GM and Segway create new vehicle(news.bbc.co.uk)
news.bbc.co.uk
GM and Segway create new vehicle
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7987301.stm
14 comments
If you two people are drowning and they grab onto each other, does that increase their odds of survival?
Literally, probably yes. You decrease the freedom of movement, which likely decreases the unstructured thrashing that is often detrimental. Then, you may also leverage each others' buoyancy.
What happens when two drowning people grab onto one another is that they both start trying to push the other down in order to push themselves up. The result is that both of them drown.
One of the things any lifesaving class will teach you is to always approach a drowning person from behind, because if they can get their hands on you they try to push you under.
One of the things any lifesaving class will teach you is to always approach a drowning person from behind, because if they can get their hands on you they try to push you under.
This is what I was thinking of when I wrote the original comment. Lifesaving techniques are a bizarre mix of completely control them/help them.
It just came to mind as soon as I saw this headline. I read it as TWO COMPANIES WITH ABSOLUTELY DOOMED CURRENT BUSINESS MODELS JOIN FORCES TO ANSWER A QUESTION NO IS ASKING
It just came to mind as soon as I saw this headline. I read it as TWO COMPANIES WITH ABSOLUTELY DOOMED CURRENT BUSINESS MODELS JOIN FORCES TO ANSWER A QUESTION NO IS ASKING
So the real question is which one drowns and which one gets to use the corpse as a life raft?
Very interesting! So people really get so frantic as to not understand that someone is trying to save them. Reminds me of Survival by John Wyndham (good, quick read of sci-fi horror). The ending was not so scary as it was baffling.
Whenever I'm stuck in traffic I tend to come up with ways to solve it. So far I have only two solutions which can actually completely eliminate the problem: rented small cars (preferably electric), and AI drivers. Having them together would be bliss.
And the second one isn't even as science fiction as is sounds. You can cheat in any way you want, as long as you get the job done. You can tell the AI the map of the city, down to traffic signs. Keep the AI in one place and drive remotely. Put cams all over the city (or better above the city), with cars' roofs painted with barcodes. Hell, you can probably simply drive remotely and it'd be enough of a killer app.
And the second one isn't even as science fiction as is sounds. You can cheat in any way you want, as long as you get the job done. You can tell the AI the map of the city, down to traffic signs. Keep the AI in one place and drive remotely. Put cams all over the city (or better above the city), with cars' roofs painted with barcodes. Hell, you can probably simply drive remotely and it'd be enough of a killer app.
It's only feasible right now in a controlled environment (all the drivers are the same AI and no humans doing unexpected things). Otherwise is a hard and complex AI problem.
Yes. But I don't think you need all the pieces to make a whole system. How about small electric rental cars, which you drive yourself to the destination and once you get there are remotely driven to the nearest parking/charging station? For practical purposes it's the same thing... and slowly you add some AI to the mix.
But they have to be small, cheap and can't depend on you driving them to a dedicated parking lot.
On the other hand it's perfectly ok if they never go past 40 mph and need recharging twice a day - as long as they don't need the "client" to take them to the fuel station.
But they have to be small, cheap and can't depend on you driving them to a dedicated parking lot.
On the other hand it's perfectly ok if they never go past 40 mph and need recharging twice a day - as long as they don't need the "client" to take them to the fuel station.
As always, cost matters.
If you're trying to get folks into a part-time vehicle to save gas, that vehicle must cost under $3k. It is unlikely to be a big success if it costs more than $1,500.
If you're trying to get folks into a part-time vehicle to save gas, that vehicle must cost under $3k. It is unlikely to be a big success if it costs more than $1,500.
I kinda like it. It seems to solve the Segway's chief problems: 1) standing and looking like and ass and 2) getting rained on.
Plus, side-by-side seating is a win compared to front-and-back.
Plus, side-by-side seating is a win compared to front-and-back.
Is there any reason why one would prefer this over a bicycle? I personally don't see how this is any improvement over a bicycle, except possibly for those with disabilities.
Potentially, more protection from the elements and safer.
I mean, neither is demonstrated in the videos, but it looks like it could be much safer than a motorcycle (or a scooter) and it seems like the openings would be easy to weatherproof.
I mean, neither is demonstrated in the videos, but it looks like it could be much safer than a motorcycle (or a scooter) and it seems like the openings would be easy to weatherproof.
