As for cycling, yes, there may be an uptick in usage if air pollution is reduced but the facts remain that you still turn up sweaty wherever you're going, you're still vulnerable to other road-users wielding heavy, fast metal boxes, and you're still at the mercy of the weather.
I looked into a pushbike or a moped a few years ago as an alternative to the Tube, and concluded I'd end up paying for both.
If I have to go to a 9am meeting at someone else's office I am not going to cycle in to arrive at mine at 7.30, change, and commute over to their office. I'm going to Tube it straight there, which means I'll Tube it home again. So either I pay the maximum daily whack for a Tube ticket or I buy a season ticket and under-use it while also paying for the two wheels.
I think it only really works for people who work flexi hours in one place all the time.
I looked at this. For me, an travelling to work 4 days a week and the occasional bus ride is cheaper as pay-as-you-go than a rolling monthly travel card, especially when vacation time is taken into consideration.
Season tickets for the tube are for mugs or a few edge cases.
Agree about the short-period travelcards.
The annual ones are materially cheaper though. A peak Z1 - Z3 return is £7.70. If you do that 225 days a year it's £1,732. The season ticket is £1,548, which also gets you free weekend and discount mainline travel.
I haven't driven a car since 1997 (and not with any regularity since 1990). So I find it very hard to get how interesting most people seem to find this subject.
I haven't driven a car since 1997 (and not with any regularity since 1990). So I find it very hard to get how interesting most people seem to find this subject.
I haven't driven a car since 1997 (and not with any regularity since 1990). So I find it very hard to get how interesting most people seem to find this subject.
That's just weird. Reminds me of Charlie Brooker live tweeting a car journey pretending he'd never been in one. Do you walk to a shop round the corner when you need milk?
That's what it will look like eventually, but it I was agreeing with @JosiasJessop that it will take longer than expected for the technology to mature.
Yes, an autonomous car is useless if it can't work like a taxi. In fact, an autonomous car than will hand control back to the human driver in an emergency is probably more dangerous - as the human may not be paying sufficient attention.
That's what Google think: Level 5 or nothing.
There are three broad approaches towards autonomous cars: 1) go for level 5 with no immediate steps. The Google approach, and fair enough. 2) go for high levels, publicise it as 'driverless' and make it the driver's duty to remain alert. Unworkable. 3) Bring in increasing numbers of drivers' aids, perfect them, and move on. What Merc, Volvo etc are doing.
1) and 3) are the honest options. Tesla goes for option 2 which is, IMO, a dangerous lie.
And that matters: it is as much an education of the public as it is technology, and Tesla's pushing the PR of their tech far further than the tech can currently stand.
I could imagine some combination of 1) and 3), depending on circumstances. For example, 3) on regular roads, with the option to switch to 1) on the more controlled environment of motorways.
What idiot thought that was good selection of colours to use. Yellow ok then green, shades of green, greeny blue, bluey green, shades of blue, ....
Yes, it's not helpful - I had to zoom in - looks like Canada clearly ahead, UK/Germany tied for second, EU/France tied for fourth & Italy clearly last....
Thanks for deciperhing Carlotta.
How can Canada be ahead when it's not in the EU and only has limited "access" to the the single market?
(Yeah, yeah I know Canada has loads of natural resources... Still pretty funny though)
Not having something on the first place is very different to having it and then losing it
I haven't driven a car since 1997 (and not with any regularity since 1990). So I find it very hard to get how interesting most people seem to find this subject.
That's just weird. Reminds me of Charlie Brooker live tweeting a car journey pretending he'd never been in one. Do you walk to a shop round the corner when you need milk?
Yes of course. It would take me considerably longer to drive than to walk, given the one way systems in central London.
I haven't driven a car since 1997 (and not with any regularity since 1990). So I find it very hard to get how interesting most people seem to find this subject.
I wouldn't bother in London either. Meanwhile in Brexitshire...
I haven't driven a car since 1997 (and not with any regularity since 1990). So I find it very hard to get how interesting most people seem to find this subject.
That's just weird. Reminds me of Charlie Brooker live tweeting a car journey pretending he'd never been in one. Do you walk to a shop round the corner when you need milk?
It is amazing how many people make a 5 minute car journey (plus parking time) instead of a 15 minute walk
I have driven a plug in hybrid now for 3 years, and it is a very nice vehicle to drive. However, I pay no excise duty, no congestion charge, and no fuel duty on the electricity I use, so how are the Gov going to replace this lost revenue. I do about 30 miles for £1.10 worth of electric and manage about 7000 miles per year on pure plug in electric. They only appear more economical because of these incentives.
Indeed. You can be reasonably confident that if the move to electric becomes a flood rather than a trickle then the tax base will follow.
On the other hand, as the market expands, the efficiency of electric should improve markedly as more money goes into R&D in search of the returns on offer in such a bigger market.
The national grid in GB has a capacity of ~61 GW. Mass elec. cars will melt it. Badly thought out, driven by industrial lobbying. The nuclear industry is desperate for a level load; cars are used as much in summer to winter.
IMO if elec cars are the answer it's the end of private motoring and the car industry. One might as well summon a driverless electric taxi to get to the train station ... or supermarket. Electric taxis could be charged off the 11 kV system, avoiding the huge cost of replacing all the small 230 V cables to houses.
I'll be 87 in 2040. Although I think I'll still be around, I'll be past caring.
Most cars in 1900 were electric. If you think they'll improve, look at the past. The range is similar then and now.
To be honest, declaring something as a goal for 2040 is a little more than a statement of intent.
It might just be the Government following where the market is going anyway, and pretending it's leading policy, as much as anything else.
+1
"Today’s move against petrol and diesel vehicles will move the narrative on from Brexit"
I presume Mike can only be talking about the PB narrative (in which case he's largely right!).
It will take something considerably more significant and proximate to move the real political narrative away from Brexit imo. A major ministerial scandal might do the job
I haven't driven a car since 1997 (and not with any regularity since 1990). So I find it very hard to get how interesting most people seem to find this subject.
If you had said that you haven't been in a car (either as a driver or passenger) since 1997 that would be a remarkable statement.
That's what it will look like eventually, but it I was agreeing with @JosiasJessop that it will take longer than expected for the technology to mature.
Yes, an autonomous car is useless if it can't work like a taxi. In fact, an autonomous car than will hand control back to the human driver in an emergency is probably more dangerous - as the human may not be paying sufficient attention.
That's what Google think: Level 5 or nothing.
There are three broad approaches towards autonomous cars: 1) go for level 5 with no immediate steps. The Google approach, and fair enough. 2) go for high levels, publicise it as 'driverless' and make it the driver's duty to remain alert. Unworkable. 3) Bring in increasing numbers of drivers' aids, perfect them, and move on. What Merc, Volvo etc are doing.
1) and 3) are the honest options. Tesla goes for option 2 which is, IMO, a dangerous lie.
And that matters: it is as much an education of the public as it is technology, and Tesla's pushing the PR of their tech far further than the tech can currently stand.
Yes, that's a good point. As they iron out all the edge cases, the cars need to be driven only by professional test drivers. Tesla's system that works 95% of the time is the worst system for a human driver to work with, as it encourages the human to mentally disengage from the driving process. Their marketing of the system as 'Autopilot' doesn't help.
What idiot thought that was good selection of colours to use. Yellow ok then green, shades of green, greeny blue, bluey green, shades of blue, ....
Yes, it's not helpful - I had to zoom in - looks like Canada clearly ahead, UK/Germany tied for second, EU/France tied for fourth & Italy clearly last....
Thanks for deciperhing Carlotta.
How can Canada be ahead when it's not in the EU and only has limited "access" to the the single market?
(Yeah, yeah I know Canada has loads of natural resources... Still pretty funny though)
Not having something on the first place is very different to having it and then losing it
It looked like a pretty odd selection of countries tbh, more for the ones that are missing, e.g. US and Japan. All in all a pretty shoddy graph.
I haven't driven a car since 1997 (and not with any regularity since 1990). So I find it very hard to get how interesting most people seem to find this subject.
Extremely difficult to manage without a car in rural parts.
Oh, they're covered in cameras, but there's no law that says you have to let someone out when they've got a 'Give Way' sign in front of them. The autonomous cars will be very conservatively programmed, so it will be slow progress in the city rush hour for the self driving car - and for whoever is behind it!
The version of the software in Tony Blair's driverless car will, of course, be different to the version in those that carry us proles.
Suppose Mr. Blair's driverless car is pottering along a road which has a sheer precipice on the left, and on the right a pavement with a bus stop and queue. Just ahead, the road bends to the right.
A truck now approaches on the opposite side of the road, and as it does so, a lunatic overtakes it around the blind bend. Head-on collision is imminent, and the Blairmobile must decide what to do to avoid it.
The best decision would be to swerve left and send Tony Blair alone to oblivion over the precipice. Cost: one life.
The next best would be to swerve into the oncoming truck. Although Mr. Blair will die, the truck driver will probably survive as he's above the impact point. Cost: one life, one injured.
Mr. Blair's version of the software will instead choose to swerve into the bus queue. The multiple small impacts bring his car to a gentle stop, and he then emerges uninjured. Cost: ten to fifteen total nobodies.
For Blair read Juncker, or the Koch brothers, or a prominent Leaver, or anybody you hate or despise. But the idea that VIPs and slebs will take their chances with the same software as the plebs is for the birds.
I haven't driven a car since 1997 (and not with any regularity since 1990). So I find it very hard to get how interesting most people seem to find this subject.
I am the same, dates and all, with television. And with the same outcome.
The activist - who makes changes and gets things done - e.g. Gove?
The manager - who keeps things moving without adverse headlines - e.g. Hunt?
The firefighter - who moves from post to post to resolve problems frequently caused by activists - e.g. Hammond?
The ineffectual - tends to be a political appointment and political themselves - e.g. Leadsom?
Any others?
