how long

[photofly]

Well, I'm confused, and I'm asking.

What I'm confused about is why your righeous anger at C suite remuneration manifests as a dislike of tax breaks that benefit shareholders. My uncle's pension plan is the one that benefits from higher shareholder returns. He doesn't have a yacht of any size, nor a mansion.

Now if you think my uncle's pension is too high, and want to divert from his pocket to the people who work the cash, I get it. But he's not the one with the yacht.

[rookiepilot]

More than one issue. Many, many issues. C suite comp is only one.

The tax breaks are -- partly --companies that income shift to lower tax jurisdictions to avoid tax, while benefiting from the North American market. They aren't contributing.

It's Amazon who holds states hostage for extended tax free goodies, as a carrot dangled to bring jobs to a state. It's wrong. Meanwhile the state governments are broke. As in really broke. People going hungry broke.

Tesla pays no tax. Is only profitable because it sells environmental credits. Yet Musk is in line for a 2 b payday, based on the stock price. It's board is family members. Sound familiar-- BBD ---......WTF?

I could go on, and on, and on.

Doesn't AC outsource its heavy maintenance overseas? WTF is that? Sending millions of dollars overseas. Yet they are crying now -- "let us fly or bail us out".

Why not contribute properly to this country that has given you so much -- AC.

No one here goes on about that, yet small operators bonds are an endless topic. The reasons are obvious -- no one wants to criticize their ultimate golden ticket.

[leftoftrack]

They did the A220 purchase in order to outsource the heavy maintenance. now they're canceling the A220 order

[fish4life]

The taxing of robots was the philosophy when the dream of having robot servants was around and partially led to the development and support of them. I hate to say it but I lean towards the idea of taxing the automation as well, this will become required once AI becomes fully developed as it will be possible to replace pretty much every job we can think of because it will think. No need for doctors when it can look at every test done to a person and compare it to a worldwide bank of other people in seconds to come up with a diagnosis that a doctor would never be able to.
Lawyers ... not required once again when the robot lawyer can quickly scan through every precedent setting case and develop and argument that applies in seconds.
Cashiers? we already have self check out with one person working 8 machines
Mechanical jobs/ trades will be all that’s left until the robotics become more agile then they are now and will be able to perform all the tasks then.

As for automation for flying, CN rail still has operators.

[valleyboy]

It seems that Isaac Asimov is required reading. When you say tax I assume you mean owner fees unless we come to the point where they are actually sentient beings. With that the obvious discrimination issues. We are destined to relive history over and over again, but then again maybe robots will eliminate such emotions as hate and race issues. It might even evolve to they will enslave us. The signs are there when you look around a room and everyone is buried deep in their phones, even messaging instead of talking to each other in the same room. Robots will have no problem conquering humanity. Damn I like when science fictions turns into fact.

[photofly]

I actually meant tax the robots themselves.

[goldeneagle]

As for automation for flying, CN rail still has operators.

Have you ever rode the Skytrain in Vancouver ?

When I was 19yrs old, got a job in a mine to help fund university, worked there for 8 months driving a haul truck, 4 on 4 off shift and I was working as flying instructor on the days off. It was a big beast, weighed in at 100 tons, held a 100 ton load. At the time, the thought of automating those things was ludicrous. It was a very good job in it's day, paid well, union wages and as a junior member of the union I made the exact same wage as the guys that had been there for 20 years., but that's a whole different story.

Wind the clock forward 40 years. A new mine today doesn't have haul truck drivers as a job. Today a modern mine has haul trucks that weigh in at 400 tons, carry a 400 ton load, and they are fully automated driverless vehicles. My understanding is Suncor started rolling out autonomous trucks in the oil patch a couple years ago, I haven't kept an eye on the project to see how it has progressed.

Change is inevitable, and technology will continue to advance. You can choose to be part of the steam roller, or, be part of the road, take your pick.

[valleyboy]

I actually meant tax the robots themselves.

and how does one tax a robot, I'm missing something here. Right now, to me, that's like expecting your car to pay taxes. I don't think the robots of today have any income to tax or file income tax reports. Automation in aircraft could be "taxed" through user fees but I can't see how a robot coughs up money.

