There was a great "Nova" episode on the Grand Challenge [1].
A Pentagon-funded contest spawned many of today’s self-driving startups
21–30 of 99 posts
Re: A Pentagon-funded contest spawned many of today’s self-driving startups
#22It was 13 years from the Wright Flyer to the first commercial fixed-wing aircraft. And that was still very dangerous. Jet engines (which really introduced the safety we are used to in airlines) took 50 years.
Jet travel brings improved speed and comfort, not really improved safety. Prop planes, as a technology, are very safe. It is a lot easier to land a prop with a failed engine or another part -- due to is low speed one can land small props with a high chance of no injuries on unprepared surfaces such as grass fields. For jets, if you have a failed engine and no landing strip you are likely toast (although there are some well publicized exceptions).
The great flight safety numbers of modern jet travel are due to the fact that commercial traffic is heavily regulated end to end, from production to operation, licensing and maintenance. None of this is specific to jet travel, it is just that speed and comfort pushed props mostly out of the business.
Re: A Pentagon-funded contest spawned many of today’s self-driving startups
#2327 years. The first famous "proof of concept" autonomous driving is Navlab (Thorpe, 1990). (Are there any prior projects?)
There's VaMoRs from Ernst Dickmanns (1986)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernst_Dickmanns
Already driving on the Autobahn in '87:
Re: A Pentagon-funded contest spawned many of today’s self-driving startups
#24It certainly seems to validate the strategy of "grand challenges" to focus research. One could argue that the X prize helped spawn today's commercial space companies. So does this mean a good way for benevolent billionaires to improve the world would be to sponsor things like this? Certainly Gate's sponsoring the toilets prize was influential in bringing out better sanitation ideas.
I wonder if anyone would sponsor a prize for an 'off grid' sustainable living space. People create slums and homeless encampments out of a variety of cast off materials, is there a way to create housing for people which would be safer and enhance their quality of life without also creating a public burden? Perhaps that is a pipe dream but it is something I wonder about.
Re: A Pentagon-funded contest spawned many of today’s self-driving startups
#25It certainly seems to validate the strategy of "grand challenges" to focus research. One could argue that the X prize helped spawn today's commercial space companies. So does this mean a good way for benevolent billionaires to improve the world would be to sponsor things like this? Certainly Gate's sponsoring the toilets prize was influential in bringing out better sanitation ideas. I wonder if anyone would sponsor a…
>One could argue that the X prize helped spawn today's commercial space companies.
That'd be a stretch. The Ansari X Prize led to a bunch of companies pursuing a goal with little commercial value and few designs with orbital aspirations. The winner led to a costly, dead-end design that has still yet to fly again for suborbital tourism, killed four people along the way, and will never service orbit. The rest of the companies are either dead or vaporware.
That said, I'm generally in favor of prize-based challenges to spur development at lower cost, as long as you aren't forced to set a goal that's entirely tangential to what you want out of industry. Newt Gingrich is a notable supporter of the idea, but I'm not aware of any other prominent politicians who support it.
Re: A Pentagon-funded contest spawned many of today’s self-driving startups
#26It certainly seems to validate the strategy of "grand challenges" to focus research. One could argue that the X prize helped spawn today's commercial space companies. So does this mean a good way for benevolent billionaires to improve the world would be to sponsor things like this? Certainly Gate's sponsoring the toilets prize was influential in bringing out better sanitation ideas. I wonder if anyone would sponsor a…
Hasn’t this been validated for hundreds of years? The Story of Longitude is a great read. Harrison spent decades working on the problem.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Longitude_(book)
The Spirit of St. Louis crossing the Atlantic was for a prize, and I believe an inspiration for the current X-Prize.
I don’t think we need “grand challenges” but simply challenges, to help get us to successive breakthroughs.
I’ve thrown this out before, but a Kickstarter for these “challenges“, with well-defined goals might help accelerate technological progress.
Re: A Pentagon-funded contest spawned many of today’s self-driving startups
#27It certainly seems to validate the strategy of "grand challenges" to focus research. One could argue that the X prize helped spawn today's commercial space companies. So does this mean a good way for benevolent billionaires to improve the world would be to sponsor things like this? Certainly Gate's sponsoring the toilets prize was influential in bringing out better sanitation ideas. I wonder if anyone would sponsor a…
The trouble with your particular scenario is that when it comes to improved efficiency, newer stuff will always win, so that excludes cast-off materials. If being off-grid were cheaper than being on-grid, no one would be on the grid.
Re: A Pentagon-funded contest spawned many of today’s self-driving startups
#28Keeping up with Darpa's challenges is a good way to see into the future a couple of their current projects:
1) A machine-learning competition to overcome scarcity in the radio frequency which is INSANELY fascinating and, if they pull it off, hugely impactful -> https://spectrumcollaborationchallenge.com
2) A program to build technology to drive “swarm sprint” exercises to inform tactics and technologies for large groups of unmanned air and ground robots in urban environments. Yes, like how do we build a collaborative air drone army.
And PS they are having a hacker fest in the bay in a couple of weeks, registration is closed but bet you can get in if you email via - https://darpahackfest.com
Re: A Pentagon-funded contest spawned many of today’s self-driving startups
#29It was common lore in CS grad school that there were self driving cars, funded by DARPA, driving around the CMU campus back in the 90s.
It was not as easy to look things up. I am glad this story is being told, but I'd love to know about the history and the early days.
Re: A Pentagon-funded contest spawned many of today’s self-driving startups
#30It was 13 years from the Wright Flyer to the first commercial fixed-wing aircraft. And that was still very dangerous. Jet engines (which really introduced the safety we are used to in airlines) took 50 years.
Jet travel brings improved speed and comfort, not really improved safety. Prop planes, as a technology, are very safe. It is a lot easier to land a prop with a failed engine or another part -- due to is low speed one can land small props with a high chance of no injuries on unprepared surfaces such as grass fields. For jets, if you have a failed engine and no landing strip you are likely toast (although there are som…
It is very counter-intuitive, but speed increases safety in an aircraft type both as a function of hours and as a function of miles. This is an empirical fact that's true for both military and civilian aircraft, I was looking for the US Air Force chart on this, but couldn't seem to find it. Not to discount other factors, but the OP is correct that speed increases safety. Maybe someone with more Google skills can find this chart.