Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
In recent years, our surface transportation infrastructure is suffering from overuse, extreme traffic congestion, and roadway disrepair. Instead of following the traditional infrastructure expansion policy, current transportation research focuses on developing innovative and novel solutions to the aforementioned issues. Current pathways to overcoming these issues include the gradual transition toward a number of emerging transportation technologies, such as, autonomous motor vehicles for human transport, as well as unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV's) and “drone” technologies for surveillance, and package deliveries. However, as a long-term solution, transportation scientists are also investigating the once-seemingly futuristic notion of flying car technology—a convergent form of ground/air vehicle transportation, and assessing associated regulations. In this paper, an extensive review of current literature is conducted to explore the technological capabilities of flying cars—each requiring appropriate regulations and governance—to become fully sustainable. Specifically, issues pertinent to training, safety, environment, navigation, infrastructure, logistics/sustainability, and cybersecurity and human factors are explored. This paper concludes with a preliminary quantitative analysis exploring the public perceptions associated with flying cars—including anticipated benefits, concerns, and willingness to both hire and acquire the technology once available to consumers. Insights offered by this data will help inform next-generation policies and standards associated with the gradual advancement of flying cars.
The “Transportation network of Tomorrow” has long been a topic of discussion and debate, with numerous forward-thinking possibilities [e.g., Hyperloop and Personal Rapid Transit; (Cunningham, 2017)]. Since the depictions of flying cars were mostly confined in the science fiction movies, the notion of a real “Flying Car” has long-seemed nearer to science fiction than science fact. However, recent technological advances are slowly bringing these capabilities closer to reality (Covington, 2018). The surmised advantages of a Flying Car network are many, as it effectively combines ideal characteristics of both planes and cars. Specifically, a Flying Car is much more maneuverable and would be less susceptible to traffic jams while traversing three dimensional airspace as compared to two dimensional ground-based roadways (Soffar, 2018). However, regardless of the superior transportation capabilities likely to be offered by this technology, the widespread adoption of flying cars will be predominantly shaped by public perception. Evaluation and statistical analysis of public perception toward a forthcoming transportation technology pose significant methodological challenges in terms of unobserved heterogeneity and temporal instability (Mannering and Bhat, 2014; Mannering et al., 2016; Fountas et al., 2018; Mannering, 2018). A number of recent studies have demonstrated that people's perception toward potential benefits and concerns from the future use of flying cars, as well as the associated safety and security issues are multifaceted, and influenced by a broad range of socio-demographic factors (Eker et al., 2019, 2020a). In addition, whether general population is willing to embrace and pay for flying cars as personal vehicles and/or as a shared mobility service are major research questions that have been investigated as well (Ahmed et al., 2019; Eker et al., 2020b). In addition to survey-based approaches, virtual and/or live motion and simulation (M&S) based approaches are warranted for in-depth investigation of safety-, infrastructure-, sustainability-, environment-, and human factor-specific requirements (as shown in Figure 1).
Figure 1. Flying car M&S domains of interest.
In this context, the ongoing evolution of Flying Cars will have profound impacts upon various policies and standards that govern future development, test, evaluation, validation, and deployment of the technology (Lineberger et al., 2018). Forecasting existing regulations and establishing appropriate incentives that will serve to standardize and sustain a full-scale Flying Car Transportation network will be required. In the next section, an overview highlighting the applicability and potential impacts of M&S toward the future deployment of flying cars in the existing transportation fleet is presented.
Applicability of M&S and Training Toward Deployment of Flying Cars
Modern technological developments demonstrate that flying cars may be available for commercial use by 2025 (Becker, 2017; Bogaisky, 2018). Many of the associated challenges to sustain the technology will necessitate virtual and/or live M&S for testing and validation. For example, the evolution of flying cars will demand new policies and standards to regulate transition and handoff periods between manual and autonomous vehicle control and the complex transition between ground and flight dynamics (e.g., for takeoffs/landings). Furthermore, new policies and standards will be required to explore the complexities of airborne navigation safety, which will necessitate both computational M&S for virtual testing and physical M&S performed within a live setting. For the latter, prototyping (e.g., within a “drone dome” enclosure; refer to Figure 2) must be leveraged to emulate a functional miniature-scale infrastructure for forecasted flying car transport modes. Flying car deployment will likewise have profound impacts on training, which will demand novel regulations for safe operational and maintenance procedures. The ongoing development of flying car technologies will enable next-generation training methods within related technological domains, including: (a) pilot training and certification, (b) repair/service/upgrade procedures, (c) connected/automated vehicles, including advanced robotics and sensor fusion, and (d) machine learning and artificial intelligence (AI). Lastly, human response to autonomous features of next-generation transport modes remains uncertain. Through application of M&S, an improved understanding of the complex human factors associated with flying cars is required to manifest policies and standards that will govern future operation. Ultimately—human behavioral patterns ascertained (e.g., via human behavior models and simulations) in conjunction with live/virtual testing to explore the human-machine interface can be leveraged to clarify the infrastructure challenges associated with real-world deployment.
