What a driverless world could look like | Wanis Kabbaj

[@trevan5035]

*TED:* How to design a walkable city *Also TED:*

[@dustywaxhead]

Complex solutions that require a lot of money or healthy vibrant cities that are economically siund

[@tukangpempek5390]

underground passage and a bridge across the street could fix that

[@richardlinares6314]

@@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.

[@weetikissa]

@@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.

[@thestudentofficial5483]

@@tukangpempek5390 just look at what underground and bridge crossing done to your country. Nothing gets done.

[@jonathanpcampbell]

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.

[@gabrielcasagrande9463]

Good point

[@ImNaviar]

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.

[@5PYZ3R]

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.

[@someweirdguy7275]

Thats the idea behind public transport, there is no specific destination but a series of stops along a path

[@mikem9987]

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.

[@edanashkenazi7003]

I love how this simulation doesn't even take pedestrians into account

[@peter1062]

Or cyclists.

[@richardlinares6314]

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.

[@fren111]

they never take people into consideration

[@breadw7490]

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.

[@fatasian6825]

@@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.

[@stevenarvizu3602]

I also love looking at CD's from the sky

[@akshatshah3717]

Steven Arvizu *rolls eyes*

[@mrmaniac3]

Steven Arvizu so shiny ~~~+

[@toshinotakiyami]

CD's NUTS XD

[@raabsand]

Steven Arvizu hahaha that's what I thought he said at first. I was confused

[@paxwallacejazz]

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.

[@clems_first]

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.

[@stabilini]

7:18 "all the adiotional space we will have to enjoy our cities" 10:40: "fast as autobahns with Mumbais intersections"

[@weetikissa]

@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.

[@suicune2001]

As long as pedestrians can still cross the street safely then yay!

[@IsYitzach]

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.

[@suicune2001]

IsYitzach Yeah, that is what concerns me. Inertia is still a thing. lol

[@shelbymoore6956]

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.

[@suicune2001]

Shelby M. That sounds difficult for people in wheelchairs unless it's a little elevator of some kind.

[@IsYitzach]

Then why don't they do that more often now? They do it some now, but not very often at all.

[@locouk]

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.

[@assalane]

Well there goes my screen and my coffee. Thanks green silver

[@PedroGeaquinto]

And something to clean the blood of the pedestrians and bikers

[@Welther47]

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.

[@Oddme100]

You could just ditch the windows or close your eyes and have Morning Mood by Edvard Grieg playing on the speakers. :D

[@niccolom]

I bet the people from 100 years ago would say the same thing about airplanes.

[@nickpalmerarts]

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.

[@snowpunk116]

Very cool and exciting. I'm a little sad he didn't mention bicycles or pedestrians at all.

[@Derpster2493]

In the future there will be no such things, that's why.

[@puntco]

But I like cycling and walking. I don't want to get in a vehicle when I can walk a few minutes.

[@alwaysuseless]

@Derpster Are you kidding? Of course, there will be pedestrians & bicyclists. In some highly built-up areas, bicyclists may be harder to accommodate.

[@VulpeculaJoy]

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.

[@piranha031091]

MrBaronmoll : I think you meant "lymphatic". They're very different things...

[@dipsyteletubbie802]

10:32 that is what a driverless world would look like

[@Erick.werner]

Dipsy Teletubbie internet bless you

[@TougeTime]

Dipsy Teletubbie already looks like this in asia lol

[@AWARHERO]

Well, if that is the case, India is way ahead of everyone ;) They have been driving like this forever!

[@Tpoleful]

Yea, but, not as fast though.

[@djrdm2755]

no thats just what it looks like without women driving

[@PVivekmca]

just one human on that traffic grid will spoil entire system lol!

[@texasray5237]

Just one bug in the daily software would do it as well. Or one mechanical problem.

[@wylie2835]

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.

[@charlesj.easleyii7642]

@@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.

[@kaioocarvalho]

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.

[@bloodtypeinfinity5143]

A grid this automated will have no signs or lights, making it impossible to navigate without a self driving car.

[@joeycommet45]

it's easy, all you gotta do is imagine a road with no cars.

[@jesse_cole]

deep.

[@klingefjord]

joeycommet45 or any city ~120yrs ago

[@joeycommet45]

***** Just imagine a railroad, with no trains

[@aggroknight4259]

joeycommet45 How about a runway?

[@joeycommet45]

Analytic31 So imagine a runway, with no planes

[@b22chris]

Imagine playing frogger on that animation at the end...

