W. Knight, Sep. 14, "LAST MONTH, STANFORD researchers declared that a new era of artificial intelligence had arrived, one built atop colossal neural networks and oceans of data. They said a new research center at Stanford would build—and study—these “foundational models” of AI. ..." Read more Hmmmm... More fundamental than arguing about the term " foundational" would be to argue about throwing around the term "Artificial Intelligence". Sure, what's been "founded" is "artificial", but is it anywhere near anything deserving the word "intelligence". Elon's use of the terms "autoPilot" and "Full Self-driving" to over-promise and over-hype his reality is grade school compared to Stanford's "foundational Artificial Intelligence". Maybe this is all fine in Silicon Valley speak, but at some point reality rears its ugly head. Alain
[log in to unmask]" _mf_state="1" title="null" src="cid:[log in to unmask]" class="" width="44" height="44" border="0"> The SmartDrivingCars eLetter, Pod-Casts, Zoom-Casts and Zoom-inars are made possible in part by support from the Smart Transportation and Technology ETF, symbol MOTO. For more information: www.motoetf.com. Most funding is supplied by Princeton University's Department of Operations Research & Financial Engineering and Princeton Autonomous Vehicle Engineering (PAVE) research laboratory as part of its research dissemination initiative
Thursday
evening Nov.
18, through
Saturday Nov.
20, 2021. Live
(Covid
permitting)
Trenton, New
Jersey. This
5th Summit is
inspired by
the many
levels of
public-sector,
community and
neighborhood
welcoming and
support that
now exists in
New Jersey for
the deployment
of
high-quality
affordable
mobility.
Mobility made
possible by
technology to
especially
those in New
Jersey that,
for what ever
reason, don't
have access to
their own
personal
car.
As
Robin Chase
presented in
one of her
slides in my
course this
past week,
right now,
this instant,
180 million
Americans,
more than 50%,
don't have
access to a
car. All 16
and under,
most above 85,
the many too
poor, half of
two person
households
with one
car... That's
more than 50%
of our US
population. The mobility equity afforded by this technology can
substantially
improve the
quality-of-life
of so many,
immediately.
We
envision the
initial
deployment
along the
lines of what
was presented
at the end of
the 4th SDC
Summit this
past Spring,
in Trenton,
the State
Capitol, where
70% of the
household have
access to at
most one car.
We believe
that this is a
perfect
Operational
Design Domain
(ODD) to
successfully
deploy with
the
opportunity to
expand
throughout
Mercer County
and replicate
the
deployment
throughout the
State. The
welcoming
environment
now exists in
New Jersey to
enable a
successful
Public-Private
Partnership to
deliver this
enhanced
mobility to
the residents
of Trenton and
all New
Jersians. The
5th Summit
will focus
directly on
the initial
phases of this
most equitable
mobility
deployment in
Trenton. Alain
D. Yergin,
Aug. 31,
"...Recently,
I asked
Wagoner about
that
conversation.
“The focus
then was on
making the
internal
combustion
engine
better,” he
replied. “I
was asking,
‘If we were
starting the
industry
today, what
would be
different?’”
A pretty clear
answer about
how different
came earlier
this month
from President
Joe Biden when
he issued an
executive
order setting
out the goal
that “50
percent of all
new passenger
cars and light
vehicles sold
in 2030”
should be
electric. In
the order, he
instructed
government
agencies to
implement
regulatory
policies to
achieve that
goal. “There’s
a vision of
the future
that is now
beginning to
happen,” said
the president.
This vision
clearly does
not involve
making the
internal
combustion
engine
better....
The third
challenge
involves the
public — the
people who buy
automobiles...." Read
more Hmmmm...
Amazing...
This article
assumes that
electricity
that goes
through the
chargers into
the batteries
that requires
all that
mining,
transport and
processing to
capture that
electricity
and trickle it
out as we are
leisurely
going to
grandma's
house,
magically
appears.
Where does
electricity
come from?
How is it
manufactured,
by whom, with
what
equipment.
What is
produced today
has persistent
customers that
aren't going
to go away.
All of our nice ways (solar, wind, hydro and nuclear)
to make
electricity
(electricity
is made) are
at capacity
and we are
still using
bad ways
(coal) and not
so bad ways
(natural gas)
to serve
existing
customers.
It was hoped
that better
efficiency and
more makers of
the nice ways
could ween out
the bad and
not so bad;
however, Hydro
is capped by:
only so much
water falls so
far, and
"everyone" is
afraid of
nuclear. That
places the
burden
directly on
solar &
wind to make
the
electricity
that's now
made from
coal.