Gove and Hunt are leaving problems behind -- staffing shortages in the NHS, for instance, or not enough school places. Is Leadsom ineffectual? She does seem prone to slips of the tongue, as in Jane Austengate. Leader of the House is not a spending department.
I have driven a plug in hybrid now for 3 years, and it is a very nice vehicle to drive. However, I pay no excise duty, no congestion charge, and no fuel duty on the electricity I use, so how are the Gov going to replace this lost revenue. I do about 30 miles for £1.10 worth of electric and manage about 7000 miles per year on pure plug in electric. They only appear more economical because of these incentives.
Indeed. You can be reasonably confident that if the move to electric becomes a flood rather than a trickle then the tax base will follow.
On the other hand, as the market expands, the efficiency of electric should improve markedly as more money goes into R&D in search of the returns on offer in such a bigger market.
The national grid in GB has a capacity of ~61 GW. Mass elec. cars will melt it. Badly thought out, driven by industrial lobbying. The nuclear industry is desperate for a level load; cars are used as much in summer to winter.
IMO if elec cars are the answer it's the end of private motoring and the car industry. One might as well summon a driverless electric taxi to get to the train station ... or supermarket. Electric taxis could be charged off the 11 kV system, avoiding the huge cost of replacing all the small 230 V cables to houses.
I'll be 87 in 2040. Although I think I'll still be around, I'll be past caring.
Most cars in 1900 were electric. If you think they'll improve, look at the past. The range is similar then and now.
Fairly sure that's not true about 'most cars in 1900 were electric', though they were a substantial proportion. Likewise, today's cars have a much greater range - 200+ miles now compared with 50 or so 100 years ago. That's still not really enough unless the car's going to be used exclusively in urban areas (or can recharge within a few minutes) but then manufacturers have only very recently started putting serious money into R&D for electric.
While sharing your concern about the load on the grid and power generation, moving away from reliance on carbon fuels from dodgy countries must of itself be a good thing.
I haven't driven a car since 1997 (and not with any regularity since 1990). So I find it very hard to get how interesting most people seem to find this subject.
If you had said that you haven't been in a car (either as a driver or passenger) since 1997 that would be a remarkable statement.
One things which puzzles me is how the French and Norwegian positions on going over entirely to electric cars by 2040 and 2025 respectively can possibly be consistent with the spirit and letter of the Single Market rules. Surely vehicle type approval is entirely an EU-level decision? Quite apart from anything else, the French in particular keep lecturing everyone about the need for European solidarity and doing nothing to undermine the sacred nature of the Single Market.
I haven't driven a car since 1997 (and not with any regularity since 1990). So I find it very hard to get how interesting most people seem to find this subject.
I take it you don't live in Dorset then!
It's important because those who live in London tend to be the most influential in the public and corporate space.
Funnily enough, Osborne got this, but I wonder if the love affair parts of middle England have with Corbyn will quickly become unstuck once he's in power, because I expect most of his policy to be done through a very metropolitan filter, which is where he and his base is.
"A British newlywed couple's honeymoon to the United States was ruined when they were deported because the groom was Muslim.
Natasha Politakis, 29 and husband Ali Gul, 32, spent NZ $12,000 (£7,000) for their dream two-week trip to Los Angeles, Hawaii and Las Vegas.
The couple had to spend 26 hours sitting in LAX airport in Los Angeles before being refused entry and flown back to the UK.
While being detained they were refused showers and had all of their possessions confiscated. They were only given back their phones when they were back in Britain."
2040 doesn't sound particularly ambitious. If and when it happens, it could transform urban living for the better.
The UK probably needs time to build the power stations that are going to support all these electric cars. Also is it just petrol and diesel cars being banned in which case there are still going to be plenty of vans and trucks that batteries aren't yet powerful enough to power.
And pretty much every street parking space will need a car charger. There's a LOT of infrastructure required, compared to the petrol station network we have now.
The petrol station network has been in numerical decline for 40 years, but it has accelerated in the last 20. The culprit was supermarkets, whose market share went from nothing to 22% in 2000 to about 44% now.
We had about 30,000 petrol stations in 1980 which fell to 13,000 in 2000 and to about 8,500 today. About 1,500 of those are supermarket sites, so they do 44% of the volume through 18% of the sites.
It will be very, very difficult indeed in the transition between petrol/diesel and electricity. The unavailability of petrol will make current cars very troublesome to operate. On the positive side I will eventually be able to afford a Ferrari Daytona Spyder, although it won't be possible to drive it.
Sounds positive to me.
There are fewer petrol stations because cars are much more efficient these days, need to fill up less, and there is far fiercer competition, which consolidates at supermarkets and keeps prices low for the consumer.
Satnavs help people locate the nearest petrol station, or linked apps on their phones.
You should always fill up when you have <50 miles to go.</p>
There are fewer petrol stations solely because of supermarkets. The total road fuel market is 11% bigger now than in 1992 but the number of filling stations has more than halved.
Yes, and I don't think that's a problem.
There are things to mourn: closed railway lines, fewer community and cottage hospitals, village shops, pubs, and even your old local police station.
I struggle to get emotional about closed filling stations.
I haven't driven a car since 1997 (and not with any regularity since 1990). So I find it very hard to get how interesting most people seem to find this subject.
Extremely difficult to manage without a car in rural parts.
Especially if the age for a bus pass keeps getting later and later!
Buy... my... book, buy my book, go on, give it a look, the plot has quite the hook, just click the link below and to my story you’ll be took,
Spot of murder, spot of death, you’ll read with bated breathe, as the civil war rages what’s going on with the mages?
They can heal, they can kill, Do they prefer John Esden or Black Will? Or will they both end up out of luck?
Come on check the preview, or read a 5* review, and buy my book, buy my book, buy my book,
Treachery, and deceit, a story that’s hard to beat, There are kills, countless thrills, you’ll be squirming in your seat,
War breaks out and there’s woe when Penmere faces its foe, Esden musters a horde to end the violent discord,
Wesley fights, Charlotte schemes, she’s the woman of his dreams, but she’s ruthless and mercenary as you can get,
Karena’s brutal and cruel, but William’s nobody’s fool, as you’ll read in my book
If you want a wild ride, that my story will provide, buy my book, buy my book, buy my book
The kingdom has been torn asunder between rivals and war consumes the once peaceful land people wish for the happy times to return but nobles for war alone have planned Will the rulers come from Esden or Penmere? Common folk don’t care, it’s war they fear Men are mustered, and armies march, Supplies provisioned and plots soon hatched, Plans may be well-laid, but if the Hykirs invade in my book, in my book, tables are turned, the dice are shook There’s war from top to bottom, the kingdom’s turned rotten, men are dying amid the muck, broken limbs and head contusions, the story hurtles to its conclusion, villains live and heroes die, the first part climax is nigh, will Sophie survive or meet the end of her life?
She might escape, with any luck, Will Hugh win the day and make Esden pay? Find out in my book, in my book, in my book, in my book
Buy my book, buy my book, On sale, less than a buck
It’s over a hundred thousand words give it a look You’ll be entertained for hours by my storytelling prowess
The plot will twist, and then turn, will your favourite live you’ll soon learn
Page by page Line by line you’ll soon finish it’s mighty fine
It’s so enticing you might want a second look, or simply buy the sequel, KA’s only equal, Buy my book, buy my book, buy my book
There's a bit of a contradiction in there. On the one hand he's arguing that the Tories are suffering because people can't get on the housing ladder. But presumably, the people moving to Swindon, Reading, Crawley, Bracknell and Brighton are getting on the housing ladder.
Personally I think the Tories do need to worry about home ownership. But there is a tendency to think that the latest result is all that matters and that because the Tories didn't do as well as expected, things will inevitably get worse for them. What we've just had is an election where the Tories ran a pretty dreadful campaign and the opposition got a free ride to promise the earth to voters. And the Tories still won more votes than Labour.
The problem is, tlg, that the people who have to move to Swindon, Reading etc. to get on the housing ladder will a) take their politics with them, b) resent their commute and blame the government, and c) push up the prices in said commuter towns thus pricing locals who can't/won't get a job in London further out of the market.
This is a major reason those towns and many others like them will fall to Labour next time.
I cannot see a solution for the Tories though. If they made planning controls significantly easier, they'll piss-off their core constituency. Any other steps they take to reduce house prices will similarly upset their core voters.
Massive council house building?... Doesn't really fit the Tories core values, nor meet the property ladder desire (though it does help people to have their own place to live). But where would it be funded from?
Over time, people tend to take on the politics of the areas they move to. That's why most New Towns have switched from Labour to Conservative over the years.
I would expect housing to become a good deal more affordable in coming years, due to a number of trends.
1. Construction output has risen very strongly over the past four years. 2. Immigration from the EU will fall considerably due to Brexit. 3. The number of divorces has fallen quite sharply in recent years, and 4. The number of deaths is due to increase markedly, releasing new properties on to the market.
One things which puzzles me is how the French and Norwegian positions on going over entirely to electric cars by 2040 and 2025 respectively can possibly be consistent with the spirit and letter of the Single Market rules. Surely vehicle type approval is entirely an EU-level decision? Quite apart from anything else, the French in particular keep lecturing everyone about the need for European solidarity and doing nothing to undermine the sacred nature of the Single Market.
We banned unleaded petrol. Did all EU countries do so exactly at the same time ? They are not bringing new vehicle standards. All they are saying is that certain vehicles are not permitted.
London does not allow certain emission vehicles today.
"A British newlywed couple's honeymoon to the United States was ruined when they were deported because the groom was Muslim.
Natasha Politakis, 29 and husband Ali Gul, 32, spent NZ $12,000 (£7,000) for their dream two-week trip to Los Angeles, Hawaii and Las Vegas.
The couple had to spend 26 hours sitting in LAX airport in Los Angeles before being refused entry and flown back to the UK.