[@jjammmees]

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

[@erictkd8]

ok without traffic lights how do i get across the frogger death level?

[@tennyb.6973]

Eric Beach Maybe small Bridges or Tunnles

[@hens0w]

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]"

[@KuraIthys]

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.

[@apolicum]

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.

[@lancerider1272]

Look at the Las Vegas strip. That system already exists.

[@atomicmrpelly]

Me at the start of this video: Why would CDs look any different when viewed from above?

[@mrmaniac3]

atomicmrpelly If you view it from the side, it looks like a sliver :D

[@alkri1935]

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!

[@zachhipsley8708]

I love being in control of a vehicle going 10 mph in highway traffic

[@innomind]

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.

[@shoulders-of-giants]

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.

[@MankindDiary]

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.

[@jaredhall4812]

loved the detachable train idea

[@joshuamclean8913]

Jared Hall good idea… will take a lot of work to get there.

[@joshuamclean8913]

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

[@nathangek]

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.

[@privateauthor7037]

Techniques for successful public speaking for dummies = sad.

[@Vixinaful]

Bahahaa! Nailed that one.

[@hackedi.t3065]

To give the audience time to absorb and process the information better?

[@tezzo55]

:-B Why would you do that? Are you depressed?

[@ElihuNavon]

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.

[@joel.engelhardt]

Skip to 9:20 for the good stuff on driverless cars.

[@clementm5417]

that's the only part of the video that matches the title, but it is still very very poor on the subject.

[@REIQ]

thanks

[@quinmcewen892]

Thanks. Not all heroes wear capes!

[@JohnReiher]

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.

[@AZCaveMan480]

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.

[@JohnDoe-tp2rj]

i just want a self driving car because then i could just play videogames on long trips or sleep

[@JohnDoe-qq6gv]

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?

[@JohnDoe-tp2rj]

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.

[@JohnDoe-qq6gv]

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.

[@marka112]

Please don't drive. save a life now...

[@kurtissen]

You know you could just take the train/plane/bus for that. ;)

[@manualLaborer]

is that top view really automated cars? or india?

[@docblue2776]

It's actually red blood cells shaped like cars.

[@DK-qb8kn]

Bruh u dumb but ill answer anyways. Its a top view of what a world with self driving cars would look like.

[@user-zf4qu9gf2j]

no its a bunch of asians

[@ShreyPandya150]

xD so true

[@ShreyPandya150]

david kwon dude its a joke chill

[@jean-lucdupuis7052]

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.

[@zachhipsley8708]

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.

[@jean-lucdupuis7052]

Zach Hipsley The closer we get to technology the further we get from humanity

[@streamtrollmike5348]

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

[@greynolds17]

it worked for the amish

[@gabemerritt3139]

@@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

[@PicklesRTasty]

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.

[@xydya]

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.

[@sirrobertwalpole913]

It's probably because the number of people not living in cities is quickly decreasing. Though i doubt the difference would be too much.

[@streetart_eagle]

The most genius minds in urban design don't include bicycles in their 3d renderings.

[@bfbaril]

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.

[@RossMKF1]

Benjamin Baril Should be the opposite though autonomous cars should be driving underground and bikers, motorcyclist, and regular cars should be above.

[@hackedi.t3065]

More obesity!

[@OrangeC7]

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.

[@argusy3866]

Because they actually suck as transportation. Sure, works on Amsterdam to get to work, amazing. Now about all the other needs...

[@hugoedelarosa]

I love long drives, I love listening to podcasts on my way to work.

[@MatVeiQaaa]

9:30 oh, this sweet red Toyota Supra!

[@ausvice3721]

Matthey Raz oh damn!

[@mrmaniac3]

Sweeeeet, move the camera to the right a little please

[@themadhattress5008]

Does it bother anyone else that Paris allegedly destroyed historical buildings just for the means of "more efficient" transportation, or is it just me?

[@OsakaOutlaw]

The Mad Hattress I caught that as well.

[@zenmarkdev1231]

The Mad Hattress the past is what holds us back.

[@swiftyunknown]

no

[@themadhattress5008]

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.

[@SarcasticSyringe]

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

[@TheGoodContent37]

Here's what you came for: 10:36 Avoid the patronizing monologue and save 10 minutes of your life...

[@PietroSperonidiFenizio]

thanks, seriously

[@TheRealAlas]

Thanks, I was skipping and skipping and skipping and still patronizing monologue... This comment is what I needed.