A ">10x"
improvements
in solar &
wind is needed
to replace the
bad ways
(coal) and
another
">10x" to
replace
natural gas as
a maker of
electricity.
And we haven't
begun
replacing the
gasoline with
electricity
that produces
our mobility.
To do that is
going to
require
another 2
">10x"s.
(The energy
required to
move us is
approximately
equal to all
the energy
procured by
electricity
today. (There
are many
details here
having to do
with rejected
energy).
Moreover, the
use of the
nice ways to
replace the
existing
bad/not so bad
ways does not
require any
change by any
customer.
They've been
using
electricity to
do x,y,z and
the new
electrons from
the new
">10x" nice
ways is
exactly the
same. They''
never know the
difference
Not so when
replacing
petroleum with
electricity.
One also needs
a new way to
create the
mobility that
the petroleum
was delivering
to its
customers
consuming
mobility. A
whole new
layer is
needed (the
EV). So maybe
for this
challenge we
should be
focusing on
"making the
internal
combustion
engine
better",
certainly
until we get a
lot better at
solar and
wind, else we
won't be able
to turn off
those coal and
natural gas
plants for a
very long
time.
A Rule by
the Federal
Communications
Commission on
05/03/2021, "C.
ITS in the
5.895-5.925
GHz Band
25. To promote
the most
effective use
of the upper
30 megahertz
of spectrum in
the 5.9 GHz
band, the
Commission
determined
that the ITS
service should
be based on
use of one
technology,
and concluded
that C-V2X
technology
would provide
the best means
of achieving
its goals for
ITS in the
coming years.
In the First
Report and
Order, the
Commission
provided
technical
flexibility to
enable ITS
licensees
currently
using
DSRC-based
technology to
operate in
this
30-megahertz
ITS band until
the time ITS
services must
operate using
C-V2X
technology.
Because the
Commission
believed that
many, if not
most, of the
active ITS
licensees
would want to
transition to
C-V2X
technology as
soon as
possible to
speed
development
and deployment
of ITS
services, it
decided to
permit,
through its
waiver
process, the
deployment of
C-V2X
technology
during the
transition
period in a
manner that
would not
interfere with
existing
DSRC-based
operations...
Read
more Hmmmm...An
important
ruling that I
had missed.
Alain
A.
LaFOrest, Sep
14, " U.S.
auto safety
regulators are
requesting
substantial
amounts of
data on
advanced
driver-assistance
systems from
major
automakers to
aid their
investigation
into 12 Tesla
crashes
involving
Autopilot and
first
responder
scenes.
NHTSA's Office
of Defects
Investigation
sent letters
Monday to 12
automakers,
including Ford
Motor Co.,
General
Motors, Toyota
Motor North
America and
Volkswagen
Group of
America, to
gather
information
for comparing
vehicles
equipped with
Level 2
driver-assist
systems, where
the vehicle
has the
ability to
control
steering and
braking/accelerating
simultaneously
under certain
conditions.
For each
automaker, the
agency is
seeking the
number of
vehicles
equipped with
Level 2
systems that
have been
manufactured
for sale,
lease or
operation in
the U.S. as
well as the
cumulative
mileage
covered with
the systems
engaged
and a log of
the most
recent updates
to the
systems.
The agency
also is
requesting all
consumer
complaints,
field reports,
crash reports
and lawsuits
that may
relate to the
driver-assist
systems.
Automakers
must describe
the types of
roads and
driving
conditions
where the
systems are
intended to be
used, and the
methods and
technologies
used to
prevent usage
outside the
operational
design domain
specified to
customers. In
addition,
automakers
must provide
an overview of
their approach
to enforce
driver
engagement or
attentiveness
while the
systems are in
use..." Read
more Hmmmm...
Can't wait to
read the
responses. I
wonder if any
of the OEM
even log "mileage
covered with
system
engaged."
Why would
they? ...
NHTSA might
request it
some day.
What are the privacy implications? ??? What other data
are my car
accumulating
on how I use
it without
telling me (Of
course, I
didn't read
even the big
print in my
owner's
manual, let
alone the fine
print.) Alain
H. Poser'77, Sept 13, 2020. "Creating Value for Light Density Urban Rail Lines" . See slides, See video Hmmmm... Simply Brilliant. Alain
These
editions re
sponsored by
the SmartETFs
Smart
Transportation
and Technology
ETF, symbol
MOTO. For more
information
head to www.motoetf.com
R.