While being detained they were refused showers and had all of their possessions confiscated. They were only given back their phones when they were back in Britain."
I think the best course would be to allow the winner to recover costs from the loser in ET cases, which would be even-handed between employers and employees, and deter vexatious litigants.
There's a bit of a contradiction in there. On the one hand he's arguing that the Tories are suffering because people can't get on the housing ladder. But presumably, the people moving to Swindon, Reading, Crawley, Bracknell and Brighton are getting on the housing ladder.
Personally I think the Tories do need to worry about home ownership. But there is a tendency to think that the latest result is all that matters and that because the Tories didn't do as well as expected, things will inevitably get worse for them. What we've just had is an election where the Tories ran a pretty dreadful campaign and the opposition got a free ride to promise the earth to voters. And the Tories still won more votes than Labour.
The problem is, tlg, that the people who have to move to Swindon, Reading etc. to get on the housing ladder will a) take their politics with them, b) resent their commute and blame the government, and c) push up the prices in said commuter towns thus pricing locals who can't/won't get a job in London further out of the market.
This is a major reason those towns and many others like them will fall to Labour next time.
Over time, people tend to take on the politics of the areas they move to. That's why most New Towns have switched from Labour to Conservative over the years.
I would expect housing to become a good deal more affordable in coming years, due to a number of trends.
1. Construction output has risen very strongly over the past four years. 2. Immigration from the EU will fall considerably due to Brexit. 3. The number of divorces has fallen quite sharply in recent years, and 4. The number of deaths is due to increase markedly, releasing new properties on to the market.
Unless you think a lot about politics and have an ideology, or culturally identify overwhelmingly with one party or another, you vote practically and largely to your economic interest.
It's a bit chicken and egg, because the reason you move out the city is because you're looking for a different sort of life, but the economic interests of those living in the country and new towns tend to be different to those living in major cities.
I think the best course would be to allow the winner to recover costs from the loser in ET cases, which would be even-handed between employers and employees, and deter vexatious litigants.
The activist - who makes changes and gets things done - e.g. Gove?
The manager - who keeps things moving without adverse headlines - e.g. Hunt?
The firefighter - who moves from post to post to resolve problems frequently caused by activists - e.g. Hammond?
The ineffectual - tends to be a political appointment and political themselves - e.g. Leadsom?
Any others?
I'd split 'activist' into two sub-categories:
The ideologue: determined to implement their own agenda - e.g. Gove
The reformer: appointed to implement the government's / PM's agenda - not particularly visible under Cameron or May (as neither were radically reforming PMs) but plenty under Thatcher and Blair.
I wouldn't have 'ineffectual' as a category: that's a measure of how well they did what they did rather than why they did it and why they were there. 'Political appointee' deserves a category in its own right though.
I think the best course would be to allow the winner to recover costs from the loser in ET cases, which would be even-handed between employers and employees, and deter vexatious litigants.
That would mean no employee could ever risk it.
It's the same rule with litigation generally. People run the risk of paying the other side's costs if they lose.
I haven't driven a car since 1997 (and not with any regularity since 1990). So I find it very hard to get how interesting most people seem to find this subject.
If you had said that you haven't been in a car (either as a driver or passenger) since 1997 that would be a remarkable statement.
That's a very London thing to say.
Let's face it, car ownership in London fell between 2001 and 2011 (https://tinyurl.com/ybzrqtnp) so to hear that someone (who can drive) hasn't driven a car for 20 years is perhaps not that surprising. The public transport is excellent and the cost of housing is very expensive, so why bother owning a car. But it would be a surprise if someone hadn't jumped in a cab once or twice.
The activist - who makes changes and gets things done - e.g. Gove?
The manager - who keeps things moving without adverse headlines - e.g. Hunt?
The firefighter - who moves from post to post to resolve problems frequently caused by activists - e.g. Hammond?
The ineffectual - tends to be a political appointment and political themselves - e.g. Leadsom?
Any others?
I'd split 'activist' into two sub-categories:
The ideologue: determined to implement their own agenda - e.g. Gove
The reformer: appointed to implement the government's / PM's agenda - not particularly visible under Cameron or May (as neither were radically reforming PMs) but plenty under Thatcher and Blair.
I wouldn't have 'ineffectual' as a category: that's a measure of how well they did what they did rather than why they did it and why they were there. 'Political appointee' deserves a category in its own right though.
And of course you need a special category just for John Prescott.
I haven't driven a car since 1997 (and not with any regularity since 1990). So I find it very hard to get how interesting most people seem to find this subject.
That'll explain your continued shrewd and insightful posts
“We know that regularly driving for more than two to three hours a day is bad for your heart. The research suggests it is bad for your brain, too, perhaps because your mind is less active in these hours. Driving causes stress and fatigue, with studies showing the links between them and cognitive decline.”
I haven't driven a car since 1997 (and not with any regularity since 1990). So I find it very hard to get how interesting most people seem to find this subject.
That'll explain your continued shrewd and insightful posts
“We know that regularly driving for more than two to three hours a day is bad for your heart. The research suggests it is bad for your brain, too, perhaps because your mind is less active in these hours. Driving causes stress and fatigue, with studies showing the links between them and cognitive decline.”
OTOH, I've also read the opposite, that driving helps to keep the mind active, and reduces the risk of dementia.
As for cycling, yes, there may be an uptick in usage if air pollution is reduced but the facts remain that you still turn up sweaty wherever you're going, you're still vulnerable to other road-users wielding heavy, fast metal boxes, and you're still at the mercy of the weather.
I looked into a pushbike or a moped a few years ago as an alternative to the Tube, and concluded I'd end up paying for both.
If I have to go to a 9am meeting at someone else's office I am not going to cycle in to arrive at mine at 7.30, change, and commute over to their office. I'm going to Tube it straight there, which means I'll Tube it home again. So either I pay the maximum daily whack for a Tube ticket or I buy a season ticket and under-use it while also paying for the two wheels.
I think it only really works for people who work flexi hours in one place all the time.
I looked at this. For me, an travelling to work 4 days a week and the occasional bus ride is cheaper as pay-as-you-go than a rolling monthly travel card, especially when vacation time is taken into consideration.
Season tickets for the tube are for mugs or a few edge cases.
Not if you work five days a week (as most people do) and/or can get an annual travelcard either interest free from work or from CommuterClub.
I haven't driven a car since 1997 (and not with any regularity since 1990). So I find it very hard to get how interesting most people seem to find this subject.
We are going on holiday to the Western Isles next month. Driving our own car makes that sort of trip not simply easier but outright possible. It would be a very dull life if we were restricted to cities, towns and the public transport network.
I haven't driven a car since 1997 (and not with any regularity since 1990). So I find it very hard to get how interesting most people seem to find this subject.
That'll explain your continued shrewd and insightful posts
“We know that regularly driving for more than two to three hours a day is bad for your heart. The research suggests it is bad for your brain, too, perhaps because your mind is less active in these hours. Driving causes stress and fatigue, with studies showing the links between them and cognitive decline.”
OTOH, I've also read the opposite, that driving helps to keep the mind active, and reduces the risk of dementia.
It could be to do with the type of driving. Perhaps a jaunt through the countryside has a different effect to a grinding 2-hour commute.
There's a bit of a contradiction in there. On the one hand he's arguing that the Tories are suffering because people can't get on the housing ladder. But presumably, the people moving to Swindon, Reading, Crawley, Bracknell and Brighton are getting on the housing ladder.
Personally I think the Tories do need to worry about home ownership. But there is a tendency to think that the latest result is all that matters and that because the Tories didn't do as well as expected, things will inevitably get worse for them. What we've just had is an election where the Tories ran a pretty dreadful campaign and the opposition got a free ride to promise the earth to voters. And the Tories still won more votes than Labour.
The problem is, tlg, that the people who have to move to Swindon, Reading etc. to get on the housing ladder will a) take their politics with them, b) resent their commute and blame the government, and c) push up the prices in said commuter towns thus pricing locals who can't/won't get a job in London further out of the market.
This is a major reason those towns and many others like them will fall to Labour next time.
I cannot see a solution for the Tories though. If they made planning controls significantly easier, they'll piss-off their core constituency. Any other steps they take to reduce house prices will similarly upset their core voters.
Massive council house building?... Doesn't really fit the Tories core values, nor meet the property ladder desire (though it does help people to have their own place to live). But where would it be funded from?
Over time, people tend to take on the politics of the areas they move to. That's why most New Towns have switched from Labour to Conservative over the years.
I would expect housing to become a good deal more affordable in coming years, due to a number of trends.
1. Construction output has risen very strongly over the past four years. 2. Immigration from the EU will fall considerably due to Brexit. 3. The number of divorces has fallen quite sharply in recent years, and 4. The number of deaths is due to increase markedly, releasing new properties on to the market.
Re 4, is Tory NHS and care policy an exercise in population control?!
Massive council house building is distinctly One Nation Tory. Harold Macmillan did it.
We banned unleaded petrol. Did all EU countries do so exactly at the same time ? They are not bringing new vehicle standards. All they are saying is that certain vehicles are not permitted.
I'm struggling to see why you think that's not a new vehicle standard. It seems to be 100% the definition of a vehicle standard.
More generally, the implication of the French policy would be that a car can be legally sold in Germany but not just across the border in France. That would explode the entire rationale and legal basis of the Single Market.
That's what it will look like eventually, but it I was agreeing with @JosiasJessop that it will take longer than expected for the technology to mature.
Yes, an autonomous car is useless if it can't work like a taxi. In fact, an autonomous car than will hand control back to the human driver in an emergency is probably more dangerous - as the human may not be paying sufficient attention.
That's what Google think: Level 5 or nothing.
There are three broad approaches towards autonomous cars: 1) go for level 5 with no immediate steps. The Google approach, and fair enough. 2) go for high levels, publicise it as 'driverless' and make it the driver's duty to remain alert. Unworkable. 3) Bring in increasing numbers of drivers' aids, perfect them, and move on. What Merc, Volvo etc are doing.
