Thursday, July 2, 2009

Economist Magazine and the common fallacy of Street Bots

A comment on this recent article from the Economist magazine. It bares the common misperception about evaluating automated traffic on our roads. Here is the incorrect quote:

"Trains, meanwhile, are conceptually simple: they can only move forwards or backwards, and most of the time drivers need only watch for red signals and keep the train moving at the right speed."

What makes the trains simple to automate? Not the tracks, but the knowledge of human drivers not to drive onto the tracks when a train is coming by. Other than that fact, trains move through urban traffic, the criticism the article applies to computerized vehicles.

So the article ends up with this illogical conclusion that automated vehicles cannot drive in a straight line because they have no tracks. So, paint Green Tracks. Once the asphalt has Green Tracks painted, then the human drivers will treat the asphalt Robocars with the same care they automated light rail or automated rail freight.

Summary: There is no difference between automated light rail and tram bots running on asphalt. Anyplace a city puts a light rail tracks, the same solution works with Green Paint tracks, minus the expense.

No comments: