDraqon That's idiotic.
Rebasepoiss But... Mah FUTURRRE
Rebasepoiss How?
VoxelDraqon Raising up all the sidewalks would be impossible. The alternative would be to build over- or underpasses for pedetrians at every crossing. That would be extremely inconvenient for pedestrians, very expensive and would destroy a lot of inner-cities.
8:50 That moment where you're a lone female, and the creepy guy who's been watching you the whole journey, ends up being segregated into your little personal module that's taking you home.
Don't worry, in this dystopian future, we'll be under constant video surveillance and every single mile you and that creep travel will be logged. :P
I have never seen a UA-cam video get better, more thoughtful comments
I see cars moving, but I don't see folks crossing the street. I don't see pedestrians. I just see cars. So this is your typical car-centric solution that ignores that places like New York City or Paris, have many more people walking and navigating the streets than cars.
And that modular bus? I can see some old person getting confused as to which "car" they need to be in and getting stuck in the wrong one. Or how about a family riding one of these? Junior runs to the back just before the bus splits and goes in different directions. It's a nice idea, but in practice it would end up being more of a bother than a solution.
Does it bother anyone else that Paris allegedly destroyed historical buildings just for the means of "more efficient" transportation, or is it just me?
The Mad Hattress I caught that as well.
The Mad Hattress the past is what holds us back.
no
MarkHinds If we don't learn from the past we are doomed to repeat it, but I digress. Some people, like myself, enjoy studying and learning about antiquity, no matter how "irrelevant" it might be.
The Mad Hattress Paris destroying there own historical buildings is basically like them taking there own flag, taking out a match, and lighting it on fire
Vehicles slow down when they turn...
Damn physics spoiling a good time!
Not for space communists!
But they won't have to break, they'll gas just enough for maximum fuel efficiency
We need a city that only has one road! Now thats pretty efficient, lol
Vehicles slow down also when driver gets old :)
That's the only possible future for an individual traffic system. Great video. Let's do it.
Me at the start of this video: Why would CDs look any different when viewed from above?
atomicmrpelly If you view it from the side, it looks like a sliver :D
9:30 oh, this sweet red Toyota Supra!
Matthey Raz oh damn!
Sweeeeet, move the camera to the right a little please
So now, I won’t even be able to look up and see the sky!? Glad I won’t be around.
Makes a lot of sense if they're all connect and can read one another's action in less than a second...nice....that part at the end sounds cool....just head to your destination as mapped in the car without traffic jam...pretty impressive..
That part at the end does *not* sound cool at all. How is any cyclist or pedestrian supposed to safely cross that mess?
is that top view really automated cars? or india?
It's actually red blood cells shaped like cars.
Bruh u dumb but ill answer anyways. Its a top view of what a world with self driving cars would look like.
no its a bunch of asians
xD so true
david kwon dude its a joke chill
How do you cross the street when the cars don't stop...?
One word: Bridge.
go into a car, drive one the other side
Bridges every where isn't feasible but you could have the zebra crossing/cross walk buttons linked to the network of cars letting them know they need to stop.
You're stuck in today's mindset. When the transportation system is optimized you won't need to cross the street because streets as we know it won't exist.
In the future the shops will come to you, man.
Greetings from Düsseldorf
el Patron
I thought Pablo escobar is from colombia O.o !!
bruh ich heiße Pablo und komme auch aus Düsseldorf ... dann scheint mein Penis wohl doch kleiner zu sein als die Welt :c
YES Wanna Kannabus! Great pics! Awesome talk! DRIVERLESS YESS!!
Curious why no one ever talks about how automatic cars will affect the 50% of us not living in cities. I know that rural areas need them far less than urban areas, but at least a footnote about an idea or two would be appreciated.
PicklesRTasty the honest truth is that rural areas dont have the population density or traffic issues as cities. When driverless cars are used everywhere, id expect the only benefit rural areas would experience would be the lack of speed limits, driving at 150, maybe 200 mph.
It's probably because the number of people not living in cities is quickly decreasing. Though i doubt the difference would be too much.
