6 ms·
These things are like trains, but the tracks are virtual and are made of GPS coordinates.
by ChatGTP 3y ago
These things are like trains, but the tracks are virtual and are made of GPS coordinates.
- amelius 3y agoand the railroad crossings have no barriers.
- coffeebeqn 3y agoFuriously typing a blog post: wrong assumptions software engineers have about train tracks
- taylodl 3y agoThat's funny! Reminds me of all the posts I've seen over the years concerning the wrong assumptions software engineers have about people's names and dates.
- foobarbecue 3y ago... except trains have humans driving them.
- ChatGTP 3y agoActually not true, we have fully automated trains for some years now. I've ridden fully automated trains in many different cities around the world. I've actually though about this for a while, not just replace cars with light rail and have small "pods" that you can call to come to your nearest station and hop on it, kind of like on demand rail. IMO this is kind of what has been built.
- replygirl 3y agothat's called a PRT
- arghwhat 3y ago... except driverless trains have been around for decades is is relatively common for e.g. metros, and even trains that are decades old with drivers have been prepared for driverless operation from day one - usually just requiring a signalling upgrade. Trivial to do self-driving when the tracks are real.
- orwin 3y agoDriverless trains still need operators (who can be remote) and can only operate if the tracks are surveilled and kept clean (one of the huge issue of driverless trains us braking and braking distance).
- arghwhat 3y agoI find this statement to be misleading, as none of the concerns relate to driverless vs. driver... ful. All train systems have remote monitoring (normally as part of the signal system), even for driverful trains. The Danish Metro has 5 "operators" passively monitoring the entire train network, but can step in if something goes wrong. Nothing is required in normal operation - the trains even schedule and execute cleaning, and return to service fully automatically. All train systems require tracks to be kept clean, with driverful trains often having issues with leaves or snow. Some 20 years back when the Metro was new, there was some issues with spurious debris detection stopping the train, but that was sorted out. All modern trains have automated signalling, brake distance management and brake control, the whole shebang. The system, not the driver, enforce safety, and driverless systems have exactly the same characteristics. This is also why some trains bought more than 2 decades ago already boasted "self-driving ready" capabilities - the signalling system was already then for all intents and purposes the operator of the train.
- orwin 3y agoThe first one I agree with, but 'automatic braking' works pretty well in subterranean metro, and poorly if the tracks are exposed to elements (crickets, leaves, ice although that last one is less dangerous). When trains loose friction during braking, they start their emergency braking, which is costly and sometimes not enough (trains then overshoot stations). I agree that most (or maybe all) subterranean metro/urban trains can be made driverless, but this isn't the case for countryside trains.
- TRiG_Ireland 3y agoThe futurists keep re-inventing trains badly.
- MengerSponge 3y agoTrains: the crab of public mobility. futurists:train::evolution:crab
- FormerBandmate 3y agoLess homeless people and more comfortable
- JumpCrisscross 3y agoHonestly, trains, but where everyone gets a private car (and no last-mile problem) sounds like an excellent way to brand these services.
- euroderf 3y agoIf they don't excite kids, they're kinda missing the point eh.
- MattRix 3y agoThis seems reductionist. The fact that these cars operate on regular roads that have human drivers (and pedestrians, bikes, etc) makes them much more complex than trains.