Duffy, Aug 23,
"Chandler,
Arizona, is a
city of just
over 250,000
that’s located
southeast of
Phoenix. Like
most of
Arizona, it's
hot, dry, and
lined with
cacti and palm
trees.
But unlike
most of
Arizona—or
virtually
anywhere else
in the
world—Chandler
residents
share the road
with fully
driverless
robotaxis,
courtesy of
Waymo. As
Stacy, a
Chandler
resident, told
us, “Waymos
are like
rabbits in my
neighborhood.”
Since October
2020, the
Alphabet
subsidiary has
been running
its driverless
ride-hail
service, Waymo
One, in a
50-square-mile
service area
that
encompasses
parts of
Chandler,
Tempe, Mesa,
and Gilbert.
Anyone with a
smartphone,
credit card,
and GPS
coordinates in
the service
area can hail
a completely
driverless
ride of their
own.
In
December 2018,
Waymo opened
Waymo One
(with safety
drivers) to
the general
public,
expanding
beyond an
early rider
program
available to
pre-approved,
NDA-bound
Phoenix
residents. The
company’s
current
testing zone,
for driverless
and safety
operator-supervised
vehicles,
stretches
across roughly
100 square
miles.
And although
residents
living in or
near the
service area
may be used to
seeing Waymo’s
glossy-white,
sensor-laden
Chrysler
Pacificas
roving around,
the chances
they’ve ridden
in one are
much, much
lower. .." Read
more As I've been writing, Chandler is a great place to
test
Driverless
mobility to
make sure it
at least
begins to
work; however,
the value in
the technology
is not as
amusement or
thrill ride or
as circus
sideshow. The
value is its
ability to
affordably
deliver high
quality
on-demand
mobility. It
will be a long
time before it
can provide a
higher quality
of service
that a
chauffeured
"Black car" or
limousine, so
it can't
compete for
those
traveling on
an expense
account or the
well to do.
It also can't
really compete
to serve the
Drive-it-Yourself
(DiY) folks
that can
afford to buy
their own cars
and park them
for free when
not in use.
Conventional
mobility
serves all of
these folks
very well.
Where this form of mobility has a real advantage is
to serve folks
who are
required to
conform to
mobility whose
very limited
service is
provided on a
"take-it-or-leave-it" operational philosophy. Services that operate
between few
fixed
locations at
strictly
stipulated
times
specified by
the service
provider. The
disparity in
service is
incredible
between
mobility
options that
respond
directly to
customer needs
in terms of
from/to/when
(walking, DiY
personal car,
Uber/Lyft/taxi/limousine/WaymoOne)
and public
transit's "take-it-or-leave-it"
customer
service
approach.
M. Sena,
Issue (08-10)
, Aug. 25,"
Some of you
are fans of Douglas Adams and
will enjoy
this month's
Musings.
Sometimes a
little humor
helps to get a
serious point
across better
than trying to
be seriously
persuasive.
The lead
article in
this issue is
the first part
of a two-part
series. This
month I
discuss why
there is still
a chance for
the Western
automotive
OEMs to stay
in the game of
manufacturing
cars, rather
than being
relegated to
assemblers of
battery
electric
vehicle
components.
Next month I
examine why
the position
they have held
for the past
century, King
of the Hill,
is about to be
challenged.
In the second
article is
focused on the
need for
cooperation
between robot
and driver in
highly
automated
driving. If
Tesla had done
a better job
on this score
it could have
avoided being
called on the
carpet by the
National
Highway
Traffic Safety
Administration. We'll see where that leads.
Dispatch
Central, as
usual,
attempts to
have something
for everyone.
I've called
the European
Commission out
for a major
miss in its
intelligent
speed
assistance
regulation,
not for
passing it but
for not making
it as robust
as it should
be.
Yes, I did use
these summer
months to
start work on
a follow-up to
the Princeton
SmartDrivingCars Summit, and I did enjoy a very pleasant summer here in
Sweden. I hope
you enjoyed
your summer as
well wherever
and however
you spent it.