The most genius minds in urban design don't include bicycles in their 3d renderings.
Non-automated or manually operated bicycles would be too dangerous and unpredictable to allow onto automated roads. There'd likely be either separate bicycle paths (e.g. parks), or under/overground pathways that would be exclusive to bicycles and/or pedestrians.
That's a good thing though - assuming your experiences are like mine and you've nearly been sideswiped by far too many jeeps, taking them away from behind the wheel would be a wonderful, incredible thing.
I'm sure the most genius minds in urban design intentionally left out bicycles.
Benjamin Baril Should be the opposite though autonomous cars should be driving underground and bikers, motorcyclist, and regular cars should be above.
More obesity!
Bicycles can always have separate bicycle paths, or if the government insists that can go on sidewalks. Remember that bicycles have to have a driver, so they would never be allowed on a driverless road.
Because they actually suck as transportation. Sure, works on Amsterdam to get to work, amazing. Now about all the other needs...
We already have public transport that utilises 95% of available space - it’s called the London Underground at rush hour. The point of individuals driving their own cars is that it’s much more comfortable than being compacted into a bus.
Just a thought on the pedestrian crossing. If the entire network is automated you could still have designated crossing times and have the routes adjust slightly
It would work like a valve system
Also you would probably try and limit the bulk of high speed traffic to specific roads (veins) and have the cars travel slower once they're in the side roads (arteries).
Would be nice if a automatic car module arrived and attached to the door of my apartment. Then I hop in, and the car drove where ever I wanted to go. At shop I get directly in, and the car leaves and goes where ever. When I leave the shop, another car arrives next to a waiting room, from where I hop in...
Google has this exact concept. They're envisioning a world where people don't own vehicles, but rather they can contact some kind of vehicle service to pick them up and drop them off.
Basically like if every vehicle on the street was a self-diving taxi that can be called at any time.
isn't that an uber?
Kratax that called Minority Report
Then you get a ghetto taxi.
surely theyd become filthy with people dropping crap in them since the vehicle doesn't belong to them.
In cities like NY they should leave 1 lane only for bikes, skateboards etc. and put a lot more of subway lines
In Toronto, they're having meetings about this. They've been having these meetings for the past couple decades and have barely done anything. But they're certainly having a lot of meetings!
Just beautiful and brilliant. Let's learn from nature and seek out for natural solutions
Blood cells bump against each other, cars can't. However, he makes some good points. Right now some cities require permits to enter, like London. I can see a time when only driverless cars are allowed in certain areas. A car is only allowed in the area if it is driverless capable. The A.I. takes over from that point. Taxis in that area are also driverless, with human driver taxi stands at the edges, just like at airports. This would work great in big cities like New York City, or maybe just portions of it. Likewise, freeways could have the same limitations with driverless capability kicking in at the on ramps and stopping at the off ramps.
1. I don't think driverless and driven cars mix in the same system.
2. People will not want to give up driving.
3. There are areas where each is superior.
Therefore, 4. Cars will be dual capable. They will be hybrids, just like we have hybrids for engine type (electric/gas).
For one, blood cells don't care about their destination or time they get there. That is very different for people and jobs/activities.
They don't care that's true, but it's vital that they get to a specific place at a specific time
I hope you realize that it was just a metaphor. Symbolism.
if the system were to work, there will be a specific amount of time it takes to get wherever you are going. Instead of an estimate time there will be an exact time. Therefore, a person is capable of timing it exactly right, because there are no external factors that may effect timing, i.e. no traffic or stop lights.
***** Although that would be if you exclude the fact that the cars are built by humans, they can break at random times. So can the software, also written by humans. and also other kinds of unpredictable natural events. edit: Though still ofc driverless is the future.
The blood caries:
- OXYGEN;
- NUTRIENTS;
- WASTE etc.
To desired parts of the body...so in contrary, the contents within the blood (which is what he was talking about - not limited to red blood cells) move with an intent to arrive at a destination.
I came up with the modular thing on my own. I also have thought about vehicles that have both wheels for road and wheels like trains. Then long distances can be traveld on rails and the wheels can take over from one rail to another.