1) and 3) are the honest options. Tesla goes for option 2 which is, IMO, a dangerous lie.
And that matters: it is as much an education of the public as it is technology, and Tesla's pushing the PR of their tech far further than the tech can currently stand.
Having spoken to some of the leading people in the field, who are heading up the various well known company teams, there is a divergence of how to proceed.
One group see self-driving cars as a service. They want to get to level 5 at least in one environment and roll it out, then grow the service city by city, country by country.
The other want to slowly progress through the levels, but at each level the car should work in all possible environments.
Should add that those saying Uber are going under, they have recently invested a huge amount to hire a team of some of the best people at this and their research team at University of Toronto is growing extremely rapidly.
I haven't driven a car since 1997 (and not with any regularity since 1990). So I find it very hard to get how interesting most people seem to find this subject.
That's because you live and work in London.
I don't own a car because I live and work in London, but I do use Zipcar occasionally for big shopping trips and/or day trips to places that trains are inconvenient.
I haven't driven a car since 1997 (and not with any regularity since 1990). So I find it very hard to get how interesting most people seem to find this subject.
We are going on holiday to the Western Isles next month. Driving our own car makes that sort of trip not simply easier but outright possible. It would be a very dull life if we were restricted to cities, towns and the public transport network.
Being without a car is only really possible in a big city where the government spends billions on public transport infrastructure. The rest of the country can sod off.
I have driven a plug in hybrid now for 3 years, and it is a very nice vehicle to drive. However, I pay no excise duty, no congestion charge, and no fuel duty on the electricity I use, so how are the Gov going to replace this lost revenue. I do about 30 miles for £1.10 worth of electric and manage about 7000 miles per year on pure plug in electric. They only appear more economical because of these incentives.
Indeed. You can be reasonably confident that if the move to electric becomes a flood rather than a trickle then the tax base will follow.
On the other hand, as the market expands, the efficiency of electric should improve markedly as more money goes into R&D in search of the returns on offer in such a bigger market.
The national grid in GB has a capacity of ~61 GW. Mass elec. cars will melt it. Badly thought out, driven by industrial lobbying. The nuclear industry is desperate for a level load; cars are used as much in summer to winter.
IMO if elec cars are the answer it's the end of private motoring and the car industry. One might as well summon a driverless electric taxi to get to the train station ... or supermarket. Electric taxis could be charged off the 11 kV system, avoiding the huge cost of replacing all the small 230 V cables to houses.
I'll be 87 in 2040. Although I think I'll still be around, I'll be past caring.
Most cars in 1900 were electric. If you think they'll improve, look at the past. The range is similar then and now.
Fairly sure that's not true about 'most cars in 1900 were electric', though they were a substantial proportion. Likewise, today's cars have a much greater range - 200+ miles now compared with 50 or so 100 years ago. That's still not really enough unless the car's going to be used exclusively in urban areas (or can recharge within a few minutes) but then manufacturers have only very recently started putting serious money into R&D for electric.
While sharing your concern about the load on the grid and power generation, moving away from reliance on carbon fuels from dodgy countries must of itself be a good thing.
Agreed. Some people are simply opposed to change - any change !
We banned unleaded petrol. Did all EU countries do so exactly at the same time ? They are not bringing new vehicle standards. All they are saying is that certain vehicles are not permitted.
I'm struggling to see why you think that's not a new vehicle standard. It seems to be 100% the definition of a vehicle standard.
More generally, the implication of the French policy would be that a car can be legally sold in Germany but not just across the border in France. That would explode the entire rationale and legal basis of the Single Market.
Surely the question is about what can be driven on public roads, not what can be sold per se.
We banned unleaded petrol. Did all EU countries do so exactly at the same time ? They are not bringing new vehicle standards. All they are saying is that certain vehicles are not permitted.
I'm struggling to see why you think that's not a new vehicle standard. It seems to be 100% the definition of a vehicle standard.
More generally, the implication of the French policy would be that a car can be legally sold in Germany but not just across the border in France. That would explode the entire rationale and legal basis of the Single Market.
Surely the question is about what can be driven on public roads, not what can be sold per se.
Good luck with that argument in a court!
In any case, that makes it even worse. Are they saying a German who owns a shiny new petrol BMW won't be able to drive through France?
That's what it will look like eventually, but it I was agreeing with @JosiasJessop that it will take longer than expected for the technology to mature.
Yes, an autonomous car is useless if it can't work like a taxi. In fact, an autonomous car than will hand control back to the human driver in an emergency is probably more dangerous - as the human may not be paying sufficient attention.
That's what Google think: Level 5 or nothing.
There are three broad approaches towards autonomous cars: 1) go for level 5 with no immediate steps. The Google approach, and fair enough. 2) go for high levels, publicise it as 'driverless' and make it the driver's duty to remain alert. Unworkable. 3) Bring in increasing numbers of drivers' aids, perfect them, and move on. What Merc, Volvo etc are doing.
1) and 3) are the honest options. Tesla goes for option 2 which is, IMO, a dangerous lie.
And that matters: it is as much an education of the public as it is technology, and Tesla's pushing the PR of their tech far further than the tech can currently stand.
Having spoken to some of the leading people in the field, who are heading up the various well known company teams, there is a divergence of how to proceed.
One group see self-driving cars as a service. They want to get to level 5 at least in one environment and roll it out, then grow the service city by city, country by country.
The other want to slowly progress through the levels, but at each level the car should work in all possible environments.
Should add that those saying Uber are going under, they have recently invested a huge amount to hire a team of some of the best people at this and their research team at University of Toronto is growing extremely rapidly.
Thanks. As a matter of interest, what do you mean by 'environment' in this context?
Mr. Smithson, I was just about to post that I'd seen a little news and Gove was talking about local authorities deciding what is right in each city.
Much of the country isn't city. It's town. And village.
I think talk of banning new petrol vehicles is a potentially very serious mistake. [I have vague memories of writing something similar about the demented Conservative policy at the election].
Probably be more slow-burn, but worse.
They should be promoting electrical cars, if they think that's a good idea, and allowing the infrastructure to build up, instead of trying to impose what seems a feasible metropolitan policy on the whole country.
Do we know how many more power stations we will need to sustain the current amount of car travel? The maths must be doable and done.
It's not just power stations, it's also the entire distribution network.
OTOH it's potentially easier to handle variable supply and demand if every street has a bunch of internet-connected batteries-on-wheels hoping to charge themselves up as cheaply as possible.
We banned unleaded petrol. Did all EU countries do so exactly at the same time ? They are not bringing new vehicle standards. All they are saying is that certain vehicles are not permitted.
I'm struggling to see why you think that's not a new vehicle standard. It seems to be 100% the definition of a vehicle standard.
More generally, the implication of the French policy would be that a car can be legally sold in Germany but not just across the border in France. That would explode the entire rationale and legal basis of the Single Market.
A guess: would it be tackled in the same way that sales of left-hand drive vehicles are here in the UK? It can be done, but there are extra hurdles to go over? (AIUI)
In other words, anyone buying an IC-engined car in France would have extra layers of bureaucracy to overcome.
I haven't driven a car since 1997 (and not with any regularity since 1990). So I find it very hard to get how interesting most people seem to find this subject.
We are going on holiday to the Western Isles next month. Driving our own car makes that sort of trip not simply easier but outright possible. It would be a very dull life if we were restricted to cities, towns and the public transport network.
I expect the Left to come down on motorists like a ton of bricks as soon as they regain power.
Do we know how many more power stations we will need to sustain the current amount of car travel? The maths must be doable and done.
It's not just power stations, it's also the entire distribution network.
OTOH it's potentially easier to handle variable supply and demand if every street has a bunch of internet-connected batteries-on-wheels hoping to charge themselves up as cheaply as possible.
In the long-term, yes, that might be so. But it's going to require a massive rejig of the network (made worse by the fact that renewable energy sources tend to be geographically spread out).
That's what it will look like eventually, but it I was agreeing with @JosiasJessop that it will take longer than expected for the technology to mature.
Yes, an autonomous car is useless if it can't work like a taxi. In fact, an autonomous car than will hand control back to the human driver in an emergency is probably more dangerous - as the human may not be paying sufficient attention.
That's what Google think: Level 5 or nothing.
There are three broad approaches towards autonomous cars: 1) go for level 5 with no immediate steps. The Google approach, and fair enough. 2) go for high levels, publicise it as 'driverless' and make it the driver's duty to remain alert. Unworkable. 3) Bring in increasing numbers of drivers' aids, perfect them, and move on. What Merc, Volvo etc are doing.
1) and 3) are the honest options. Tesla goes for option 2 which is, IMO, a dangerous lie.
And that matters: it is as much an education of the public as it is technology, and Tesla's pushing the PR of their tech far further than the tech can currently stand.
Having spoken to some of the leading people in the field, who are heading up the various well known company teams, there is a divergence of how to proceed.
One group see self-driving cars as a service. They want to get to level 5 at least in one environment and roll it out, then grow the service city by city, country by country.
The other want to slowly progress through the levels, but at each level the car should work in all possible environments.
Should add that those saying Uber are going under, they have recently invested a huge amount to hire a team of some of the best people at this and their research team at University of Toronto is growing extremely rapidly.
Thanks. As a matter of interest, what do you mean by 'environment' in this context?
Well the likes of Uber are talking a complete city, such having mapped the whole of Toronto metro area.
This is again another area of divergence, do you create HD maps of a consistent area or do you have low res maps and the car still be able to navigate / send the data back and the whole fleet able to learn from that. You can do the later if you are selling this as a service.
There is also a lot of work on cars learning in one "environment" and then being able to transfer that learning to another e.g. say a city in Germany, then be able to transfer that learning to a city in US.
One other thing I should add, some cities are actually investing in changing their roads / signs / signals to be aid self driving cars. nuTonomy tested in Singapore by doing this.