M. Sena"
Read more Hmmmm... Enjoy & Learn this month's Dispatcher ( especially how to "... turn... pig’s ear into a silk purse...; no-brainers (P. 17); Some interesting Statistics on World energy & BEVs (P.18, thank you Fred Dryer), a possible upside for coal mines (P. 19), why 'Level 3' is even less probable than 'Level 5' which is reached only 'in the limit as time goes to infinity' and Evolutionary Domesticity (P. 29) and the answer is '42' ! Listen/watch to the Pod/Zoom-Cast 231 with Michael, Fred and me centered on this issue. Alain
M
Henninger, Aug
11, "A bright
orange,
battery-powered
train breaks
the lush green
stillness of
Rockhill
Furnace,
Pennsylvania,
as it
traverses
track
originally
laid in 1876.
At the helm in
a bright
green/yellow
safety vest,
Meg Richards
tweaks the
throttle and
brakes as the
two-car train
passes by
baseball
fields,
crosses
streets and
completes the
day's test
run.
Along for the
ride, Henry
Posner III,
the chairman
of Railroad
Development
Corporation
(RDC) and an
adjunct
instructor at
Carnegie
Mellon
University,
sits eager to
demonstrate
his vision for
a rail-based
mass transit
system in the
United States.
The original
concept for
Pop-Up Metro —
a
battery-powered,
modular train
that can be
inserted onto
existing
infrastructure
— evolved in
parallel with
his Department
of History
class, The
American
Railroad-Decline
and
Renaissance in
the Era of
Deregulation.
CPUC, Nov
23, '20, "This
decision
creates two
new autonomous
vehicle
programs that
authorize fare
collection
(deployment
programs), one
for drivered
autonomous
vehicles and
the other for
driverless
autonomous
vehicles.
Among other
requirements,
applicants to
the existing
driverless
pilot program
and the new
driverless
deployment
program must
submit
Passenger
Safety Plans
that outline
their plans to
protect
passenger
safety for
driverless
operations.
In addition,
the decision
establishes
four goals
that apply to
both the
existing pilot
programs and
the new
deployment
programs; 1.)
Protect
passenger
safety; 2.)
Expand the
benefits of AV
technologies
to all of
Californians,
including
people with
disabilities;
3.) Improve
transportation
options for
all,
particularly
for
disadvantaged
communities
and low-income
communities;
and 4.) Reduce
greenhouse gas
emissions,
criteria air
pollutants,
and toxic air
contaminants,
particularly
in
disadvantaged
communities.
The Commission
will collect
data to
monitor permit
holders’
progress
toward each of
the goals...."
Read
more Hmmmm...
Sorry for not
reporting this
sooner, and
thank you Doug
Coventry for
bringing it to
my attention.
It is must
reading
for any
jurisdiction
making
regulations
regarding the
provision of
autonomousTaxi
mobility.
Its four goals are laudable, especially the 3rd, even if
it may end up
violating part
of the 4th.
Moreover, the
clauses of the
3rd should be
re-ordered to
be: ...
Improve
transportation
options for
disadvantaged
communities,
low income
communities
and those with
disabilities,
and, if
possible, for
all... This
also reduces
the goals to 3
important
ones, ...
safety, the
environment
and improved
mobility for
those that
have been left
behind by the
personal
automobile
Of course, one wants to improve mobility for those that
drive their
own personal
car; however,
that is a entrenched
well-served
set of
customers that
are not
readily going
to flip from
driving their
car to
something that
isn't really
better and may
largely be
perceived as
no cigar.
Certainly, the
public sector
should in no
way use public
resources to
give car
drivers yet
another good
but inferior
choice as was
done with many
public transportation investments
that actually
provide
inferior
mobility to
those that
were to be
attract as
customers.
These systems
are rebuffed
by many that
they were
intended to be
taken off the
road for the
trips they
already make,
let alone
deliver
quality-of-life
benefits by
providing
mobility to
new places
that they
couldn't
previously
access.
A properly designed Operational Design Domain focused on from and where low income communities want to go is, to my mind, where the best opportunity exits for these safe, environmentally responsible systems . In such ODDs these driverless aTaxis can actually improve quality-of-life; and thus, deserve accommodation and promotion by public agencies such as CPUC. Alain
July 12
-> 15,
"..." Read
more Hmmmm...I haven't been able to
find a public
source for any
of the content
from the
symposium but
there were at
least three
sessions (of
the few that I
was able to
attend) that
were really
good. One
was B-101-
An inside Look
at
Policy-Making
for Automated
Vehicles,
moderated by
Baruch
Feigenbaum of
the Reason
Foundation.
Pay particular
attention to
the insights
offered by
Kevin Biesty
of Arizona
DoT. So far,
no one in the
world has done
it better.
A second one was