What planet is this guy on?!
pipedream salesman selling ideas that arent very well thought out
I'm ready! - I drive 26 miles into NYC from NJ. Most times it's 90 minutes. But at least 2X a month it's 180 mins. Then back home. So 3 to 6 hours driving 52 miles. Oh it's so depressing. At least I am not burning Gasoline or producing Exhaust.
Get another job.
When autonomous car traffic moves like blood cells, the roads will have to be completely isolated from pedestrians. Just like in Russia, the intersections will have to get either underground pedestrian pass-ways or bridges so car traffic is not interrupted. New city road design will completely abandon surface car roads - moving them underground just below surface, by that time all vehicles will be electric so no pollution underground.
We (humans) are so stupid that we'll build roads above and walkways below the surface. Power structures win over logic and quality of life.
It's not just in Russia. I'm from Poland and subways are common in every major city with huge traffic. And these subways are full of shops, bars, restaurants and banks, so the space is also used for many things.
And I wouldn't call it stupid, Shoulders of Giants. It's easier to make a subway for pedestrians, than to literally build entire new underground road system for cars. It can be done only in really small and new cities, where there are still only couple of streets and no major traffic going on. Take Masdar as an example of such city.
Have you ever stood next to a wide Autobahn with cars speeding by at 130+ km/h? It's loud! Really, really loud! And that's not due combustion engines, it's rolling noise. Nobody can live next to it without sound barriers. But because that's apparently not loud enough for this guy, we should add noisy flying cars! And all that in the center of the city! Genius!
We always talk about driverless cars, maybe we should talk more about carless drivers
Skip to 9:20 for the good stuff on driverless cars.
that's the only part of the video that matches the title, but it is still very very poor on the subject.
thanks
Thanks. Not all heroes wear capes!
Best purpose of swarm computing/ intelligence. All computers will communicate seamlessly, resulting in flawless traffic.
agree
That is a hackers wet dream
Flawless. Just like our election system. And corporations.
A senior CEO of an insurance company once told me the main problem of driverless: privacy. No man wants an electronic trail on his way to the gentleman's club or to see his mistress. So, do not worry. Vintage wheels are here to stay.
dan connor lol, privacy.
This sounds like an essay you would write as a kid.
your mom gay
ur mom and dad gay together
you dog gay
I actually did write this exact thing when I was a kid.
It doesn't seam like my essays at all :/
Is this good or bad?
If you have a driverless car but still want to drive, can we develop a "car driving simulator" for a 360° simulation of driving cars?
Matthew Tolentino VR
Yeah, it would be wildly immoral to insist on driving if driverless cars are so much saver.
Matthew Tolentino Hey we revoked people's freedom to drive! What should we do? I know, develop something to make them even lazier while bitching about how lazy they are! Flawless logic! You really are a moron!
Analytic31 Taking away the right to drive and making people sit in some automatic driving car is what will make people more lazy.
To clarify, self driving cars do not make people lazy. Rather, it saves time we spend on the road on doing other stuff. It is also safer, especially if every car is self-driving.
Every time I hear someone talk about how driverless vehicles will revolutionize traffic and there will no longer be a need for traffic lights, they forget about one crucial segment: pedestrians and cyclists.
HallucinatnJack F*ck 'em
HallucinatnJack these cars can easily be programmed to account for pededtrian and biking pathways.
Not so much traffic lights, but how many times have you been slowed down by drivers in front of you wanting to look at something (maybe a crash on the motorway).. these driverless cars would do great on motorways and highways! and i agree with Ole Tim Herr about their sensors being programmed to detected minor vehicles or pedestrians. driving in a city is different to country road's, motor ways, highways, A roads, the lot.
Gotta say, I'm not a fan of cyclists as it is. They're a danger on the roads.
As for pedestrians, overpasses & underpasses. Also, autonomous taxis & public transit.
Cyclists are the danger? It's drivers who ram into cyclists, pedestrians, and each other. Not sure cyclists kill or injure many people, especially where there's proper implementation of cycling lanes.