Figure 2. Flying car drone dome testing.
In this paper, we present an extensive overview of the capabilities and requirements for actionable regulations and governance for flying car technology to advise and dictate future test, evaluation, validation, and deployment of the technology. A brief forecast of the primary issues pertinent to key M&S domains of interest includes:
The most critical segment of flying car operation will be ground/air transitions (takeoff/landing), which will demand NAS/FAA regulation, and suitable governance for an integrated (rather than segregated) airspace. Another critical aspect would be addressing operational challenges and ensuring safety during adverse weather conditions (e.g., heavy rainfall, high wind, snowstorm, etc.).
Pilot Training and Certification
For both manual and autonomous flying cars, the vehicle operator (or pilot), and the air/ground-based support systems (maintenance) will require appropriate certifications and governance.
Flying cars will require regulations for “vertiports” (takeoff/landing facilities) for land/air transitions, and this in turn, will dictate policies and standards for vertical takeoffs and landings operational features.
Governance must be mandated (e.g., NASA UAM) to ensure environmentally conscious best practices for flying cars. For instance, fully electrical powered operation, minimum operational noise, and minimum greenhouse gas emission.
Logistics and Sustainability
Flying cars will require sustainable legal standards for operation, maintenance, control, and step-by-step adoption (e.g., as emergency vehicles, as a mode of ridesharing service, and as consumer vehicle).
Flying cars will be highly automated, computerized, and likely be connected to encrypted network for navigational purposes. Such a system will mandate policies for safeguarding against cybercrimes (e.g., unauthorized remote access through Trojans and malwares, DDoS attacks preventing network access).
Human preferences and attitudes will direct and dictate flying car sustenance, including financial (i.e., acquisition expenses; willingness to hire), operational benefits/concerns, and anticipated Use Case scenarios.
We begin with an overview of policies and standards related to safety (i.e., operational; mechanical)—a foremost concern for establishing and maintaining flying car sustainability.
The Indian media has provided extremely fawning coverage of Kamala Harris ever since she announced her run for the presidency. The fawning coverage continued when Joe Biden declared her as his Vice Presidential nominee and the coverage scaled new heights after Joe Biden won the elections and Kamala Harris became the Vice President of the United States of America.
Nevertheless, people in India have not really been half as enthusiastic about Harris as the media. While Indian media went all in for her, Indians on the internet have been quite cautious about her. On the other hand, there is one female American politician who does not receive as much coverage in Indian media but is vastly more popular than Harris in the Indian sections of social media. We are referring, of course, to Tulsi Gabbard.
Tulsi Gabbard is a former US Congresswoman from Hawaii. She became the first Hindu to get elected to the US House of Representatives and was the first Hindu to run for the presidency of the United States of America. She practices progressive politics and is a member of the Democrat party. She served in the US Congress until January 2021 after he decided not to contest for reelection.
There is some personal rivalry between the two as it is widely believed that Kamala Harris failed in her presidential bid due to the intervention of Tulsi Gabbard during the Democratic presidential debates. The former Congresswoman from Hawaii slammed Kamala Harris for her duplicity with regards to prison reform and marijuana legalisation.
One of the foremost reasons for her popularity among Indians is her warm regards for India. Unlike other progressive members of her party, Tulsi Gabbard has been positive in her views regarding India and has unequivocally taken India’s side on contentious matters such as Article 370.
After Article 370 was revoked, she was one of the few Democrats who were outspoken in their support for India’s decision. Gabbard has also been extremely critical of Pakistan and has regularly called them out for providing a safe haven to terrorists. At the same time, she has advocated for better ties between the USA and India to confront and combat shared threats and collaborate on mutual interests.
There is another much stronger reason for Gabbard’s popularity. Her Hindu identity does endear her to Indians at large, the overwhelming majority of whom are Hindus. When she says ‘Jai Shri Krishna’ or wishes people on the occasion of Gaura Purnima, it makes her more relatable to Indians, which is natural.
Tulsi Gabbard, unfortunately, has been targeted a lot for her Hindu identity. Her Hindu identity was enough to brand her a ‘Hindutva fascist’ by Hinduphobic bigots. One of the reasons cited was that she shares a warm relationship with Prime Minister Modi and therefore, she was accused of being an ‘RSS plant’.