[@rin_etoware_2989]

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?

[@AqierDesigns]

Matthew Tolentino VR

[@daddyleon]

Yeah, it would be wildly immoral to insist on driving if driverless cars are so much saver.

[@aggroknight4259]

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!

[@ninabsolaqa5163]

Analytic31 Taking away the right to drive and making people sit in some automatic driving car is what will make people more lazy.

[@rin_etoware_2989]

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.

[@Lapusso650]

How do you cross the street when the cars don't stop...?

[@dragonsraaaaaaaaawr]

One word: Bridge.

[@IWasHereFirst2]

go into a car, drive one the other side

[@PulseCodeMusic]

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.

[@AbbundanceOasis]

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.

[@SamuelHorler]

In the future the shops will come to you, man.

[@davmar9923]

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.

[@smks8er]

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.

[@WadcaWymiaru]

WHY human blood circulatory system is so effcient? Because everything flow...and cells are semi-solid.

[@alasterkenway9773]

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.

[@OsakaOutlaw]

Sirapob Klarod Exactly!

[@grumblebuggyspergamatron6466]

" accident rate would be very close to zero" $50 says they'll still make you buy insurance for it.

[@OsakaOutlaw]

Grumblebuggy Spergamatron You'd still want insurance, incase of a storm etc or if someone broke into your car.

[@grumblebuggyspergamatron6466]

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.

[@BoojieD]

That's not to mention all the extra work you could get done in the car.

[@Rebasepoiss]

Umm..where are the pedestrians in that picture?

[@dragonsraaaaaaaaawr]

On elevated sidewalks above the road.

[@Rebasepoiss]

VoxelDraqon That's idiotic.

[@technic1285]

Rebasepoiss But... Mah FUTURRRE

[@dragonsraaaaaaaaawr]

Rebasepoiss How?

[@Rebasepoiss]

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.

[@banzy3]

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.

[@SomePotato]

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

[@felixthecrazy]

For one, blood cells don't care about their destination or time they get there. That is very different for people and jobs/activities.

[@kilgoretrout1952]

They don't care that's true, but it's vital that they get to a specific place at a specific time

[@4nlimited3dition_4n3d]

I hope you realize that it was just a metaphor. Symbolism.

[@MacDatmusic]

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.

[@4nlimited3dition_4n3d]

***** 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.

[@shellyeditsalot]

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.

[@MehdiNPartDeux]

What about G forces from turning so rapidly?

[@andrewm1058]

hold on tight

[@666Tomato666]

you need to collect the matter that soiled the pants after crossing one or two such intersections...

[@anigah]

inertial dampers

[@sirjmo]

minimize the amount of sharp turns in a route and possibly a slight tilt to turn the sideways G forces into downward G forces, which people are used to as it's called gravity.

[@maltava4534]

If the seats inside rotated so that your back always faced the direction of the G-forces you could turn as fast as the grip of your tires will allow with very little discomfort.

[@sparkeee519]

This sounds like an essay you would write as a kid.

[@dkkr7526]

your mom gay

[@zioxei]

ur mom and dad gay together

[@KandyWabbit]

you dog gay

[@cheapgamer4U]

I actually did write this exact thing when I was a kid.

[@ixalaz4536]

It doesn't seam like my essays at all :/ Is this good or bad?

[@Kratax]

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...

[@Dxpress_]

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.

[@VESTIGE888]

isn't that an uber?

[@Pernection]

Kratax that called Minority Report

[@Kratax]

Then you get a ghetto taxi.

[@riftis2210]

surely theyd become filthy with people dropping crap in them since the vehicle doesn't belong to them.

[@jdfreality]

A very Utopian view of things.

[@yabdelm]

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.

[@jdfreality]

"A utopia is impossible" - Thats my point.

[@yabdelm]

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.

[@TheHeavyModd]

Imagination is the essence of discovery.

[@TheHeavyModd]

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.

[@joegerhard615]

Vehicles slow down when they turn...

[@KuriusOranj]

Damn physics spoiling a good time!

[@danconnor8422]

Not for space communists!

[@gabemerritt3139]

But they won't have to break, they'll gas just enough for maximum fuel efficiency

[@spookeylordzey8432]

We need a city that only has one road! Now thats pretty efficient, lol

[@dariusdeg]

Vehicles slow down also when driver gets old :)

[@appa609]

That intersection does not bode well for cyclists like me...