Flying cars will make cities even noisier then they are today. Traffic noise is one of the worst problems in cities.
Lol yeah imagine the noise of a drone but 100x louder.
Elon musk : we must go underground!
Electric is silent
It’s a lovely dream, but you forgot that cities are not about vehicles, they are about people. A pedestrian crossing a road as you show is suicide, unless the algorithms can also read minds. Same for any bicyclist or scooter rider, who today takes up 1/100th the space on the clogged streets and whose only traffic is traffic lights.
Your Lego-like bus is a lovely idea outbound, until the people disembark and it is 100 disjoint pieces that need to reassemble, without killing its passengers in the process.
Your bit on 3D is good. Dwell on that. Dwell on how easy it is to navigate Paris, London, NYC, and Tokyo underground. Better stil if we doubled or tripled those systems vs. flooding the streets with self-driving vehicles, modular busses, and Uber air taxis making yet-more noise and occasionally falling from the sky.
It's so amazing to find someone out there that actually thinks the same way I have thought about improving our horrifying traffic situation in this country. We could still have mass transportation if we were to make pods holding up to 4 occupants which can combine together like sections of a centipede. These could attach temporarily to one another via electric magnets to increase efficiency via the momentum theory of mass. And by being driver-less, these would allow the human occupant to read a book, watch self-help tutorials, or catch up on emails, voice mails, and IMs. I find it horrendously nerve racking and complete waste of life falling victim to the drudgery of having to figure out where to park my car. For this reason, I would love to wake up in a world (hopefully soon) where my transport was plugged into a vast virtual grid that mapped every urban parking space and could be reserved by my car so that it could claim this space, navigate to this, and then park for me. Hallelujah!
Have u ever considered: Trains ?
If no stop lights becomes a thing then crosswalk Bridges like what's in Vegas will be more widespread. Kinda like that.
+Jessica Ramps.
there can be stop lights for pedestrians, where pushing a button will automatically stop driverless cars to allow you to cross, but there will be no need for traffic lights is what he's saying, because all of that can be automated with computers, your car doesn't really need to SEE the traffic light, just wirelessly transmit the command that it needs to stop.
If you stand at the edge of the sidewalk the cars can interpret that as intent to cross and signal the following cars to stop for you anywhere. Also the only people that will be walking will be those that choose too. The era of having to walk out of necessity would be over.
The disabled will be calling a car to take them places; they won't be walking anyway. The price of transportation will be so low that it would be free for disabled people and the poor.
Jessica Technology gets cheaper and faster at an exponential rate. Moore's law.
8:41 yeah the uk was doing that in the 1850s they were called slip coaches
Just imagining all of the overpasses that would have to be built for pedestrian traffic because the roads never stop.
Everyone is talking about how it's going to be hacked. or buggy.
Im not saying that's impossible, but would you honesty prefer human error which causes over 50,000 deaths a year to the occasional hacking incident?
Xoreign I would hack my ex's car and crash it into the tallest building on her route lmao........there may be people who intend to do such things and it can be harmful. unless it's a closed network
Ole Tim Herr Right. But I doubt it would kill the amount that are currently killed every year due to human error
Xoreign well, drinking and driving will not be a problem then
Muhkuh Muh Sorry. But i prefer the saving of lives over fun.
Xoreign, Have you ever read The Giver? If you follow that line of reasoning, then that's the reality that you want to implement. If everyone was safe from every known danger, then we'd be restricted from many activities that make living....well, living. Can't drive. Can't backpack, or ski, or play any sports whatsoever.
I see a lot of: "How would this or that work?" type questions.
I love seeing great questions vs "That will never work because of X" statements. Some people may not know this (I didn't) but the first cars in the early 19th century were seen as impractical and were banned early on in many cities. People didn't see the efficiency of horses and carriages going away anytime soon.
Most of the time when we question new technology, we are only seeing the one aspect it is changing. Driverless cars only without changing the roads/sidewalks, etc. so many things won't work. Scientists and engineers will inevitably run trials and come up with new concepts that will pave the way in solving/optimizing these new technologies and ideas.
