- Jun 29, 2013
- Reaction score
I would widen the Bowker on its west side over the Mass Pike. That side has space on both ends for a wide ped/bike pathway (shown in yellow) without encroaching onto the greenspace too much. When the portion of the Bowker north of here is torn down someday, this on-ramp and bridge over the Pike portion would still be usable.Charlesgate is un-bikeable, and the sidewalk along the existing bridge is narrow and scary even for pedestrians.
Yeah, this is pretty much exactly what I pitched.I would widen the Bowker on its west side over the Mass Pike. That side has space on both ends for a wide ped/bike pathway (shown in yellow) without encroaching onto the greenspace too much. When the portion of the Bowker north of here is torn down someday, this on-ramp and bridge over the Pike portion would still be usable.
Seriously, why not?I don't think that will happen to be quite honest.
Prolly not the right thread for a breakout sidebar. . .Seriously, why not?
Just this weekend after 4 years of an ANTI-SCIENCE Presidential Administration:
1) Musk routinely landed (ho-hum) another rocket booster ever so sweetly and gently on its feet within inches of its target
2) a 94.5% effective vaccine (leapfrogging a 90% effective vaccine and at lower storage temp reqs) was announced within MONTHS (something that used to take DECADES for a 50%-70% effectiveness).
The self driving pod technology isn't perfected yet, but has made advances in leaps and bounds in the past 15 years. The economic/real estate property need is CLEARLY there in urban centers. We are talking TRILLIONS of dollars of real estate freed up and more efficient and prodcutive urban economies as a result. Money talks.
By 2035, this is going to be in place - - at least in urban centers of forward thinking progressive cities elsewhere in the world - - why not here? 2035? This is a layup.
Key words in that post "presently known form....".Prolly not the right thread for a breakout sidebar. . .
TLDR version: There are known chaos factors that AI...any presently kown form of AI...simply cannot anticipate for traffic on city streets. It's chaos that exceeds limited-access roadways or results reproducible in a lab setting, and the tech completist enough to tackle that isn't yet the stuff of whitepapers let alone production environment. "80/20" rule isn't good enough..."99/1" isn't even good enough.
Second...the production AI for self-driving today is so error-prone it trailing its own self-predicted rate of improvement by years. And nobody is totally sure why because the best researchers in the land can't fully quantify where it's whiffing. That's...um...bad for future prognostication. You shouldn't for example, have closed-course self-driving demo races where a Jetsons Shit demonstrator car decides to up and crash itself into a wall on Lap 1, like that viral blooper from last month. That was *supposed* to be a layup right now in 2020; it wasn't.
YMMV on if it ever hits that threshold. But 2035, 15 years from now? Not a chance in hell...way too over-optimistic. The best money and minds are already behind it...and it's running way way far behind that pace. 15 years is not a long time; advancement is falling too far behind a pace that'll net results anywhere close to that timeframe. That much you can predict with fast-increasing reliability now.
There's a whole thread for this here:
Connected/Automated vehicles and infrastructure in Boston
(I'm a believer that self-driving tech will incrementally improve from now to like 2050, but fully autonomous vehicles in urban areas will take the longest to develop. Every new car will be self-driving on the highway before any new car will fully be able to confidently navigate city streets.)