[@xydya]

Bill Kong Put a sensor on your bike, and the cars will move around you.

[@appa609]

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.

[@jesses7244]

We could build a lane specifically for cyclists and prohibit the cars from being able to access these lanes maybe

[@jesses7244]

Or just potentially put the entire self-driving system underground? Above ground even.

[@experimental2.372]

yes. the self driving system could work very well underground. I think kind of like the had in I-robot

[@kingjames4053]

In cities like NY they should leave 1 lane only for bikes, skateboards etc. and put a lot more of subway lines

[@KuriusOranj]

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!

[@danconnor8422]

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.

[@spookeylordzey8432]

dan connor lol, privacy.

[@NAY2GAS]

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.

[@frankfahrenheit9537]

Get another job.

[@ovonisamja8024]

Imagine for some reason you were forced to cross the street from the last animation by foot. :)

[@rhetthouse432]

the same system could be used for this, just call one of the pods from your phone and it will take you across the street, within a minute or two. i've imagined a system like this while siting in traffic several times

[@Danuxsy]

You don't have too, just call the shop you want to go to and it will arrive, moving buildings is our future! No longer shall we need to walk to the store, it will come to us!

[@ovonisamja8024]

Guys, if you think about it, it would be much easier to just cross the street without the need of making an arrangement for it. Just start walking and you're there. :)

[@bobbywalter9062]

I presume it could work much the same as a we have now with crossing signals. Whenever someone wants to cross the street, just press the button, and it will adjust traffic accordingly so you can cross the street. It would definitely cure J-walkers haha. The only problem I foresee now is if traffic moves non-stop, and one person wants to cross the street, then traffic adjusts for that one person, what will the rest of non stop traffic do. It could create a HUGE traffic jam. Not sure if that makes sense. Another thing I thought of might be building of short under lying (underground?) walkways where crosswalks are currently. Then you wouldn't have to worry about traffic at all. Just walk underneath.

[@ovonisamja8024]

Oh there it is, you said it, just walk underneath. :) And that already exists so I guess my question wasn't necessary in the first place lol.

[@shoulders-of-giants]

Flying cars will make cities even noisier then they are today. Traffic noise is one of the worst problems in cities.

[@spookeylordzey8432]

Lol yeah imagine the noise of a drone but 100x louder.

[@nimbolism3040]

Elon musk : we must go underground!

[@ispartacus1337]

Electric is silent

[@AleksandarPanov]

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.

[@mrmaniac3]

Aleksandar Panov they're also squishy and can run into the walls of the vessel.

[@Rayowag]

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?

[@alexgagnon52]

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).

[@Derpster2493]

The walkaways need escalators and conveyor belts.

[@alwaysuseless]

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.

[@kilgoretrout1952]

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

[@bloodyshoes13]

They can just have pedestrian bridges.

[@VladimirRoytman]

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.

[@fennecfocks]

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.

[@xoreign]

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?

[@OleTimHerr]

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

[@xoreign]

Ole Tim Herr Right. But I doubt it would kill the amount that are currently killed every year due to human error

[@OleTimHerr]

Xoreign well, drinking and driving will not be a problem then

[@xoreign]

Muhkuh Muh Sorry. But i prefer the saving of lives over fun.

[@steeldriver5338]

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.

[@HallucinatnJack]

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.

[@Jackmerius_Tacktheritrix5733]

HallucinatnJack F*ck 'em

[@OleTimHerr]

HallucinatnJack these cars can easily be programmed to account for pededtrian and biking pathways.

[@TheJumpingJake]

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.

[@dr.zoidberg8666]

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.

[@galagora]

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.

[@Alltoc]

We always talk about driverless cars, maybe we should talk more about carless drivers

[@portfoliocollection8072]

some taxi drivers disliked this video so hard

[@abdelhassouneh7205]

Uegene Dyalnburke lkoo

[@TarasGrabar]

Uegene Dyalnburke LMAO

[@hubblelord999]

Uegene Dyalnburke in my city taxi drivers are here to attrmpt to run over people getting off of streetcars and buses

[@resukajdm]

Or people that actually like driving?

[@hubblelord999]

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

[@strykerten560]

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

[@Derpster2493]

That's what I've been saying. Make the traffic three dimensional and build millions of kilometers of tunnels for cars.