Biking on my (pre-COVID-19) commute, I tended to pass one of Waymo's self-driving cars every other day. While I have had close calls with human-driven cars, I have never felt in danger from a Waymo car. They are really quite cautious! On one hand, I think it would be nice to see some more well-programed self-driving cars on the road. On the other hand, these cars are not ready (especially not for the kind of driving suggested in this TED talk - not sure if they will ever be able to do that). These self-driving cars are still practicing normal traffic conditions. Side note: in a blood vessel, it's okay if blood cells bump each other. It's not okay for cars to hit each other. And let's not forget that the energy of a collision increases with the square of speed. Interesting analogy, though!
If Waymo is too careful, wouldnt that make them bad transports? Imagine getting stopped all the time at the slightest sense of a pedestrian.
Hey is Prince of Persia sands of time sound at start 😍♥️
this is the future i have been looking forward for quite some time. The 1 issue i see with the presentation is what about pedistrians? How will they cross the street without stop lights. One option would be for a walkway over the road, but people being people will not always want 2 walk the extra steps and will walk across the road. As it stands now some people cannot even wait for the light 2 turn before walking across the road (yes, my hand is up).
The walkaways need escalators and conveyor belts.
If the traffic is as dense and fast as in the video, non-suicidal pedestrians will use the crosswalks over the street. And yes, where the crosswalks change elevation, some form of wheelchair-friendly mechanization may be needed.
Same way as now. You press a button to indicate you want to cross, this tells oncoming cars you're going to cross so they stop, once you've crossed they continue. Driverless cars would communicate with each other at the speed of light, and they can already detect pedestrians, so it wouldn't be much of an issue
They can just have pedestrian bridges.
Pedestrians will be part of traffic, as bicycles, roller skates, and others. Pedestrians can walk anywhere, but since they are all tagged, cars will know about their movements ahead of time. Besides, pedestrians are slow. Another thing, traffic rules will apply to all, including pedestrians, bicycles, roller skates, and all others. After couple of tickets, "pedestrians" will wise up.
That intersection does not bode well for cyclists like me...
Bill Kong Put a sensor on your bike, and the cars will move around you.
In practice that might be what has to be done. The problem is that the optimized traffic flow described in this video can only be achieved when all the parameters of this flow are well known. As soon as you start trying to account for the unpredictable movements of pedestrians and cyclists, you compromise a lot of efficiency.
We could build a lane specifically for cyclists and prohibit the cars from being able to access these lanes maybe
Or just potentially put the entire self-driving system underground? Above ground even.
yes. the self driving system could work very well underground. I think kind of like the had in I-robot
Video turned out good man!
So much variables to control and syncronize...
Could you start on a small city level? Of course, it would have to be mostly detached from all external roads. Perhaps we could invent a form of super-efficient parking (everyone gets out of the car before it is slotted into a space via some sort of belt?). Everyone moving into the city puts their "outside car" in this super-efficient garage, then they use the city's transportation system, with any combination of the lane-straddling buses, vehicles on suspended rails, flying machines, and modular detachable cars.
You missed one major point. Cars can not bump into each other like red cells do. Also, red cells are rotating like wild in all directons. All thet helps them move seamlessly.
Aleksandar Panov they're also squishy and can run into the walls of the vessel.
Maybe cars can bump into each other in the future if they are made with a even lighter material & have a new construction. Who knows?
Love the split bus design, looks amazing. Amazing ideas and concepts!
That split bus design was a scam. Investors have lost their money.
There are so many more participants in traffic than cars. Pedestrians, motorbikes, scooters, cyclists, wild animals (okay, mostly outside cities), trucks delivering goods, in some places horses (with or without carriages) etc. So the cars have to be banned from the system and must get their own roads either in an elevated tunnel or below ground. I wrote tunnel because that is a good way to get our cities quiet and clean. (Yes, even electric cars blow dust from their tyres into the air and therefore pollute it.)
