Archive for February 2013

I said FLYING cars, not DRIVING cars… Stupid Google…

February 8, 2013 Writing Comments Off on I said FLYING cars, not DRIVING cars… Stupid Google…

I have a problem.  I grew up in sunny California, where nobody walks if they can possibly drive and the roads are so, so very tidy.  So for me, the idea of a self driving car is perfectly reasonable.  Even on our worst traffic day, the roads in CA won’t kill you.  Other people might.    There are always the unhappy accidents where attentiveness and physics sit down together and decide to end your days.  By and large, however these are not the fault of road conditions (okay, there is that bridge over by Sacramento that freezes over, but that’s a bit fluke-y).  So for us, the idea of a car that can help reduce those accidents, that can help drop the number of fatalities due to things like texting, early morning rush hour handjobs, a rock in the windshield, this is going to be a good thing.  Because, for us, there is never ever a question as to whether or not road conditions are safe.

But in many many places in the US (and internationally) it’s a valid question.  Can a self-driving car be safe under more adverse conditions?  Can I hop into my little green Googlecar in the middle of a blizzard and arrive safely (and you know someone will, it’s a robot, if you own a self-driving car, you’re going to be one of those who have an unquestioning faith in technology, the kind of person who will drive into a lake because Apple Maps told you too).  Can I rely on my self-driving car to avoid tornadoes?  Can my self driving car compensate if the road floods?

http://www.forbes.com/sites/nextavenue/2013/01/30/can-you-be-trusted-with-googles-driverless-car/

One Way Street?

February 6, 2013 Uncategorized Comments Off on One Way Street?

I ran across this article here, about reintroducing exotic species to areas in which related/similar species have been driven out.  The idea being to help rebuild a manageable, functioning ecosystem in those areas (many of which are in the process of being reclaimed).

http://www.takepart.com/article/2013/01/20/water-buffalo-extinct-europe-10000-years-spotted-outside-berlin?cmpid=tp-ad-outbrain-general

Which leads me to the idea of terraforming (because that’s the way my brain works).  It would be hard to argue that the rise of humanity has had anything less than a massive impact on the Earth and it’s ecosystems.  It’s what we do.  We adapt, not only ourselves, but the world around us to suit our needs.  Its what we do.

I know there is some resistance to ideas like the one postulated above.  Humans have a somewhat dodgy track record when it comes to invasive species.  Sometimes we introduce a species on purpose, sometimes on accident and then *whammo* that species does something unexpected, like over-competing, or over-breeding, or out and out changing it’s dietary habits so that it eats birds instead of snails…

The thing is though, we are going to change the planet.  We have already done so, and “footprint-minimizing” techniques can only go so far before they become crippling.  So why shouldn’t we put our big-*ss brains onto balancing those changes out.  Reclaiming territory is an excellent start.  Should we have put it in a state to be reclaimed in the first place?  Nope.  Should we be more careful to keep territory in better condition so we don’t have to reclaim it later?  Yes, but you know, sometimes you have to weigh the good against the bad.  Is it better to build a landfill to house garbage (which could be reclaimed at a later date) or is it better to ship the garbarge out and dump it into the ocean (where reclaiming is a whole different kettle of fish).

So I think this idea that we can change things for the good as well as the bad needs to be promoted a bit more, even if we aren’t putting things back exactly the way we found them, the idea that we can put things back at all, and that we need to time and space to learn how to put things back, is a very important one.

« Older Entries   Recent Entries »