Skycar!

Heh...

That's pretty cool.

Though, for the moment, I'd settle for just having an ordinary car...I wonder if they still ask road taxes if you ride in one of those, though?
 
hehe...pretty damn good, although slightly on the expensive side.
It can cruise at 350 mph, thats pretty sweet! With that speed and no early morning rush hour to worry about, i could get atleast another 30 mins in bed!
 
Spazmo said:
Bah, you'd need permits up the wazoo.

Well if you have $500k to spend on the M400 then you should be able to afford a couple hundred bucks in permits. If I win the lottery I'm going to get one. It really kicks ass and gets 28mpg! A cruising altitude of 5 miles! Top speed of 380mph is the ultimate selling point plus it looks like the vehicles from Bladerunner.
 
JJ86 said:
Well if you have $500k to spend on the M400 then you should be able to afford a couple hundred bucks in permits. If I win the lottery I'm going to get one. It really kicks ass and gets 28mpg! A cruising altitude of 5 miles! Top speed of 380mph is the ultimate selling point plus it looks like the vehicles from Bladerunner.

Not too mention, chicks dig the flying cars.
 
When you see that they have now craeted a "Skycar" as its called, i wonder just how long it will be before we have skys that look like something actually from Blade runner, 5th Element or Judge Dread. The ground completly deserted, everthing taken up to the clouds!
 
Re

Wraith said:
When you see that they have now craeted a "Skycar" as its called, i wonder just how long it will be before we have skys that look like something actually from Blade runner, 5th Element or Judge Dread. The ground completly deserted, everthing taken up to the clouds!

That wouldn't be all bad, as long as we don't have Rutger Hauer running around freely. That'd be bad, we Dutch are annoying enough as it is.

Anyone here read Huxley's Brave New World (I recently stated in Point Counter Point, it seems to be very bad) ór for that matter 1984...Well, 1984 is not a good example, that world is terrible, but Brave New World isn't THAT horrible a world...I mean...No monogamy.
 
Re: Re

Kharn said:
Wraith said:
When you see that they have now craeted a "Skycar" as its called, i wonder just how long it will be before we have skys that look like something actually from Blade runner, 5th Element or Judge Dread. The ground completly deserted, everthing taken up to the clouds!

That wouldn't be all bad, as long as we don't have Rutger Hauer running around freely. That'd be bad, we Dutch are annoying enough as it is.

Anyone here read Huxley's Brave New World (I recently stated in Point Counter Point, it seems to be very bad) ór for that matter 1984...Well, 1984 is not a good example, that world is terrible, but Brave New World isn't THAT horrible a world...I mean...No monogamy.

To quote Strangelove:

General Turdigson (looking surprisingly happy about the situation): "You mention the ratio of 10 women to every men. Wouldn't that entail the abandonment of the traditional monogamous relationship, for men at least?"

Dr Strangelove: "Yes, well, sacrifices must be made for the sake of the human race."
 
What if that thing runs out of gas? Or the engines fail? How would you prevent collisions with airplanes? That's when 3-D driving starts to show its problems.
 
DarkShade1989 said:
What if that thing runs out of gas? Or the engines fail? How would you prevent collisions with airplanes? That's when 3-D driving starts to show its problems.

I would assume that you still need a pilot's license to use it and as such you'd need to file a flight plan. Even commuter pilots need to calculate the amount of fuel they need for a flight plan. They also have to stick to the rules of the sky which means they are limited to certain flight paths and altitudes. As technology improves, flight plans can be uploaded to central air traffic computers and moitored for any conflicts. Combine that with GPS and you have instantaneous air traffic control.

Even automobiles are undergoing alot of research for intelligent trans systems. Buried conduit in highways can automatically guide vehicles and collision detection systems can maintain proper speeds and distances in all conditions. The future is pretty impressive and its approaching faster than you can imagine.

Here is the government's site: http://www.its.dot.gov/
 
What happen's if there is a failure in the equipment?
Like with a collision detection system. All systems, no matter how advanced and skilled they are, they could still be prone to simple electric and system failures. This could lead to some nasty accidents.
 
RoGuE HeX said:
What happen's if there is a failure in the equipment?
Like with a collision detection system. All systems, no matter how advanced and skilled they are, they could still be prone to simple electric and system failures. This could lead to some nasty accidents.

Well let me put it this way; the biggest cause of death in the US today is auto accidents. That is more than any disease or any other type of accident or by crime. The biggest cause of deadly accidents are driver error or inattention. So if you take the human driver out of the picture you will probably decrease the death rate even if you factor in mechanical errors. As it is mechanical errors in vehicles do cause deaths but it is doubtful that the rate of deaths by that type of error would increase given the same manufacturing QC. I would feel safer driving on a highway where all the cars were computer controlled instead of the current state where most drivers don't even have half a brain! That is unless Microsoft or Interplay were involved with the software....

And Goose, yeah - here's the keys!
 
JJ86 said:
Well let me put it this way; the biggest cause of death in the US today is auto accidents. That is more than any disease or any other type of accident or by crime. The biggest cause of deadly accidents are driver error or inattention. So if you take the human driver out of the picture you will probably decrease the death rate even if you factor in mechanical errors. As it is mechanical errors in vehicles do cause deaths but it is doubtful that the rate of deaths by that type of error would increase given the same manufacturing QC. I would feel safer driving on a highway where all the cars were computer controlled instead of the current state where most drivers don't even have half a brain! That is unless Microsoft or Interplay were involved with the software....

That's true, but also you would have to take into account that if all the drivers of cars were replaced by machines, you'd have more operitunities for machine failure.

Things like air traffic control are pretty good right now, but they aren't used all that much. Increasing their use exponetioally would also increase the chance of failure.
 
Re: Re

Kharn said:
Anyone here read Huxley's Brave New World (I recently stated in Point Counter Point, it seems to be very bad) ór for that matter 1984...Well, 1984 is not a good example, that world is terrible, but Brave New World isn't THAT horrible a world...I mean...No monogamy.

i read both, and both books are great. "1984" gives, in my opinion, the most realistic and detailed description of communist dictatorship. it's not nice - it's scary. and the scariest thing about it is the fact that it's very real. i think everyone should read it, because not reading it means choosing to be ignorant, and "ignorance is power".
i also recommend you read Milan Kundera's "The Joke". it's a beautiful book written by someone who lived most of his life in a communist country. in these days, when USA is turning into an authoritary police state, it seems unwise to say certain things. so everyone be careful about political humor - there are people out there who won't find it very humorous. and it's incredibly short path from simple censorship to your TV becoming replaced with a telescreen.
 
Back
Top