Or a motorcycle, Vespa, something.
With their combined R&D budgets I am still waiting for an autonomous vehicle. This to me is an unnecessary incremental improvement on current vehicles. When I can sit in a vehicle and not drive, that I'd pay anything for. The darpa grandchallenge seemed to prove it's possible today, different companies are coming at it from different angles (irobot, autonomous warehouse robots).
Or, you could get a bicycle.
i find the small wheels on the back disconcerting. presumably they're still working out some bugs keeping it upright, which is understandable as this is clearly a prototype, but the implications there are still troubling. It's too big to work on the sidewalks but it's hard to imagine trusting their stability controls on a crowded road full of other traffic.
Reminds me of the Dymaxion:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dymaxion_car
http://images.google.com/images?q=dymaxion+car
Reminds me of the Dymaxion:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dymaxion_car
http://images.google.com/images?q=dymaxion+car
The small wheels are probably for when the thing's turned off, like a kickstand on a bike.
As everyone owning a bike knows, you feel much better having small wheels (or anything for that matter) instead of expensive body. Two-wheeled vehicles will fall, even if it's when they're stopped and a kid pushes them.
For a company that's extremely close to bankruptcy I was expecting something a bit more exciting and well, reasonable.
I think Segway only selling 2,000 units in the UK since 2002 isn't very good news either.
I think Segway only selling 2,000 units in the UK since 2002 isn't very good news either.
In the UK they can't legally be used on pavements which restricts their usefulness.
Really?
I guess that's why I've never seen any http://citysegwaytours.com/ around here.
I guess that's why I've never seen any http://citysegwaytours.com/ around here.
What exactly were you expecting from a 90-day quick-turn project?
The unit shown is a prototype, where the final version would be a little more polished and practical.
The unit shown is a prototype, where the final version would be a little more polished and practical.
Wouldn't this be a better bet..
http://revengeoftheelectriccar.com/bring-back-the-ev1-press-...
http://revengeoftheelectriccar.com/bring-back-the-ev1-press-...
Honestly, I don't see anyone driving this thing. It doesn't make you look any less silly than a Segway.
If anything, this makes me wish we'd stop throwing money down the drain that is GM.
If anything, this makes me wish we'd stop throwing money down the drain that is GM.
Comparing to my bicycle what I'm using daily all year long this is just a fancy overkill. Good luck but the original Segway even had a style unlike this.
More info on the Segway website:
http://www.segway.com/puma/
The Toyota iReal looks like a better option with superb design.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/nmsi/3025451321/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/nmsi/3025451321/
One of the links about the Segway/GM project included the design concept. What you're looking at today is basically just the "chassis".
The iReal looks more like the product from T3, and suffers the same basic issues as the T3 product and the Segway PT itself: single rider, un-enclosed design (which also limits top speeds in the US for crash-test reasons).
This GM/Segway project is designed to address a need for short-haul commuter uses (as it appears to me). Where a limited top-speed and range do not create a real-world limitation on the usage of the product.
For example, most weekends the wife and I and our 3 dogs go to a weekend retreat. My F-150 SuperCrew holds the people, dogs and various other items we bring quite well, but then is really too huge for getting around town. Something like this would be more applicable, holds two people, a small bit of cargo room and would have the range and speeds needed to get around nicely.
The iReal looks more like the product from T3, and suffers the same basic issues as the T3 product and the Segway PT itself: single rider, un-enclosed design (which also limits top speeds in the US for crash-test reasons).
This GM/Segway project is designed to address a need for short-haul commuter uses (as it appears to me). Where a limited top-speed and range do not create a real-world limitation on the usage of the product.
For example, most weekends the wife and I and our 3 dogs go to a weekend retreat. My F-150 SuperCrew holds the people, dogs and various other items we bring quite well, but then is really too huge for getting around town. Something like this would be more applicable, holds two people, a small bit of cargo room and would have the range and speeds needed to get around nicely.
Then the Toyota IQ fits the bill
http://www.flickr.com/photos/nmsi/3026282222/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/nmsi/3026282222/
What strikes me most is that Toyota has been doing that for years, preparing themselves for the future (now present) while GM was sitting on its fatass giving millionaire executive bonuses watching the economy collapse.