Remember how Segways came out and everyone laughed? Then they were recalled. And no one wanted them in Europe... where I understand everyone already has a jet pack. And remember how, despite being around for the best part of a decade you only see them on TV ads for discount hotel chains? Now, apparently because of an economic crisis and half the auto industry in collapse, they are back. And they are back with the roof and seat that they needed all along - but without that one little thing that I think people actually want - crash safety protection:
...the vehicles would also be part of a communications network that through the use of transponder and GPS technology would allow them to drive themselves. The vehicles would automatically avoid obstacles such as pedestrians and other cars and therefore never crash, Mr. Burns said. As a result, the PUMA vehicles would not need air bags or other traditional safety devices and include safety belts for “comfort purposes” only, he said.
Puma! Viva Puma!! Excellent!!! Works for me. And what a lovely photo by Getty Images of the vehicle of the new era drove around Brooklyn on Monday, showing all its strengths, the unfocused background implying breakneck speed and... What? What is that you say? You don't think the combination of a failed 19th century auto maker and a failed tech revelation for the new millennium creates a great source of trust? You don't think the makers of bad ideas should be hiring people called Mr. Burns as spokesmen? How did you become so cynical? P'shaw I say!
But... errr... aren't they going to have an issue with the trademark?
Comments
Alan - April 8, 2009 11:03 AM
Also - where is the guy's helmet?
Chris Taylor - April 8, 2009 12:10 PM
My wager is that a minimum of fifteen people have to die needless deaths before GM and Segway figure out that while these contraptions may indeed be able to avoid smacking other vehicles that are also generally moving in the same direction of travel.... other non-GPS-equipped vehicles weighing as much as several dozen Pumas may lack the automated sophistication or human diligence to avoid a collision.
Alan - April 8, 2009 2:06 PM
Disclosure: I think I personally weigh what several PUMA might and cannot confirm I would not have the automated sophistication no to collide with one.
Temujin - April 8, 2009 5:45 PM
"Would you invest in developing this? Guess what: you already have." Billy Beck
I'm not sure anything more needs to be said!
Alan - April 8, 2009 5:51 PM
Well, it will be interesting to see what the bankruptcy trustees say about this and other developmental investments. I am sure I have also invested in certain jet pack designs over the years but the bastards are withholding them still!
seanie - April 9, 2009 10:45 AM
No one is mentioning that it looks stupid. That and a mere sideswipe and whammo... you are tumbling sideways in a non-round sideways not quite rolling death trap. I guarantee you, if a contest similar to the annual university solar car contest were initiated, for a small 1-2 person vehicle, we'd have something a little less "look at how modern we arae thinking, stop looking at the accounts" and a little more "this could be useful".
Ben (The Tiger) - April 10, 2009 10:43 AM
Other problem -- one major advantage cars have is the carrying capacity. You can pack your trunk full of groceries...
I hate carrying groceries home.
Major driving force behind my finally getting a driver's license...