[@PedroGeaquinto]

You know that it would be super expensive, right? It is easier to build transit infrastructure

[@Channel-xy2wj]

StrykerTen is your life more important than every single life form on Earth? Better to just remove every non ecofriendly vehicles.

[@strykerten560]

***** 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)

[@strykerten560]

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

[@VenkatSattuluri]

I have never seen a KZbin video get better, more thoughtful comments

[@brianbrewster6532]

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!

[@anshulramprasad5869]

Have u ever considered: Trains ?

[@lancelindlelee7256]

Best purpose of swarm computing/ intelligence. All computers will communicate seamlessly, resulting in flawless traffic.

[@bergonius]

agree

[@XxJermanator1xX]

That is a hackers wet dream

[@modolief]

Flawless. Just like our election system. And corporations.

[@davidalvarez5983]

The building in 5:15 is not in Abu Dhabi but in Oviedo, in northern Spain, and it has no hanging pods network! It is a congress center by Santiago Calatrava with serious design flaws...

[@jkl6759]

im more pissed that theres only 1 driver in 85% of cars then anything else

[@cryme5]

But say you have to drop your kids to school, forth you're not alone but back you are. That already makes 50%. I think the problem is that cars are personal.

[@Zatticzattic]

love the concept, but what will happen when a pedestrian wants to cross the road and there are no stop lights or crosswalks? and what about the cyclists? cars will still have to deal with human unpredictability

[@armansayeed9056]

Russel Kennedy sky walk and cycling lane could help

[@InsanePorcupine]

I would think pedestrian overpasses, and barriers would help with this. If what he says is true and road size could be reduced, then implementing these things might not be that bad.

[@EthanMinard]

Crosswalk button similar to what we have now that tells the automated cars that someone is crossing? Designated cycling lanes that cars will not interfere with? These are easily solved problems.

[@anSealgair]

Pedestrian crossings would still be there. Computers have far less reaction time. Also, with all the money saved on road capacity, many overpasses and underpasses could be built.

[@matiasgrioni292]

How is a cyclist to turn left on this road? I think a solution can be made, but I also think the development of smart streets like this could be detrimental to the city community and feel. I certainly would not want to walk along a street or bike on a street where cars are buzzing by and are talking with each other but not me. If we stick with the speaker's example of 1200 people on a train. I suspect that for an individual this may be less efficient, but on average efficiency will increase (1200 is at least 300 cars versus 1 train). Further, this requires no major reworking of our road networks and transportation expectations, its simply an expansion of public transit. Just my 2 cents.

[@MasterTicTac1]

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

[@MasterTicTac1]

It would work like a valve system

[@MasterTicTac1]

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).

[@PoorManMods]

9:28 MKIII Supra!!!!

[@jediRAVE]

Poor Man Mods Hahahaha I saw that...AWESOME. Now that was worth watching lol

[@MicroageHD]

100 times better than any self driving car could ever be. ;)

[@larryfitzgeraldjr]

If no stop lights becomes a thing then crosswalk Bridges like what's in Vegas will be more widespread. Kinda like that.

[@kempai]

+Jessica Ramps.

[@saturn724]

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.

[@maltava4534]

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.

[@maltava4534]

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.

[@gregdison]

Jessica Technology gets cheaper and faster at an exponential rate. Moore's law.

[@DomDalyIam]

10:36 what happens when just one of these cars malfunctions and causes a mass accident at a junction like this. The sheer volume and speed of these cars (with humans in each) means there is no room for error. But error will always occur, even with the best of technology.

[@paraabox9105]

Yes you actually have a brain!

[@femimark5021]

Except brakes are a thing and computers have reaction times that are in units you didn't know existed.

[@LudwigSchindler]

Yes there would be some accidents, but it still would be less people injured or killed than in the hundreds of accidents every day around the world.

[@123benny4]

You're speculating. How do you know?

[@stvia]

Not only that. What about pedestrians?

[@EastwardTraveller]

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.

[@EscapedConvict2007]

Taking a flight from one place to another was probably considered insane and suicidal at one point of history.

[@EastwardTraveller]

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.

[@LawTzuTao]

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.

[@EastwardTraveller]

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.

[@LawTzuTao]

***** 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 KZbin. You'll understand better.

[@jonmentovay7528]

Personally I wouldn't want too many flying cars considering how people maintain their cars and how people litter out of their cars

[@aidabach]

Thank you

[@ivveG]

10:30 - the intersection look lethally dangerous to unprotected road users.