Such accusations are little disguised efforts at character assassination by vested interests as cordial relationships between political leaders of two countries are completely natural. Former US President Barack Obama shared a good relationship with Narendra Modi, as did Donald Trump. And now, Joe Bide, too, is on good terms with the Indian Prime Minister.
We have evidence now that the propaganda campaign to malign Tulsi Gabbard, a veteran of the Iraq War, was launched by Pakistan-backed Khalistanis. It was part of a larger effort to target Hindus in the United States of America.
It would have been very easy for her to be apologetic about her Hindu identity, and hardly anyone could have blamed her for it, but she decided instead to go on the offensive and call out the pervasive Hinduphobia that is so dominant in public discourse. She condemned politicians and the media for not only refusing to condemn it but fomenting it in the first place.
During her campaign, when an attempt was made to corner her about the Gujarat riots, which had absolutely nothing to do with her, she took the opportunity to educate the person about her misguided efforts. She had said, “Again, back up your claims with evidence. The contributions that I get for my campaign come from American citizens. What you are doing right now is levelling criticism against American citizens who just happen to be Hindus and who are involved in our democratic process.”
Tulsi Gabbard again earned great appreciation from Indians on Friday when she spoke out in favour of the persecuted Bengali Hindus in Bangladesh. She condemned the Pakistsani Army’s genocide of Bengali Hindus in the 1970s, one of the darkest phases of the 20th century that has largely been forgotten, partly due to the secularist conspiracy to cover up the mass murder.
The then Indian Government under the Congress party was itself responsible for it as they feared highlighting the genocide of Bengali Hindus would vitiate communal harmony in India.
“As a member of Congress, I introduced a resolution that called for the protection of Hindus and religious minorities in Bangladesh. People who continue to be targeted and persecuted to this day. The height of this persecution actually began 50 years ago, when the Pakistani army systematically murdered, raped and drove from their homes, millions of Bengali Hindus because of their religion and ethnicity,” Tulsi Gabbard said in a video message published on Friday.
She continued, “March 25th, 1971 was the beginning of a systematic targeting of Hindus in Bangladesh by the Pakistani military. It began in Hindu neighbourhoods and villages, first at Jagannath Hall, which was a Hindu dormitory in Dhaka University, where five to ten thousand people were killed on that first night alone. This genocidal campaign continued for 10 months, resulting in two to three million people killed. Hundreds of thousands of women and girls raped and more than 10 million forced to flee their homes.”
Kamala Harris, on the other hand, despite her Indian heritage has largely been silent on matters related to India. While she has certainly been far better than her progressive counterparts in the Democratic Party since she was elected, prior to that, she did make some rather problematic comments.
She said during one of her interviews, ‘We have to remind Kashmiris that they are not alone in the world. We are keeping track of the situation. There is a need to intervene if the situation demands.’ Furthermore, despite her Indian heritage, she has far lesser of a cultural affinity with Indian than Tulsi Gabbard.
Nevertheless, it does say a lot about Indian media that it has gone gaga over Harris while ignoring an American politician who has been more of a friend to India than Kamala Harris has ever been.
Take the fucking vaccines
For the good of your families and communities
Nearly 40% of Marines have rejected coronavirus vaccine as Dems call on Biden admin to make shots mandatory for troops – reports
Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Women now hold many of the jobs controlling the world’s largest economy - and they’re trying to fix it.
We're about to see what happens when
Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen, Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo and trade czar Katherine Tai hold top jobs in U.S. President Joe Biden’s administration and many of his economic advisers also are women, as are nearly 48% of his confirmed cabinet-level officials.
This sea change may already be affecting economic policy - a new $2.3 trillion spending plan introduced by Biden last week includes $400 billion to fund the “care economy,” supporting home- and community-based jobs taking care of kids and seniors, work normally done by women that has mostly gone unacknowledged in years past.
The plan also has hundreds of billions of dollars more to fix racial and rural-urban inequalities that were created in part by past economic, trade and labor policies.
Yellen says the focus on “human infrastructure,” and the earlier $1.9 trillion rescue bill should result in significant improvements for women, whose share of the workforce had hit 40-year lows even before the crisis, and for everyone else as well.
“In the end, it might be that this bill makes 80 years of history: it begins to fix the structural problems that have plagued our economy for the past four decades,” she wrote on Twitter, adding, “This is just the start for us.”
Women leaders can bring fresh perspective to economic policy, experts say.
“When you’re different from the rest of the group, you often see things differently,” said Rebecca Henderson, a professor at Harvard Business School and author of “Reimagining Capitalism in a World on Fire.”