Wind the clock forward 40 years. A new mine today doesn't have haul truck drivers as a job. Today a modern mine has haul trucks that weigh in at 400 tons, carry a 400 ton load, and they are fully automated driverless vehicles. My understanding is Suncor started rolling out autonomous trucks in the oil patch a couple years ago, I haven't kept an eye on the project to see how it has progressed.

As any hardrock miner, over the last few years many have been replaced by remote operated equipment. The mines like it because they can start mucking immediately and not have to wait for the dust to settle after blasting like when they are using humans. The saving in wages is likely right up there as well. Progress always has its casualties. That's why we always think the "good old days" were better, but are they????

Obviously governments will need money coming in and it stands to reason as people become redundant in the work force they need to look other places for money. The answer, corporate taxes must increase in direct proportion of their move towards automation. The day the first robot casts its (will robots have gender) first vote in an election, then they will be paying taxes. Maybe I'm thinking too far into the future. I read Isaac extensively so I'm likely influenced. Why does Hollywood always screw up great stories

[Rockie]

As for automation for flying, CN rail still has operators.

Have you ever rode the Skytrain in Vancouver ?

There's a very large difference between a 4 car people mover and a 100+ car 14000 ton freight train with air brakes and 150 feet of slack moving over uneven terrain. "Finesse" seems like a strange word to use talking about something as massive as a 130 car freight train, but if the locomotive engineer doesn't have it, and an intimate knowledge of the handling characteristics of any particular train and the track they're operating on they aren't going to get very far.

[Meatservo]

As for automation for flying, CN rail still has operators.

Have you ever rode the Skytrain in Vancouver ?

There's a very large difference between a 4 car people mover and a 100+ car 14000 ton freight train with air brakes and 150 feet of slack moving over uneven terrain. "Finesse" seems like a strange word to use talking about something as massive as a 130 car freight train, but if the locomotive engineer doesn't have it, and an intimate knowledge of the handling characteristics of any particular train and the track they're operating on they aren't going to get very far.

Also the Skytrain is on a closed circuit with very few variables ever present. It's more like a model train than a real one. The cars are semipermanently coupled, all the axles are powered, the entire route is under CC surveillance, it doesn't ever go particularly fast, the tracks are completely isolated from the surrounding environment, etc. The dominant advantage to driverless operation here is that labour costs are directly tied to frequency. There's a train every eight minutes, therefore lots and lots of trains, night and day. But since it's a completely closed system, and the trains in service in a given period are all the same distance apart and travelling the same speed in a moving-block system, it would be more useful to think of the whole thing as ONE train, broken into several parts, travelling endlessly round and round a big closed circle like beads on a string. Easily overseen by one or two guys in a booth somewhere. Like the pods on a ferris-wheel.

I can confidently leave it to your imagination to imagine a similar scenario in aviation. I've no doubt it could be done, but trying to design it to integrate with other companies flying other routes, all using the same airspace and airports, and imagine trying to accommodate a "charter" flight. At the present time, even if a 100% autonomous aeroplane was safe and feasible, it's probably still cheaper, for now, to employ pilots, who at least have the advantage of some behavioural flexibility. Although the way they are managed and trained, and the experience they get along the way, I don't rate "behavioural flexibility" very high on a contemporary domestic scheduled-airline pilot's list of attributes. Many of them are like automatons themselves, "programmed" by a series of superficial online videos, perfunctory C.B.T. and cursory multiple-choice exams. Like some kind of multifunction servo-motor, made of meat.

[goldeneagle]

Also the Skytrain is on a closed circuit with very few variables ever present. It's more like a model train than a real one.

It's also what, 30 year old technology? Have you looked at what they are doing in mines these days ?

But ya, a complex system with 500 pilotless aircraft in close formation will never happen now will it.

oh wait.....


The single biggest issue holding back a lot of rapidly advancing automation in aviation is an archaic air traffic control system that relies on humans talking into a microphone.

[iflyforpie]

All trains move on a block system. Have since the 19th century. It’s actually what our IFR system of protecting airspace is based on.. only one aircraft occupying a particular piece of sky at any time. Since the signals are automatically generated through track detectors and whatnot in modern trains, all you need to do is make a system that can read and react to them. Child’s play.