[@oliverupload]

Cool, some of these solutions are necessary for sure.. and interesting/ intriguing like monorails.. HOWEVER.. people also need to take into account automated cars and a perfect symbiosis of cars linked and communicating together. The difference between the human body and drivers on the road is a central command of the body. All drivers are highly highly inefficient and constantly making mistakes, whether driving too fast, changing lanes inappropriately because they're all self interested. A network of automated cars would move in perfect harmony like flocking birds. It's like a computer playing chess. They would stop and turn and change lanes in communication with each other at the most effective and important intervals and would be 100% efficient. This would probably allow cars to travel the speed limit while cutting time of travel by 25-30% and reducing accidents to near zero.

[@TheNightstalkerShow]

That's all well and good in theory, but if there is no manual override, hackers can easily reroute you (or just your vehicle) to any location they wish, for whatever purpose they wish. Imagine a hacker using YOUR vehicle to do automated drug deliveries. The police will have you on the hook for the crime, unless you can prove your car was hacked. Also, if the car is all sensors and no physical linkage to the steering, you could easily be kidnapped. The government would always know where your car is and was, and they can predict where it will be by it's typical driving patterns. There are too many ethical and legal issues with not having control over your vehicle for it to ever become a reality. I am just showing you the tip of the iceberg. I could write books about all of the problems that would arise from a society of automation.

[@joshuamclean8913]

oliverupload thats why he was talking about driverless cars…

[@joshuamclean8913]

TheNightstalkerShow yes there must legally be a manual override. You are also supposed to remain aware as if you were driving in case of an emergency where you must take over. Idk how it will be in the future, but if you look at how highways are… people changing lanes and creating more traffic etc… it will be more efficient when we have driverless cars. There is a lot to consider and a long way to go before we have a 100% driverless society.

[@lordovravens]

"This would probably allow cars to travel the speed limit while cutting time of travel by 25-30% and reducing accidents to near zero." then you can be glad, the future is here. come to hungary. it's even better, many people drives ~20% above the speed limit. it's even faster than what you wish for.

[@TheHennes36]

Even more than that because each car knows everything about its neighbors and there is essentially no reaction time cars could not only be much closer to each other but also increase speed significantly 100km/h shouldnt be a Problem ;) absolutely AMAZING!

[@LILCRIS1990]

Greetings from Düsseldorf

[@clintross7778]

el Patron

[@ashrafulrabbi]

I thought Pablo escobar is from colombia O.o !!

[@elmuchacho47]

bruh ich heiße Pablo und komme auch aus Düsseldorf ... dann scheint mein Penis wohl doch kleiner zu sein als die Welt :c

[@CarlosFernandez-qg8ys]

That supra in the back at 9:28 shows exactly why we don't have all this

[@claudelebel49]

So now, I won’t even be able to look up and see the sky!? Glad I won’t be around.

[@7lllll]

when two blood cells collide, they don't destroy each other. because of this, cars can never be as efficient.

[@bitterlilraccoon]

Just imagining all of the overpasses that would have to be built for pedestrian traffic because the roads never stop.

[@elidennison9902]

"A cerfew is in effect, all cars are disabled until 6 A.M."

[@sybrandwoudstra9236]

This is uncanny

[@savanna1674]

i actually love driving.

[@bfbaril]

Cool, now imagine if you got to drive only on well maintained open roads with no bad drivers. Private roads and tracks would be a new market created by the automation of the commuting infrastructure. Driverless road networks aren't mutally exclusive with manually operated infrastructures. You'd simply have automated (public) roads on which manually operated vehicles would be prohibited, and private roads on which you get to drive, with no bad drivers, no crappy stop lights, no speed limits, and no stops when you don't want them. Unless of course you also like driving in gridlock stop-and-go traffic at 5km/h, but I'm sure they could make a track for that, too.

[@TodayWithDustin]

Benjamin Baril Or just driving when ever and where ever you want. I also enjoy driving. You sir sound like communism should be across your forehead.

[@xanri7673]

There will without a doubt be areas that allow you to drive your car freely. Only the commuting areas will be driver-less.

[@streamtrollmike5348]

Matt Fellenz no, I want to drive my car on an actual road. I want to go places with my car.

[@xanri7673]

Michael lopez like in government restricted areas? Good luck.

[@iknowhou1722]

I always think about delivery services. From my couch I can order items from the grocery store, then they will put my stuff in boxes and put it in a small self-driving pod. That little pod will navigate through all the other pods cruising around, and arrive at my place to be unloaded and sent back. THE FUTURE IS AWESOME!