The car drivers/owners alone have to be the only ones who pay all costs for their separate road system.
some taxi drivers disliked this video so hard
Uegene Dyalnburke lkoo
Uegene Dyalnburke LMAO
Uegene Dyalnburke in my city taxi drivers are here to attrmpt to run over people getting off of streetcars and buses
Or people that actually like driving?
George Subie there will still be some opportunities for people to drive - maybe in the countryside, in rural areas, and in tracks. And while it would be best to force people to use automatic cars, dense cities are the best place to start
It would be amazing if they could dodge people/animals or whatever that gets in the street perfectly and seamlessly. You just walk across the street as cars going 80mph driver around you.
That would certainly turn out better for the Anti-Trump protesters
Cheecks Jamz good point. It would be easy for people to completely block off roads without fear. Then the roads would get smaller and smaller as people setup little shops and crap on the road.
Stephen WTF? lol. I think you have a point, though.
The cars wouldn't need to go any faster than already allowed to be more efficient and the autonomous vehicles being developed have the ability to avoid collisions with pedestrians and other objects already.
What we need are online jobs and online schools. 90% of traffic is just people commuting to work/school. But this is no longer necessary. Most jobs and education can be done working online from home using the internet, computes, and VR. If everyone had an online job or attended an online school, 90% of traffic would disappear.
The future will be like Ready Player One. People will use VR to do their jobs, education, social, entertainment, etc., from home. There will be very little reason to travel.
Well, the Corona/ Covid crisis has proven your point. Yesterday monday 16 June 2020, there NO traffic jams on the highways of the Netherlands.
This ist a great idea. The more vehicles the more information is collected and shared. Means, if all the cars communicate via Blockchain, so they won't be hackable, then the awareness gets greater and every vehicle can predict the coming much better. That means, more vehicles which communicate with each other, make self driving cars even more save. Your vehicle would stop early enough if a car some hundred metres away detects a problem. It's like a big awareness of the surrounding world. It would know where all the other cars are and know and see what the other cars know and see, like single all knowing consciousness.
It would be practical if there was a city in this world wanted to volunteer to be the experimental city for the project.
Self-driving cars should be about reducing traffic fatalities. Even with self reinforcing algorithms shared by all cars on the road, using self-driving cars to maximize traffic efficiency by having them all tail-gate eachother, speed, and criss-cross through eachother at intersections like the graphic displayed is INSANE.
Taking a flight from one place to another was probably considered insane and suicidal at one point of history.
Terrible analogy. What the speaker in this video is proposing increases hazard risk for the sake of maximizing traffic efficiency.
It doesn't matter how advanced the AI behind self-driving cars gets, if cars all speed and tailgate each other then unforeseeable circumstances WILL lead to traffic fatalities.
Kurt Coleman Wow! I'm glad you will never be responsible for complex ideas such as this. Your level of thinking is like a beginner checkers player in comparison to a chess grandmaster.
Online Overlord
I'm open to your thinking. Instead of belittling my intelligence why don't you refute my logic or demonstrate why I'm wrong? Autonomous cars speeding, tailgating eachother, and weaving around eachother at intersections all increase risk. Doesn't matter how well the systems communicate with eachother, unforeseeable conditions on the road combined with the possibility of system failure means all these things meant to increase traffic efficiency also increase the risk of accidents.
***** you obviously don't understand computers and algorithms. What you're talking about can only exist in an analog setting. In a digital setting there are multiple fail safe mechanisms in place. For instance, when a single car malfunctions (or multiples) lines of code are in place to immediately shut those cars down and instantly route traffic around those cars until they are safely removed from the road.
These are only low level thoughts. I care not to explain higher level concepts. You obviously will have a hard enough time wrapping your head around what I just explained. Take MIT's algorithm course. It's free on UA-cam. You'll understand better.
the thing is, i cant drive yet but when i do get car i want to drive it myself. Even though it might be more dangerouns or whatever just sitting there while the car drives itself takes the thrill out of it.
thanks captain
Get self driving cars working and stick em underground, then we humans can actually have the surface for, you know, us. I would love to bike places everyday but I have to worry about getting run over so that aint happening until the 2 ton steel blocks on wheels are in their own area where they cant squish me
That's what I've been saying. Make the traffic three dimensional and build millions of kilometers of tunnels for cars.