I wouldn’t say that the Skytrain is protected from the elements and also... none of the axles are powered. One of the reasons why they used linear induction motors is because an adhesion railway would not work with the grades it uses in all weather conditions (much steeper than a mainline railway). Most of today’s unit trains are also semi-permanently coupled and don’t add or subtract cars outside of a yard except for small weigh freight that has mostly been replaced by intermodal transport. Besides, planes don’t get coupled and uncoupled except for aerial refuelling.

[Meatservo]

The skytrain uses a "moving block" system- that's different from the traditional block signalling system. It requires computers and real-time communications between trains and a central computer. Anyway whether you're talking about a modern, computerized centrally-controlled moving-block system or a steam-powered slate train that moves into the next block when the fireman literally uses a key to unlock the signals, it's just a way to keep trains from hitting each other. That's only part of "controlling" the train, and yoj're right, when it's well-designed, it is child's play from a planning perspective. That's why computers can do it.

I didn't know -and didn't bother to look up- that they used linear induction motors rather than traction motors, but the point is the same- better actually- that a driver on a short train with three or four powered units permanently coupled with slackless draught-gear is going to be much easier to drive safely -or require less programming -than a mile-long unit train going through the rockies, drawn by a locomotive.

At any rate, you and goldeneagle are correct, with your point about block systems and little drones flying in formation. I do believe it's possible with today's technology to design a railway-like hub-and-spoke system of automated airliners perfectly safely; in fact if I thought "safety" was the number-one motivation for automation I'd have a much harder time dreaming up reasons not to like it. But it's not. The motivation is robbing people of their livelihoods. Proof of this is the fact that NOBODY is working on ways to automate the role of CEO or CFO or COO or comptroller. Advances in machine learning and artificial intelligence should make that pretty easy... but we'll never know. There will never be funding for that kind of research. I suppose you'll brand me a "lefty" for saying so, but one of the roles a corporation must have in society is to provide employment. I don't obviously mean a compulsory role from a regulatory standpoint, (although why not?) but a moral and philosophical role. Otherwise, they are just parasites. And like all parasites, they specialize in destroying the host. Every job that is eliminated to increase profit reduces the pool of people who can afford to buy stuff. If you eliminate enough jobs, your savings will be infinite and your sales will be zero. People who are fond of this kind of progress love to say we will all have to adapt and learn more technical or automation-oriented careers, which, as well as sounding soul-crushing, means the same thing as "learning to tend the robots", which in turn sounds an awful lot like "serving the robots"

[tsgarp]

As for automation for flying, CN rail still has operators.

Have you ever rode the Skytrain in Vancouver ?

There's a very large difference between a 4 car people mover and a 100+ car 14000 ton freight train with air brakes and 150 feet of slack moving over uneven terrain.

Not really, as far as a computer is concerned. It's all accelerations, times, distances and forces; some of the very first things the computers tackled. The only real difference between Skytrain and a mainline freight is the likelihood of something being on the tracks; much more likely on the mainline than the Skytrain.

[Rockie]

Have you ever rode the Skytrain in Vancouver ?

There's a very large difference between a 4 car people mover and a 100+ car 14000 ton freight train with air brakes and 150 feet of slack moving over uneven terrain.

Not really, as far as a computer is concerned. It's all accelerations, times, distances and forces; some of the very first things the computers tackled. The only real difference between Skytrain and a mainline freight is the likelihood of something being on the tracks; much more likely on the mainline than the Skytrain.

Not even close. Imagine a 14,000 ton mile long slinky being pulled along varied terrain, up and down hills, around multiple corners at once where each coil is a different weight, the brakes are applied and release sequentially from the front to the back, and each coil is connected by the slimmest of threads. Then you'll have some small idea why it's not at all like a skytrain.

[photofly]

The motivation is robbing people of their livelihoods.

The motivation is saving money. The steam engine, the jacquard loom, and the computer have all been accused of the same. In all cases, the complaints have been futile. If you're familiar with English history you'll know how the term Luddite came to be:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ned_Ludd

[Meatservo]

The motivation is robbing people of their livelihoods.

The motivation is saving money. The steam engine, the jacquard loom, and the computer have all been accused of the same. In all cases, the complaints have been futile. If you're familiar with English history you'll know how the term Luddite came to be:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ned_Ludd

Yes, and I'm saying that there are some kinds of "saving money" that are a type of parsimony that is destructive to the fabric of society. Especially when the people at the top of the venture that is trying to save money are already in possession of more wealth than any human being could ever possibly spend in several lifetimes.