"A British newlywed couple's honeymoon to the United States was ruined when they were deported because the groom was Muslim.
Natasha Politakis, 29 and husband Ali Gul, 32, spent NZ $12,000 (£7,000) for their dream two-week trip to Los Angeles, Hawaii and Las Vegas.
The couple had to spend 26 hours sitting in LAX airport in Los Angeles before being refused entry and flown back to the UK.
While being detained they were refused showers and had all of their possessions confiscated. They were only given back their phones when they were back in Britain."
I haven't driven a car since 1997 (and not with any regularity since 1990). So I find it very hard to get how interesting most people seem to find this subject.
We are going on holiday to the Western Isles next month. Driving our own car makes that sort of trip not simply easier but outright possible. It would be a very dull life if we were restricted to cities, towns and the public transport network.
Being without a car is only really possible in a big city where the government spends billions on public transport infrastructure. The rest of the country can sod off.
This thread reminded me - yet again - to apply for my 60+ Oyster card.
F1: browsing the markets. Alonso for points at 1.66 is mad. Whilst credible, he's had a reliability failure at well over 50% of races.
Raikkonen podium at 4 looks interesting, likewise qualifying winner each way at 15 (NB not yet tips, I'm just marking them for future consideration when I have a little more time). Vettel win at 4 looks alright, although I've already backed him at 5.2.
Anyway, I'll give those a bit of a think when I'm on later. Renault/Hulkenberg may also be worth considering.
I haven't driven a car since 1997 (and not with any regularity since 1990). So I find it very hard to get how interesting most people seem to find this subject.
We are going on holiday to the Western Isles next month. Driving our own car makes that sort of trip not simply easier but outright possible. It would be a very dull life if we were restricted to cities, towns and the public transport network.
Being without a car is only really possible in a big city where the government spends billions on public transport infrastructure. The rest of the country can sod off.
This thread reminded me - yet again - to apply for my 60+ Oyster card.
"A British newlywed couple's honeymoon to the United States was ruined when they were deported because the groom was Muslim.
Natasha Politakis, 29 and husband Ali Gul, 32, spent NZ $12,000 (£7,000) for their dream two-week trip to Los Angeles, Hawaii and Las Vegas.
The couple had to spend 26 hours sitting in LAX airport in Los Angeles before being refused entry and flown back to the UK.
While being detained they were refused showers and had all of their possessions confiscated. They were only given back their phones when they were back in Britain."
We banned unleaded petrol. Did all EU countries do so exactly at the same time ? They are not bringing new vehicle standards. All they are saying is that certain vehicles are not permitted.
I'm struggling to see why you think that's not a new vehicle standard. It seems to be 100% the definition of a vehicle standard.
More generally, the implication of the French policy would be that a car can be legally sold in Germany but not just across the border in France. That would explode the entire rationale and legal basis of the Single Market.
Since the UK and France - both in the EU - have announced this policy, it must be EU reg compliant.
"A British newlywed couple's honeymoon to the United States was ruined when they were deported because the groom was Muslim.
Natasha Politakis, 29 and husband Ali Gul, 32, spent NZ $12,000 (£7,000) for their dream two-week trip to Los Angeles, Hawaii and Las Vegas.
The couple had to spend 26 hours sitting in LAX airport in Los Angeles before being refused entry and flown back to the UK.
While being detained they were refused showers and had all of their possessions confiscated. They were only given back their phones when they were back in Britain."
I look forward to finding out the real story once this has been shared on social media 200,000 times...
I seemed to remember we got a sob story of a family who were stopped from boarding a flight to Florida a while ago, then we found that they had rather an interesting back story.
The problem can also be that somebody shares the same name / date of birth with a person of interest. Mrs Urquhart once had that and we asked to go to the special place. It was revealed that somebody with essentially the same name and DoB was banned from entering the US.
Also, if you don't remain calm and polite, US immigration have the right, visa or not, to tell you to get back on the plane. I have found some US airports they are a lot less prepared to take any shit, because they have to deal with a lot e.g. Miami with the history of drug smugglers, don't get shitty if they ask you lots of questions coming off a flight from Latin America, cos they won't take you being a dick.
I haven't driven a car since 1997 (and not with any regularity since 1990). So I find it very hard to get how interesting most people seem to find this subject.
We are going on holiday to the Western Isles next month. Driving our own car makes that sort of trip not simply easier but outright possible. It would be a very dull life if we were restricted to cities, towns and the public transport network.
I expect the Left to come down on motorists like a ton of bricks as soon as they regain power.
Which of course Labour could, politically. So it pisses off rural and older voters - no problem. One of the dangers in such a divided country is that it not only makes it easier (for either party) to hit the other's support but it incentivises such behaviour.
The version of the software in Tony Blair's driverless car will, of course, be different to the version in those that carry us proles.
Suppose Mr. Blair's driverless car is pottering along a road which has a sheer precipice on the left, and on the right a pavement with a bus stop and queue. Just ahead, the road bends to the right.
A truck now approaches on the opposite side of the road, and as it does so, a lunatic overtakes it around the blind bend. Head-on collision is imminent, and the Blairmobile must decide what to do to avoid it.
The best decision would be to swerve left and send Tony Blair alone to oblivion over the precipice. Cost: one life.
The next best would be to swerve into the oncoming truck. Although Mr. Blair will die, the truck driver will probably survive as he's above the impact point. Cost: one life, one injured.
Mr. Blair's version of the software will instead choose to swerve into the bus queue. The multiple small impacts bring his car to a gentle stop, and he then emerges uninjured. Cost: ten to fifteen total nobodies.
For Blair read Juncker, or the Koch brothers, or a prominent Leaver, or anybody you hate or despise. But the idea that VIPs and slebs will take their chances with the same software as the plebs is for the birds.
They'll just have cars with drivers. Much less easy to hack.
But you make a good point: AIUI there is a great deal of debate over what the control laws for cars should be. I expect it would vary from country to country: in Holland they'll probably try to save cyclists over drivers, in Holland they'll want to save their beautiful car, and in the US it'll be "what the **** is that thing doing on my road?"
"A British newlywed couple's honeymoon to the United States was ruined when they were deported because the groom was Muslim.
Natasha Politakis, 29 and husband Ali Gul, 32, spent NZ $12,000 (£7,000) for their dream two-week trip to Los Angeles, Hawaii and Las Vegas.
The couple had to spend 26 hours sitting in LAX airport in Los Angeles before being refused entry and flown back to the UK.
While being detained they were refused showers and had all of their possessions confiscated. They were only given back their phones when they were back in Britain."
The version of the software in Tony Blair's driverless car will, of course, be different to the version in those that carry us proles.
Suppose Mr. Blair's driverless car is pottering along a road which has a sheer precipice on the left, and on the right a pavement with a bus stop and queue. Just ahead, the road bends to the right.
A truck now approaches on the opposite side of the road, and as it does so, a lunatic overtakes it around the blind bend. Head-on collision is imminent, and the Blairmobile must decide what to do to avoid it.
The best decision would be to swerve left and send Tony Blair alone to oblivion over the precipice. Cost: one life.
The next best would be to swerve into the oncoming truck. Although Mr. Blair will die, the truck driver will probably survive as he's above the impact point. Cost: one life, one injured.
Mr. Blair's version of the software will instead choose to swerve into the bus queue. The multiple small impacts bring his car to a gentle stop, and he then emerges uninjured. Cost: ten to fifteen total nobodies.
For Blair read Juncker, or the Koch brothers, or a prominent Leaver, or anybody you hate or despise. But the idea that VIPs and slebs will take their chances with the same software as the plebs is for the birds.
They'll just have cars with drivers. Much less easy to hack.
But you make a good point: AIUI there is a great deal of debate over what the control laws for cars should be. I expect it would vary from country to country: in Holland they'll probably try to save cyclists over drivers, in Holland they'll want to save their beautiful car, and in the US it'll be "what the **** is that thing doing on my road?"
One other interesting legal issue, whose fault will it be / who can be sued....Surprisingly and rather frankly, I heard one of the top people in this say it will ultimately be the company who coded the software.
Well the likes of Uber are talking a complete city, such having mapped the whole of Toronto metro area.
This is again another area of divergence, do you create HD maps of a consistent area or do you have low res maps and the car still be able to navigate / send the data back and the whole fleet able to learn from that. You can do the later if you are selling this as a service.
There is also a lot of work on cars learning in one "environment" and then being able to transfer that learning to another e.g. say a city in Germany, then be able to transfer that learning to a city in US.
One other thing I should add, some cities are actually investing in changing their roads / signs / signals to be aid self driving cars. nuTonomy tested in Singapore by doing this.
Again, thanks.
I don't see mapping as the way forward for autonomy, especially in built-up areas. It can help, but anything that relies on it is nowhere near 'true' AI. After all, I can drive around a strange city safely without having to know where every traffic light is.
I believe some companies believe the market for data in autonomous cars (both used by, and generated by) will be bigger than the market for the cars themselves. No wonder Google are so interested.
As for cyclists, the state-of-the-art is really poor:
"However, when it comes to spotting and orienting bikes and bicyclists, performance drops significantly. Deep3DBox is among the best, yet it spots only 74 percent of bikes in the benchmarking test. And though it can orient over 88 percent of the cars in the test images, it scores just 59 percent for the bikes."
I haven't driven a car since 1997 (and not with any regularity since 1990). So I find it very hard to get how interesting most people seem to find this subject.
We are going on holiday to the Western Isles next month. Driving our own car makes that sort of trip not simply easier but outright possible. It would be a very dull life if we were restricted to cities, towns and the public transport network.
I expect the Left to come down on motorists like a ton of bricks as soon as they regain power.
Which of course Labour could, politically. So it pisses off rural and older voters - no problem. One of the dangers in such a divided country is that it not only makes it easier (for either party) to hit the other's support but it incentivises such behaviour.