[@iknowhou1722]

jan simonides First of all, try to mature enough to make a point without having to resort to name calling. Second, if you don't understand the AGE-OLD concept of mail order, then I'm not sure how you've survived this long.

[@iknowhou1722]

Yeah, that's bad quality assurance. BUT, I'm thinking you've ordered pizza many times without incident. Pizza, items from amazon, etc. Mistakes happen since we are human, but if a business concept sucks, it's usually thrown to the wayside. Grocery shopping from the convenience of home is already a reality (most retailers in my city already offer this service). I have a feeling the advent of autonomous vehicles will just remove the human delivery-driver factor. But you know where I really geek out? What happens when we can transport matter from one place to another? Forget the pod delivering your food. Just order and pay from the app, walk into your kitchen, and watch groceries materialize. I'm super pumped now!

[@iknowhou1722]

HAHAHA!!! I gotcha. I totally get it when it comes to fresh produce, meat, eggs, and things of that nature. I'll do my own quality assurance checks on those items, but I'll let them deliver the cereal and candy for me. As for our world becoming fully automated, I accept the good with the bad. I've had humans mess up orders before. I've had computer systems fail on me. None of it is going to be perfect unless we progress and learn from our mistakes. As you said yourself, "I made a mistake, I swerved incorrectly." At that point, you had to deal with the oblivious operator, BUT you also learned the precise way to navigate in Italy. I've also messed up (a lot) and learned from it. It has helped me grow as a person. Progress is basically just learning from mistakes and doing things better. I think we will get better and better at automation once we accept the fact that failure happens, but it doesn't have to mean it's the end.

[@arjungupta6]

10:37 imagine sitting in one of those high-speed self driving cars as they turn like maniacs at 80kmph. Panic Attack!

[@Increased9]

Well if you have no stoplights or anything, how do you walk across the street or ride a bike across lanes???

[@MuadDib1402]

Walking and cycling will become illegal due to how dangerous they are.

[@Increased9]

Brig. Gen. Jack D. Ripper So then all exercising will by law have to be done at home or gym?

[@totally_not_a_bot]

Bridges and tunnels. They're already a thing in many places because they're fundamentally safer than crosswalks. If crosswalks are necessary, put the intersection on a timer. The big rule, though is to separate pedestrian traffic from vehicle traffic.

[@MuadDib1402]

Matthew Clark Only at designated exercise locations, Gyms if you will, as you can be supervised by a trained professional. heart rates will not be allowed to exceed 90bmp.

[@maltava4534]

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. If this is implemented then there will be plenty of free roadspace to make bike lanes then just get an app for your phone to plug into the car network and gtg.

[@kein_indianer]

That's the only possible future for an individual traffic system. Great video. Let's do it.

[@Mag0Lag]

What planet is this guy on?!

[@brechtthebest]

You know how blood flow also is regulated to avoid congestion? The whole system is one way

[@ALLElectricChannel]

going from Autopilot (by Tesla) to full self driving will be a huge challenge, we can do it! Very exciting time!!!

[@panther3429]

I've been looking through the comments, am I the only one thinking what happens if the cars are hacked or there is a bug and it ends up causing a crash?

[@Swiftbow]

And don't forget that they're also still cars. Cars that mechanically break down for any huge host of reasons. And these will have even more complex systems!

[@011azr]

Everything will kill you in the future. You don't need gun to assassinate people. All you need is knowledge and internet connection. From car accident to poisoning body through automatic insulin injection.

[@Swiftbow]

@Sticky6ft No, we should be asking ourselves "Am I willing to trust my life or my family's to this thing?" My answer is no. And I hope it is for others, too, because I don't want to run into these things out there. I'd rather deal with imperfect humans. At least our imperfections are slightly more predictable. And if I screw up and drive off a cliff driving, at least it's MY fault, and not a random fluke of the universe laughing at me. To me, this question boils to another very simple question: Should life be driven by fate or free will? I ALWAYS will choose free will, no matter how much "safer" fate might theoretically be.

[@bergonius]

I've been looking through the comments, am I the only one thinking what happens if the cars are driven by drunk person, or driver gets distracted by his cellphone and it ends up causing a crash?

[@andrewlamore72]

FYI cars can already get hacked. For the past 10-15 years or so cars have implemented more and more technology to make the car more efficient. Besides, any hacker can break into your computer or phone right now and take most of your valuable information without you knowing a thing had ever changed. If hacking is such a deal breaker then you should just stop using technology.