Yep, I know what a Luddite is. Of course unlike the Luddites, I would never advocate sabotage. I'm merely pointing out that, like skilled and unskilled workers throughout history, we are always under assault by the corrupt ruling class (obviously) who never need to do much more than "have lots of money". It's not like I think there's any cure for it: as history has shown, skilled labour, or "freemen" or the middle class, whatever you want to call it, are never anything other than a repetitive but transient phenomenon in the overall status quo, which is the lords ruling the serfs. You can see any so-called "golden age" in human history is one in which there was a solid base of enfranchised, prosperous middle-class communities. Which brings me back to taxing the hell out of businesses who use robots instead of people. I'd rather achieve standard of living through socialism than plunge back into a dark age. Especially a dark age with killer drones and "artificial intelligence" robots. Like I said before, let's get the automation boffins to work on automating the boardroom. I'm sure if we all chipped in a bit for the research budget, we could wipe out the 1% using science.

Sorry to be dramatic. It's easy to do during a plague.

[fishface]

The motivation is robbing people of their livelihoods.

The motivation is saving money. The steam engine, the jacquard loom, and the computer have all been accused of the same. In all cases, the complaints have been futile. If you're familiar with English history you'll know how the term Luddite came to be:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ned_Ludd

Yes, and I'm saying that there are some kinds of "saving money" that are a type of parsimony that is destructive to the fabric of society. Especially when the people at the top of the venture that is trying to save money are already in possession of more wealth than any human being could ever possibly spend in several lifetimes.

Yep, I know what a Luddite is. Of course unlike the Luddites, I would never advocate sabotage. I'm merely pointing out that, like skilled and unskilled workers throughout history, we are always under assault by the corrupt ruling class (obviously) who never need to do much more than "have lots of money". It's not like I think there's any cure for it: as history has shown, skilled labour, or "freemen" or the middle class, whatever you want to call it, are never anything other than a repetitive but transient phenomenon in the overall status quo, which is the lords ruling the serfs. You can see any so-called "golden age" in human history is one in which there was a solid base of enfranchised, prosperous middle-class communities. Which brings me back to taxing the hell out of businesses who use robots instead of people. I'd rather achieve standard of living through socialism than plunge back into a dark age. Especially a dark age with killer drones and "artificial intelligence" robots. Like I said before, let's get the automation boffins to work on automating the boardroom. I'm sure if we all chipped in a bit for the research budget, we could wipe out the 1% using science.

Sorry to be dramatic. It's easy to do during a plague.

You’re not wrong though.
Anybody who doesn’t see that there is a ruling class with an agenda is blind or refuses to see it. I don’t want to sound all tinfoil hat-y or anything but it’s true. This pandemic will further strip us of our freedoms (not talking about the whole mask thing), rip apart what’s left of the middle class and make the rich richer.

[tsgarp]

There's a very large difference between a 4 car people mover and a 100+ car 14000 ton freight train with air brakes and 150 feet of slack moving over uneven terrain.

Not really, as far as a computer is concerned. It's all accelerations, times, distances and forces; some of the very first things the computers tackled. The only real difference between Skytrain and a mainline freight is the likelihood of something being on the tracks; much more likely on the mainline than the Skytrain.

Not even close. Imagine a 14,000 ton mile ...blah blah blah... all like a skytrain.

I don't have to imagine it, I've seen it first had, more times than I can count, from the front end. My Dad worked CN freight and used to take me with him often. I listened to the hogger, (what railroaders call the engineers), talk about what he was doing when he took up the slack. Same thing when he was braking. That part of the operation can be done by a modern computer, no problem. It's just physics. We could invite Hedley back; he could explain exactly how to code it.

The things the computer won't be able to do are switching and not hitting something on the tracks. Mind you, even the human engineer is pretty much powerless to avoid hitting things on the tracks; The amount of momentum in an average mainline freight takes more distance to stop than the typical visual range of an engineer.

[tsgas]

Until the first accident. Might work for cargo, but maybe in 100 years with passengers.

Didn't Pakistan Airlines recently kill close to 100 pax on an A 320 due to pilot error ?