To an extent, but that could quickly cost them Lincoln, Bedford, Canterbury and Stroud and put Milton Keynes and Swindon way off the map.
Well the likes of Uber are talking a complete city, such having mapped the whole of Toronto metro area.
This is again another area of divergence, do you create HD maps of a consistent area or do you have low res maps and the car still be able to navigate / send the data back and the whole fleet able to learn from that. You can do the later if you are selling this as a service.
There is also a lot of work on cars learning in one "environment" and then being able to transfer that learning to another e.g. say a city in Germany, then be able to transfer that learning to a city in US.
One other thing I should add, some cities are actually investing in changing their roads / signs / signals to be aid self driving cars. nuTonomy tested in Singapore by doing this.
Again, thanks.
I don't see mapping as the way forward for autonomy, especially in built-up areas. It can help, but anything that relies on it is nowhere near 'true' AI. After all, I can drive around a strange city safely without having to know where every traffic light is.
I believe some companies believe the market for data in autonomous cars (both used by, and generated by) will be bigger than the market for the cars themselves. No wonder Google are so interested.
As for cyclists, the state-of-the-art is really poor:
"However, when it comes to spotting and orienting bikes and bicyclists, performance drops significantly. Deep3DBox is among the best, yet it spots only 74 percent of bikes in the benchmarking test. And though it can orient over 88 percent of the cars in the test images, it scores just 59 percent for the bikes."
The lady who has been hired by Uber agrees in terms of mapping. She has some excellent work where the vehicle can recognize where it is from just an OS map in a split second without any GPS or advanced computer vision which tries to identify surrounding landmarks. It works based upon features such as the changes in curvature of the road, size of road, any sign of an intersection or turn off ahead (and if so what type). One flaw is obviously somewhere like NYC where the whole downtown is a grid system.
Also, done some nice work of automatically merging OS maps with aerial photography and built maps good enough for self driving cars from that.
As you say Google have a different opinion, which is lets collect as much data as possible, because thats what we are good at.
On topic ref tech advances ... and apologies if it's already been posted below:
Toyota is in production engineering for a solid state battery, which uses a solid electrolyte instead of the conventional semi-liquid version used in today's lithium-ion batteries. The company said it aims to put the new tech in production electric vehicles as early as 2020
The improved battery technology would make it possible to create smaller, more lightweight lithium-ion batteries for use in EVs, that could also potentially boost the total charge capacity and result in longer-range vehicles. Another improvement for this type of battery would be longer overall usable life, which would make it possible to both use the vehicles they're installed in for longer, and add potential for product recycling and alternative post-vehicle life (some companies are already looking into putting EV batteries into use in home and commercial energy storage, for example).
He is becoming a little bit of a parody. Did he expect a government minister to say to tech companies "sorry folks, no chance of you bringing skilled workers in after 2019"?
I mean, if he was talking to Tesco, and assuring then that the cost of cashiers wouldn't rise as 19 year old Romanians would still be free to come, that would be one thing. But telling people in high skill industries that the government would still support them is not a betrayal, it's common sense.
The version of the software in Tony Blair's driverless car will, of course, be different to the version in those that carry us proles.
Suppose Mr. Blair's driverless car is pottering along a road which has a sheer precipice on the left, and on the right a pavement with a bus stop and queue. Just ahead, the road bends to the right.
A truck now approaches on the opposite side of the road, and as it does so, a lunatic overtakes it around the blind bend. Head-on collision is imminent, and the Blairmobile must decide what to do to avoid it.
The best decision would be to swerve left and send Tony Blair alone to oblivion over the precipice. Cost: one life.
The next best would be to swerve into the oncoming truck. Although Mr. Blair will die, the truck driver will probably survive as he's above the impact point. Cost: one life, one injured.
Mr. Blair's version of the software will instead choose to swerve into the bus queue. The multiple small impacts bring his car to a gentle stop, and he then emerges uninjured. Cost: ten to fifteen total nobodies.
For Blair read Juncker, or the Koch brothers, or a prominent Leaver, or anybody you hate or despise. But the idea that VIPs and slebs will take their chances with the same software as the plebs is for the birds.
They'll just have cars with drivers. Much less easy to hack.
But you make a good point: AIUI there is a great deal of debate over what the control laws for cars should be. I expect it would vary from country to country: in Holland they'll probably try to save cyclists over drivers, in Holland they'll want to save their beautiful car, and in the US it'll be "what the **** is that thing doing on my road?"
One other interesting legal issue, whose fault will it be / who can be sued....Surprisingly and rather frankly, I heard one of the top people in this say it will ultimately be the company who coded the software.
Volvo and others have already accepted liability. If Telsa's systems were as good as they claim, they'd do the same. It's telling they do not.
I haven't driven a car since 1997 (and not with any regularity since 1990). So I find it very hard to get how interesting most people seem to find this subject.
We are going on holiday to the Western Isles next month. Driving our own car makes that sort of trip not simply easier but outright possible. It would be a very dull life if we were restricted to cities, towns and the public transport network.
I expect the Left to come down on motorists like a ton of bricks as soon as they regain power.
Which of course Labour could, politically. So it pisses off rural and older voters - no problem. One of the dangers in such a divided country is that it not only makes it easier (for either party) to hit the other's support but it incentivises such behaviour.
To an extent, but that could quickly cost them Lincoln, Bedford, Canterbury and Stroud and put Milton Keynes and Swindon way off the map.
This sounds like the pre-97 scare stories that Labour would decimate the army, but it didn't and now the Tories have.
He is becoming a little bit of a parody. Did he expect a government minister to say to tech companies "sorry folks, no chance of you bringing skilled workers in after 2019"?
I mean, if he was talking to Tesco, and assuring then that the cost of cashiers wouldn't rise as 19 year old Romanians would still be free to come, that would be one thing. But telling people in high skill industries that the government would still support them is not a betrayal, it's common sense.
Wasn't it UKIP policy to have a five year freeze on all migration?
On topic ref tech advances ... and apologies if it's already been posted below:
Toyota is in production engineering for a solid state battery, which uses a solid electrolyte instead of the conventional semi-liquid version used in today's lithium-ion batteries. The company said it aims to put the new tech in production electric vehicles as early as 2020
The improved battery technology would make it possible to create smaller, more lightweight lithium-ion batteries for use in EVs, that could also potentially boost the total charge capacity and result in longer-range vehicles. Another improvement for this type of battery would be longer overall usable life, which would make it possible to both use the vehicles they're installed in for longer, and add potential for product recycling and alternative post-vehicle life (some companies are already looking into putting EV batteries into use in home and commercial energy storage, for example).
New battery advances are reported on all the time, yet battery development is still glacially slow. It's almost as if the reports invariably overstate the tech.
Hopefully one of the advances will pan out and make the developers a fortune. But I wouldn't gamble on any one system without expecting to lose my money.
I haven't driven a car since 1997 (and not with any regularity since 1990). So I find it very hard to get how interesting most people seem to find this subject.
We are going on holiday to the Western Isles next month. Driving our own car makes that sort of trip not simply easier but outright possible. It would be a very dull life if we were restricted to cities, towns and the public transport network.
I expect the Left to come down on motorists like a ton of bricks as soon as they regain power.
Which of course Labour could, politically. So it pisses off rural and older voters - no problem. One of the dangers in such a divided country is that it not only makes it easier (for either party) to hit the other's support but it incentivises such behaviour.
It depends what you mean by 'a ton of bricks'. Reintroducing the fuel duty escalator would bring back bad memories for Labour from the early 2000s. I doubt they'd want a repeat of that eposide.
On topic ref tech advances ... and apologies if it's already been posted below:
Toyota is in production engineering for a solid state battery, which uses a solid electrolyte instead of the conventional semi-liquid version used in today's lithium-ion batteries. The company said it aims to put the new tech in production electric vehicles as early as 2020
The improved battery technology would make it possible to create smaller, more lightweight lithium-ion batteries for use in EVs, that could also potentially boost the total charge capacity and result in longer-range vehicles. Another improvement for this type of battery would be longer overall usable life, which would make it possible to both use the vehicles they're installed in for longer, and add potential for product recycling and alternative post-vehicle life (some companies are already looking into putting EV batteries into use in home and commercial energy storage, for example).
New battery advances are reported on all the time, yet battery development is still glacially slow. It's almost as if the reports invariably overstate the tech.
Hopefully one of the advances will pan out and make the developers a fortune. But I wouldn't gamble on any one system without expecting to lose my money.
I always find the lack of progress on battery technology quite fascinating. It is like an inverse Moore's Law. I mean we are still sticking AAs in lots of things. Where as when it comes to most tech, no kid has any idea of betamax / VHS / walkmans / the day before the internet.
He is becoming a little bit of a parody. Did he expect a government minister to say to tech companies "sorry folks, no chance of you bringing skilled workers in after 2019"?
I mean, if he was talking to Tesco, and assuring then that the cost of cashiers wouldn't rise as 19 year old Romanians would still be free to come, that would be one thing. But telling people in high skill industries that the government would still support them is not a betrayal, it's common sense.
Wasn't it UKIP policy to have a five year freeze on all migration?
Immigration - I think they were perfectly happy for some groups to emigrate!
I haven't driven a car since 1997 (and not with any regularity since 1990). So I find it very hard to get how interesting most people seem to find this subject.
We are going on holiday to the Western Isles next month. Driving our own car makes that sort of trip not simply easier but outright possible. It would be a very dull life if we were restricted to cities, towns and the public transport network.
I expect the Left to come down on motorists like a ton of bricks as soon as they regain power.
Which of course Labour could, politically. So it pisses off rural and older voters - no problem. One of the dangers in such a divided country is that it not only makes it easier (for either party) to hit the other's support but it incentivises such behaviour.
To an extent, but that could quickly cost them Lincoln, Bedford, Canterbury and Stroud and put Milton Keynes and Swindon way off the map.
