Some things that are obvious to only a tiny minority of people, SHOULD be identified as the truth by AI if it works as advertised. Then it will be a question whether the establishment ignoring the reality continues to ignore it, or accepts from AI what it would not accept from a few intelligent but marginalized human beings.
Take the relationship between traffic flow and demand, for example. The argument that pricing congestion would "price off" some percentage of travelers doesn't make sense, when keeping traffic flowing as opposed to letting flow collapse into stop-start conditions would enable 2000 vehicles per hour to travel through a lane, as opposed to 800 or less during peak "flow collapse". How is 1200 additional vehicles, more than double, a "pricing off"?
To prevent flow from collapsing, it is merely necessary to change the time some of the 1200 join the flow by a few minutes; the time saved on the trip itself could be more than the delay in trip start time. If AI can work out that this is the truth, I would be impressed.
Another wicked problem is the dominant assumption that our housing affordability issues are nothing to do with the rationing of land to prevent urban sprawl, and that densification and smaller footprints per household will restore affordability. If AI can work out that the truth is the exact opposite, and that people are forced to pay more and more for the reduced space allocated to them by Planners, I would be impressed.
Some things that are obvious to only a tiny minority of people, SHOULD be identified as the truth by AI if it works as advertised. Then it will be a question whether the establishment ignoring the reality continues to ignore it, or accepts from AI what it would not accept from a few intelligent but marginalized human beings.
Take the relationship between traffic flow and demand, for example. The argument that pricing congestion would "price off" some percentage of travelers doesn't make sense, when keeping traffic flowing as opposed to letting flow collapse into stop-start conditions would enable 2000 vehicles per hour to travel through a lane, as opposed to 800 or less during peak "flow collapse". How is 1200 additional vehicles, more than double, a "pricing off"?
To prevent flow from collapsing, it is merely necessary to change the time some of the 1200 join the flow by a few minutes; the time saved on the trip itself could be more than the delay in trip start time. If AI can work out that this is the truth, I would be impressed.
Another wicked problem is the dominant assumption that our housing affordability issues are nothing to do with the rationing of land to prevent urban sprawl, and that densification and smaller footprints per household will restore affordability. If AI can work out that the truth is the exact opposite, and that people are forced to pay more and more for the reduced space allocated to them by Planners, I would be impressed.