[@ginsan8198]

It would be practical if there was a city in this world wanted to volunteer to be the experimental city for the project.

[@TarammT]

"Blood flows through our veins most of the time" Quoted from Wanis Kabbaj 'priceless'

[@TheWaki]

Misquote...

[@TarammT]

haha, well it's what you said, You misspoke. lol

[@utubedano]

I'm sure most of us probably won't be alive when this comes to fruition....

[@alucardwhitehair]

Thousands of years? You really have no sense of reality do you? The world even 100 years from now would be nearly unrecognizable. Self driving cars may even become widespread in certain cities by 2020. Wake up.

[@cagevick]

zpardus What...

[@jonathancorcoran6646]

It will not take thousands of year to develop this technology. Cars haven't even be around 200 years. Personal computers have only been around for 40.

[@lupercali3951]

Technology now advances at monumental speed, I expect to see this in around 50 years possibly (or less)

[@runningwithscissors7715]

so when i stagger out a pub at 2am my car/pod will be waiting for me to drive me home while i puke out the side?....(will it know take me home means the kebab shop running over my exs letterbox and then home?....)so many questions

[@OMGtehEPICNESSS]

Underrated comment :D

[@radical748]

That is another classic pro-car concept, not matters about sustainable urban planning and development.

[@chopsueysensei]

you should better start wondering what a carless world WILL look like

[@heidijeanrose]

Remind me to invest in pharmaceutical stock when driverless cars become a thing.

[@cizeek9748]

ALMOST 10 MILION! YAY! DIAMOND TED

[@pogodrummer]

a lot of big words, a lot of laughs, very few valid points.

[@belmundoable]

He is daydreaming like a kid.

[@gabemerritt3139]

@@belmundoable a daydream that'll become reality it's only a matter of time, could happen much quicker its available today, but too many people that doubt because they can't fully grasp the logistics

[@blahblahboii]

@@gabemerritt3139 I'd say they grasp the logistical problem too well to agree without a solution to the logistical problems.

[@ulrikebelloni9529]

your lack of intelligence is failing to recognize the points he's making

[@man_on_wheelz]

I totally agree with this guy on the future of self-driving cars, but I can see a little old lady now getting a heart attack sitting in an automated vehicle going 60 mph through a turn while a bus, 2 trucks, and 5 cars narrowly but automatically avoid slamming right into the side of her vehicle in less than 10 seconds... especially having grown up in times like today and knowing what it's like to get into or nearly get into a severe collision.

[@Vatsyayana87]

it might be a culture shock at first, like any radical change, but after one generation every old lady would have seen that a thousand times since they were much younger and wouldn't even raise their blood pressure. Your also assuming they mean put computer and tire technology to the max immediately and that would obviously not be how it happens. but its funny to imagine the reactions on peoples faces old and young if they did.

[@man_on_wheelz]

Al Goodness you read that all wrong! No, look at his demonstration of how automated traffic will move through one another. Now picture sitting in one of those cars passing through that intersection. That's what I meant.

[@BigFatCock0]

Good. Kill the weak lol

[@BigFatCock0]

MAN_ON_WHEELZ Why do people think they're funny when they say this?

[@man_on_wheelz]

BigFatCock I don't know...

[@michaelmoon9139]

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..

[@karikling6751]

That part at the end does *not* sound cool at all. How is any cyclist or pedestrian supposed to safely cross that mess?

[@alexandriariley5209]

9:49 Yes, because you'll still have pedestrians.

[@IIARROWS]

Yeah, and he thinks that blood cells don't stop at red light for what reason? I'm questioning the sanity of a man who can't see that our vascular system doesn't have intersections, and doesn't matter if a specific cell goes right or left at a fork, that keep bumping against each other without conseguencies.

[@dablasit]

+IIARROWS You're just too dense to realize it's just a metaphor. Look up the definition of a metaphor. There's no need for parallel accuracy between X and its comparison to Y when it's a metaphor

[@IIARROWS]

It's a wrong metaphor nonetheless. A metaphor must show similar concept, which blood flows and traffic are not. Sorry, but if he isn't able to come up with a good metaphor to prove what is in fact a wrong point anyway, then he shouldn't have make any.

[@InsanePorcupine]

Arrows you are describing an analogy, a metaphor is more abstract.