Maybe you didn't notice that today it was the Tories not Labour that announced the demise of the internal combustion engine.
On topic ref tech advances ... and apologies if it's already been posted below:
Toyota is in production engineering for a solid state battery, which uses a solid electrolyte instead of the conventional semi-liquid version used in today's lithium-ion batteries. The company said it aims to put the new tech in production electric vehicles as early as 2020
The improved battery technology would make it possible to create smaller, more lightweight lithium-ion batteries for use in EVs, that could also potentially boost the total charge capacity and result in longer-range vehicles. Another improvement for this type of battery would be longer overall usable life, which would make it possible to both use the vehicles they're installed in for longer, and add potential for product recycling and alternative post-vehicle life (some companies are already looking into putting EV batteries into use in home and commercial energy storage, for example).
New battery advances are reported on all the time, yet battery development is still glacially slow. It's almost as if the reports invariably overstate the tech.
Hopefully one of the advances will pan out and make the developers a fortune. But I wouldn't gamble on any one system without expecting to lose my money.
Well Tesla will build a battery storage plant in SA, Aus in 100 days. I saw in CNN, a prototype fly-wheel contraption in Ireland. Apparently. more efficient than batteries.
"A British newlywed couple's honeymoon to the United States was ruined when they were deported because the groom was Muslim.
Natasha Politakis, 29 and husband Ali Gul, 32, spent NZ $12,000 (£7,000) for their dream two-week trip to Los Angeles, Hawaii and Las Vegas.
The couple had to spend 26 hours sitting in LAX airport in Los Angeles before being refused entry and flown back to the UK.
While being detained they were refused showers and had all of their possessions confiscated. They were only given back their phones when they were back in Britain."
I look forward to finding out the real story once this has been shared on social media 200,000 times...
The sob story will run around the world a million times before the truth puts its boots on.
Regardless of whether it's true or not (and I don't find the idea that US immigration might be trigger happy all that difficult to believe) there are signs it is having an impact on tourism (doesn't seem to be huge though):
I haven't driven a car since 1997 (and not with any regularity since 1990). So I find it very hard to get how interesting most people seem to find this subject.
We are going on holiday to the Western Isles next month. Driving our own car makes that sort of trip not simply easier but outright possible. It would be a very dull life if we were restricted to cities, towns and the public transport network.
I expect the Left to come down on motorists like a ton of bricks as soon as they regain power.
Which of course Labour could, politically. So it pisses off rural and older voters - no problem. One of the dangers in such a divided country is that it not only makes it easier (for either party) to hit the other's support but it incentivises such behaviour.
To an extent, but that could quickly cost them Lincoln, Bedford, Canterbury and Stroud and put Milton Keynes and Swindon way off the map.
Maybe you didn't notice that today it was the Tories not Labour that announced the demise of the internal combustion engine.
Still somehow Labour's fault though!
It always is. Tories borrow vast sums of money, and it is Labour's fault. Lehmann Bros., goes down, it is Labour's fault.
Charge lasted 3 days with moderate gaming usage - an excellent phone for sure. Not available generally in the UK, but the Spanish importer I used was no issue.
On topic ref tech advances ... and apologies if it's already been posted below:
Toyota is in production engineering for a solid state battery, which uses a solid electrolyte instead of the conventional semi-liquid version used in today's lithium-ion batteries. The company said it aims to put the new tech in production electric vehicles as early as 2020
The improved battery technology would make it possible to create smaller, more lightweight lithium-ion batteries for use in EVs, that could also potentially boost the total charge capacity and result in longer-range vehicles. Another improvement for this type of battery would be longer overall usable life, which would make it possible to both use the vehicles they're installed in for longer, and add potential for product recycling and alternative post-vehicle life (some companies are already looking into putting EV batteries into use in home and commercial energy storage, for example).
New battery advances are reported on all the time, yet battery development is still glacially slow. It's almost as if the reports invariably overstate the tech.
Hopefully one of the advances will pan out and make the developers a fortune. But I wouldn't gamble on any one system without expecting to lose my money.
Well Tesla will build a battery storage plant in SA, Aus in 100 days. I saw in CNN, a prototype fly-wheel contraption in Ireland. Apparently. more efficient than batteries.
AIUI Tesla's battery tech isn't anything particularly new from the chemistry pov.
Here in the UK, Williams did a lot of work on flywheel tech, although they sold it a few years back to GKN.
Mr. Urquhart, we have a judge being attacked as unacceptable because he's white, and this: twitter.com/BBCRadioStoke/status/890098926409404416
The telling thing for me is this guy, who has a very long career and the most dirt they can find is he once decided that the law was being followed when a council wanted to move somebody to the next town. It seems unlikely to me that you will find anybody with such experience and so few controversial decisions, let alone who fits all demographic demands of the rabble rousers.
As for cycling, yes, there may be an uptick in usage if air pollution is reduced but the facts remain that you still turn up sweaty wherever you're going, you're still vulnerable to other road-users wielding heavy, fast metal boxes, and you're still at the mercy of the weather.
I looked into a pushbike or a moped a few years ago as an alternative to the Tube, and concluded I'd end up paying for both.
If I have to go to a 9am meeting at someone else's office I am not going to cycle in to arrive at mine at 7.30, change, and commute over to their office. I'm going to Tube it straight there, which means I'll Tube it home again. So either I pay the maximum daily whack for a Tube ticket or I buy a season ticket and under-use it while also paying for the two wheels.
I think it only really works for people who work flexi hours in one place all the time.
I looked at this. For me, an travelling to work 4 days a week and the occasional bus ride is cheaper as pay-as-you-go than a rolling monthly travel card, especially when vacation time is taken into consideration.
Season tickets for the tube are for mugs or a few edge cases.
Not if you work five days a week (as most people do) and/or can get an annual travelcard either interest free from work or from CommuterClub.
I think some combination of home working, attending meetings or doing work at different sites plus holidays is very common. I've recently started train commuting after 20 years mainly in cars (note: a pretty typical mix for living in a metropolitan borough in the north and working in and around different cities) and am not yet sure if I will beat the season ticket cost with day/week/month. Currently running at 7% above annual ticket price, missed chance to get to around 4% above by guessing wrong, but a couple of anticipated trips and I could be up.
I've started working out on a pure cost per calendar day basis over the period ahead and the discovery that you can specify custom length season tickets to run exactly between anticipated holidays/trips is a boon. If I save just £1 on the annual ticket price over the year, I'll still be well pleased.
Comments
The annual ones are materially cheaper though. A peak Z1 - Z3 return is £7.70. If you do that 225 days a year it's £1,732. The season ticket is £1,548, which also gets you free weekend and discount mainline travel.
Do you walk to a shop round the corner when you need milk?
I presume Mike can only be talking about the PB narrative (in which case he's largely right!).
It will take something considerably more significant and proximate to move the real political narrative away from Brexit imo. A major ministerial scandal might do the job
The activist - who makes changes and gets things done - e.g. Gove?
The manager - who keeps things moving without adverse headlines - e.g. Hunt?
The firefighter - who moves from post to post to resolve problems frequently caused by activists - e.g. Hammond?
The ineffectual - tends to be a political appointment and political themselves - e.g. Leadsom?
Any others?
Hope his multi-million pound mansion of the Cote D'Azur isn't at risk of going up in flames?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-40725294
Suppose Mr. Blair's driverless car is pottering along a road which has a sheer precipice on the left, and on the right a pavement with a bus stop and queue. Just ahead, the road bends to the right.
A truck now approaches on the opposite side of the road, and as it does so, a lunatic overtakes it around the blind bend. Head-on collision is imminent, and the Blairmobile must decide what to do to avoid it.
The best decision would be to swerve left and send Tony Blair alone to oblivion over the precipice. Cost: one life.
The next best would be to swerve into the oncoming truck. Although Mr. Blair will die, the truck driver will probably survive as he's above the impact point. Cost: one life, one injured.
Mr. Blair's version of the software will instead choose to swerve into the bus queue. The multiple small impacts bring his car to a gentle stop, and he then emerges uninjured. Cost: ten to fifteen total nobodies.
For Blair read Juncker, or the Koch brothers, or a prominent Leaver, or anybody you hate or despise. But the idea that VIPs and slebs will take their chances with the same software as the plebs is for the birds.
The plotter - who uses their current post only to promote their career, even if it means sabotaging their own government.
While sharing your concern about the load on the grid and power generation, moving away from reliance on carbon fuels from dodgy countries must of itself be a good thing.
Funnily enough, Osborne got this, but I wonder if the love affair parts of middle England have with Corbyn will quickly become unstuck once he's in power, because I expect most of his policy to be done through a very metropolitan filter, which is where he and his base is.
Natasha Politakis, 29 and husband Ali Gul, 32, spent NZ $12,000 (£7,000) for their dream two-week trip to Los Angeles, Hawaii and Las Vegas.
The couple had to spend 26 hours sitting in LAX airport in Los Angeles before being refused entry and flown back to the UK.
While being detained they were refused showers and had all of their possessions confiscated. They were only given back their phones when they were back in Britain."
http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/british-newlyweds-denied-us-entry/ar-AAoQoWl?li=AAmiR2Z&ocid=ientp
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jul/25/british-newlyweds-say-they-were-barred-from-entering-us
There are things to mourn: closed railway lines, fewer community and cottage hospitals, village shops, pubs, and even your old local police station.
I struggle to get emotional about closed filling stations.
go on, give it a look,
the plot has quite the hook,
just click the link below
and to my story you’ll be took,
Spot of murder, spot of death,
you’ll read with bated breathe,
as the civil war rages
what’s going on with the mages?
They can heal, they can kill,
Do they prefer John Esden or Black Will?
Or will they both end up out of luck?