You know that it would be super expensive, right? It is easier to build transit infrastructure
StrykerTen is your life more important than every single life form on Earth? Better to just remove every non ecofriendly vehicles.
*****
Yes, it would be UNBELIEVABLY expensive, I think looking at the invention of the modern sewer is a good example. Unbelievably expensive, but not impossible. I think if we considered the health benefits of more people walking and biking locally reducing the rates of obesity and such which costs us countless billions annually, I feel it could reasonably be looked at as a long term investment in preventative medicine. People are also a LOT happier when surrounded by a bit of nature, replacing city roads with footpaths with gardens along them would see a considerable drop in rates of depression and suicide
Also I dont necessarily agree that simply building more regular infrastructure is necessarily easier or cheaper. For lower density areas you can scale up a bit no problem, but for places that are already pushed to their limits (think new york, beijing, tokyo) where roads are pushed up against buildings as close as they can get you cant just expand the roads, theres no room to expand into. At that point, you either expand up and build a second set of roads above the first, or you go down (or do nothing and have weeks long traffic jams I suppose, but that doesnt really seem like a valid choice lol)
Jessica
I dont think thats as big of an issue as it might seem. We have massive city spanning sewer systems built over a hundred years ago that have done incredibly well despite the tech used to build it being so old. We also have major subway systems in pretty much every major city in the world and subway tunnels collapsing in isnt a particularly big concern, we built em well and they last. I dont see any reason we couldnt do the same for a car network
when two blood cells collide, they don't destroy each other. because of this, cars can never be as efficient.
Very well said.
I've quite liked this TED talk!
What transportation engineers frequently neglect to consider, especially in circumstances like this within a city, is the impact of these ideas on the pedestrian. To paraphrase the urban designer Deb Ryan - "Streets are not just places for cars. Streets are places for people, too."
The life-blood of a city is in the foot traffic, not the car traffic. The character and well-being of a city is expressed in the quality of life for the people walking on foot through the streets. What do they see? What do they hear? Where are they going? How do they get there? There is a reason that places like Houston, Texas are horrible for pedestrians, and a large part of it is that the pedestrian experience is horrendous. New York City is a pedestrian-based tourist hub. The entire city is characterized by the ebb and flow of people on foot. What happens when every single block is required to be self-contained because the car traffic has been given complete priority on the streets? How do the pedestrians cross the street? How does the man who sees his friend at the coffee shop across the way get there when traffic is zooming past with no controlled stops to allow for easy crossing?
Driverless cars are a wonderful idea in the suburbs. They are AMAZING for long haul trips and traffic on arterial highways. The concept of non-stop vehicular traffic within cities, however, is anathema to the very things which make cities healthy and vibrant places to live and work.
The lesson to learn is that there exists a need for better traffic flow, yes, but not at the expense of the pedestrian experience.
mithrane d r i v e r l e s s p e o p l e
Man what a /great/ idea!
"The lesson to learn is that there exists a need for better traffic flow, yes, but not at the expense of the pedestrian experience."
*driving experience
also if the biggest problem is the lack of parking spots wouldn't it be an easier solution to build parking space+mass transportation?
Yeah, people study urban transportation for years, read papers and conduct experiments, and still miss pedestrian traffic. But no worry, because +mithrane has managed, in less than twelve minutes of video, to dissect the topic and pinpoint the underlying, hidden issues. Thank Lord for your superhuman insight.
Ya right, when you are having so much fun chit chatting with your friends and not realizing that you are sitting in the correct section of the train till you and your friend part ways unexpectedly lol.
A man seems to be after my heart.
The key issues are synchronicity and maintaining velocity. The modular bus is useless because the first red light will clog the whole road with a full or rolling stop. Besides red lights there is an average of 250m between stops for buses in Sydney. That's 40 stops on a 10km journey in addition to the red lights!