Come on check the preview,
or read a 5* review,
and buy my book, buy my book, buy my book,
Treachery, and deceit, a story that’s hard to beat,
There are kills, countless thrills, you’ll be squirming in your seat,
War breaks out and there’s woe when Penmere faces its foe,
Esden musters a horde to end the violent discord,
Wesley fights, Charlotte schemes,
she’s the woman of his dreams,
but she’s ruthless and mercenary as you can get,
Karena’s brutal and cruel,
but William’s nobody’s fool,
as you’ll read in my book
If you want a wild ride, that my story will provide,
buy my book, buy my book, buy my book
The kingdom has been torn asunder between rivals
and war consumes the once peaceful land
people wish for the happy times to return
but nobles for war alone have planned
Will the rulers come from Esden or Penmere?
Common folk don’t care, it’s war they fear
Men are mustered, and armies march,
Supplies provisioned and plots soon hatched,
Plans may be well-laid, but if the Hykirs invade
in my book, in my book,
tables are turned, the dice are shook
There’s war from top to bottom, the kingdom’s turned rotten,
men are dying amid the muck,
broken limbs and head contusions,
the story hurtles to its conclusion,
villains live and heroes die,
the first part climax is nigh,
will Sophie survive
or meet the end of her life?
She might escape, with any luck,
Will Hugh win the day
and make Esden pay?
Find out in my book,
in my book, in my book, in my book
Buy my book, buy my book,
On sale, less than a buck
It’s over a hundred thousand words
give it a look
You’ll be entertained for hours
by my storytelling prowess
The plot will twist, and then turn,
will your favourite live
you’ll soon learn
Page by page
Line by line
you’ll soon finish
it’s mighty fine
It’s so enticing you might want a second look,
or simply buy the sequel, KA’s only equal,
Buy my book, buy my book, buy my book
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Kingdom-Asunder-Bloody-Crown-Trilogy-ebook/dp/B01N8UF799/
I would expect housing to become a good deal more affordable in coming years, due to a number of trends.
1. Construction output has risen very strongly over the past four years.
2. Immigration from the EU will fall considerably due to Brexit.
3. The number of divorces has fallen quite sharply in recent years, and
4. The number of deaths is due to increase markedly, releasing new properties on to the market.
London does not allow certain emission vehicles today.
It's a bit chicken and egg, because the reason you move out the city is because you're looking for a different sort of life, but the economic interests of those living in the country and new towns tend to be different to those living in major cities.
PS. You forgot to blame (4) on Brexit.
The ideologue: determined to implement their own agenda - e.g. Gove
The reformer: appointed to implement the government's / PM's agenda - not particularly visible under Cameron or May (as neither were radically reforming PMs) but plenty under Thatcher and Blair.
I wouldn't have 'ineffectual' as a category: that's a measure of how well they did what they did rather than why they did it and why they were there. 'Political appointee' deserves a category in its own right though.
Bad news for those drivers who are at the wheel for more than two hours each day.
“We know that regularly driving for more than two to three hours a day is bad for your heart. The research suggests it is bad for your brain, too, perhaps because your mind is less active in these hours. Driving causes stress and fatigue, with studies showing the links between them and cognitive decline.”
Massive council house building is distinctly One Nation Tory. Harold Macmillan did it.
More generally, the implication of the French policy would be that a car can be legally sold in Germany but not just across the border in France. That would explode the entire rationale and legal basis of the Single Market.
One group see self-driving cars as a service. They want to get to level 5 at least in one environment and roll it out, then grow the service city by city, country by country.
The other want to slowly progress through the levels, but at each level the car should work in all possible environments.
Should add that those saying Uber are going under, they have recently invested a huge amount to hire a team of some of the best people at this and their research team at University of Toronto is growing extremely rapidly.
I don't own a car because I live and work in London, but I do use Zipcar occasionally for big shopping trips and/or day trips to places that trains are inconvenient.
In any case, that makes it even worse. Are they saying a German who owns a shiny new petrol BMW won't be able to drive through France?
Much of the country isn't city. It's town. And village.
I think talk of banning new petrol vehicles is a potentially very serious mistake. [I have vague memories of writing something similar about the demented Conservative policy at the election].
Probably be more slow-burn, but worse.
They should be promoting electrical cars, if they think that's a good idea, and allowing the infrastructure to build up, instead of trying to impose what seems a feasible metropolitan policy on the whole country.
Might be wrong. I hope I am.
In other words, anyone buying an IC-engined car in France would have extra layers of bureaucracy to overcome.
This is again another area of divergence, do you create HD maps of a consistent area or do you have low res maps and the car still be able to navigate / send the data back and the whole fleet able to learn from that. You can do the later if you are selling this as a service.
There is also a lot of work on cars learning in one "environment" and then being able to transfer that learning to another e.g. say a city in Germany, then be able to transfer that learning to a city in US.
One other thing I should add, some cities are actually investing in changing their roads / signs / signals to be aid self driving cars. nuTonomy tested in Singapore by doing this.
Raikkonen podium at 4 looks interesting, likewise qualifying winner each way at 15 (NB not yet tips, I'm just marking them for future consideration when I have a little more time). Vettel win at 4 looks alright, although I've already backed him at 5.2.
Anyway, I'll give those a bit of a think when I'm on later. Renault/Hulkenberg may also be worth considering.
https://tfl.gov.uk/fares-and-payments/adult-discounts-and-concessions
The problem can also be that somebody shares the same name / date of birth with a person of interest. Mrs Urquhart once had that and we asked to go to the special place. It was revealed that somebody with essentially the same name and DoB was banned from entering the US.
Also, if you don't remain calm and polite, US immigration have the right, visa or not, to tell you to get back on the plane. I have found some US airports they are a lot less prepared to take any shit, because they have to deal with a lot e.g. Miami with the history of drug smugglers, don't get shitty if they ask you lots of questions coming off a flight from Latin America, cos they won't take you being a dick.
But you make a good point: AIUI there is a great deal of debate over what the control laws for cars should be. I expect it would vary from country to country: in Holland they'll probably try to save cyclists over drivers, in Holland they'll want to save their beautiful car, and in the US it'll be "what the **** is that thing doing on my road?"
https://www.inverse.com/article/22204-mercedes-benz-self-driving-cars-ai-ethics
http://science.sciencemag.org/content/352/6293/1573
I don't see mapping as the way forward for autonomy, especially in built-up areas. It can help, but anything that relies on it is nowhere near 'true' AI. After all, I can drive around a strange city safely without having to know where every traffic light is.
I believe some companies believe the market for data in autonomous cars (both used by, and generated by) will be bigger than the market for the cars themselves. No wonder Google are so interested.
As for cyclists, the state-of-the-art is really poor:
"However, when it comes to spotting and orienting bikes and bicyclists, performance drops significantly. Deep3DBox is among the best, yet it spots only 74 percent of bikes in the benchmarking test. And though it can orient over 88 percent of the cars in the test images, it scores just 59 percent for the bikes."
http://spectrum.ieee.org/cars-that-think/transportation/self-driving/the-selfdriving-cars-bicycle-problem
Also, done some nice work of automatically merging OS maps with aerial photography and built maps good enough for self driving cars from that.
As you say Google have a different opinion, which is lets collect as much data as possible, because thats what we are good at.
Toyota is in production engineering for a solid state battery, which uses a solid electrolyte instead of the conventional semi-liquid version used in today's lithium-ion batteries. The company said it aims to put the new tech in production electric vehicles as early as 2020
https://www.wsj.com/articles/toyota-nears-major-technological-breakthrough-in-electric-car-batteries-1500985883
The improved battery technology would make it possible to create smaller, more lightweight lithium-ion batteries for use in EVs, that could also potentially boost the total charge capacity and result in longer-range vehicles. Another improvement for this type of battery would be longer overall usable life, which would make it possible to both use the vehicles they're installed in for longer, and add potential for product recycling and alternative post-vehicle life (some companies are already looking into putting EV batteries into use in home and commercial energy storage, for example).
https://techcrunch.com/2017/07/25/toyotas-new-solid-state-battery-could-make-its-way-to-cars-by-2020/
He is becoming a little bit of a parody. Did he expect a government minister to say to tech companies "sorry folks, no chance of you bringing skilled workers in after 2019"?
I mean, if he was talking to Tesco, and assuring then that the cost of cashiers wouldn't rise as 19 year old Romanians would still be free to come, that would be one thing. But telling people in high skill industries that the government would still support them is not a betrayal, it's common sense.
http://fortune.com/2015/10/07/volvo-liability-self-driving-cars/
Something also needs doing about investigations: we cannot rely on the manufacturers to tell us what really went on in an incident.
Hopefully one of the advances will pan out and make the developers a fortune. But I wouldn't gamble on any one system without expecting to lose my money.
Still somehow Labour's fault though!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-40727400
https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/tourist-arrivals
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/is-the-trump-slump-real-spending-on-tourism-in-the-us-slides-2017-03-16
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/07/25/do-not-have-confidence-do-not-represent-us-grenfell-survivors/
That sounds a bit erhhh racist...What do they want somebody who is totally unqualified, but looks street?
https://order-order.com/2017/07/26/corbyn-deletes-yet-another-false-tweet/
Are we sure he even managed 2 E's at A-Level?
https://twitter.com/BBCRadioStoke/status/890098926409404416
5 Amp battery, 100 -> 87% in last 24 hours.
Charge lasted 3 days with moderate gaming usage - an excellent phone for sure. Not available generally in the UK, but the Spanish importer I used was no issue.
Here in the UK, Williams did a lot of work on flywheel tech, although they sold it a few years back to GKN.
http://www.gkngroup.com/frankfurt/technology-and-solutions/future/Pages/Flywheel.aspx
There's even a flywheel train in service:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parry_People_Movers
I've started working out on a pure cost per calendar day basis over the period ahead and the discovery that you can specify custom length season tickets to run exactly between anticipated holidays/trips is a boon. If I save just £1 on the annual ticket price over the year, I'll still be well pleased.