“You tend to be more open to different solutions,” she said, and that is what the situation demands. “We’re in a moment of enormous crisis. We need new ways of thinking.”
Over the past half-century, 57 women have been president or prime minister of their countries, but institutions that make economic decisions have largely been controlled by men until recently.
Outside the United States, there’s Christine Lagarde at the helm of the European Central Bank with its 2.4 trillion euro balance sheet, Kristalina Georgieva at the International Monetary Fund with its $1 trillion in lending power, and Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala at the World Trade Organization - all jobs held by men a decade ago.
Overall, there are women running finance ministries in 16 countries, and 14 of the world’s central banks, according to an annual report prepared by OMFIF, a think tank for central banking and economic policy.
The limited measures available suggest women have a better track record of managing complicated institutions through crisis.
“When women are involved, the evidence is very clear: communities are better, economies are better, the world is better,” Georgieva said in January, citing research compiled by the IMF and other institutions.
“Women make great leaders because we show empathy and speak up for the most vulnerable people. Women are decisive ... and women can be more willing to find a compromise.”
A study by the American Psychological Association showed that U.S. states with female governors had fewer COVID-19 deaths than those led by men, and Harvard Business Review reported that women got significantly better ratings in 360-degree assessments of 60,000 leaders between March to June 2020.
Women account for less than 2% of CEOs at financial institutions and less than 20% of executive board members, but the institutions they do run show greater financial resilience and stability, IMF research shows.
Eric LeCompte, a UN adviser and executive director of a non-profit that advocates for debt relief, said he noticed a clear difference during a meeting with Yellen and the leaders of Christian and Jewish faith groups last month.
“I’ve been meeting with Treasury secretaries for 20 years, and their talking points have been entirely different,” he said. “In every area we discussed, Yellen put an emphasis on empathy, and the impact of policies on vulnerable communities.”
Her male predecessors had a “brass tacks” approach that focused first on “numbers not people” and never mentioned words like “vulnerable,” he said.
THE GLOBAL SHE-SESSION
The stakes are high.
The global recession related to the coronavirus pandemic is actually a “she-session,” many economists say, because of how hard it has hit women.
Women comprise 39% of the global workforce but account for 54% of overall job losses, McKinsey found in a recent study. In the United States, women accounted for more than half the 10 million jobs lost during the COVID-19 crisis here, and over 2 million women have left the labor force altogether.
Bringing these women back to work could boost gross domestic product by 5% in the United States, 9% in Japan, 12% in the United Arab Emirates and an astounding 27% in India, the world’s largest democracy, the IMF estimates.
Georgieva on Tuesday said the IMF had put in place quantitative targets to ensure countries focused recovery spending on health, education, social protection and empowering women after years of neglect. “If we don’t do it, we risk inequalities deepening,” she said.
The rise of female leaders should lead to “a more inclusive - in the true sense of the word - response to the many, many challenges that are the legacy of COVID,” Carmen Reinhart, the World Bank’s chief economist, told Reuters.
Tai, the first woman of color to lead the U.S. Trade Representative’s office, has told her staff to think “outside the box”, embrace diversity and talk to communities long ignored.
Okonjo-Iweala, also the first African to head the World Trade Organization, which oversaw trade flows of nearly $19 trillion in 2019, said addressing the needs of women will mark an important step toward rebuilding deeply eroded faith in government and global institutions.
“The lesson for us is (to) make sure ... that we don’t sink into business as usual,” said Okonjo-Iweala, who was also Nigeria’s first female finance minister. “It’s about people. It’s about inclusivity. It’s about decent work for ordinary people,” she told Reuters.
External Content twitter.comContent embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.External Content twitter.comContent embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
The co-founder of the polarizing Black Lives Matter movement is under fire for buying a $1.4 million home in a posh California neighborhood that’s 88 percent white.
It’s an interesting decision for Patrisse Cullors, a self-professed Marxist and race-baiting activist who has paid lip service to promoting black pride.
According to Dirt.com, the home is located in Topanga Canyon, an idyllic rustic neighborhood about 48 minutes outside of Los Angeles and less than 30 minutes from tony Malibu.
Advertisement - story continues below
Cullors’ new home has three bedrooms and two baths and sits on one-quarter of an acre. The property also has a separate one-bedroom, one-bathroom guest house.
But what is most interesting is that the BLM co-founder chose to live in Topanga, where less than 2 percent of the population is black.
Sports journalist Jason Whitlock, who’s himself black, sarcastically called out Cullors for her blatant hypocrisy.
“Black Lives Matter founder buys $1.4 million home in Topanga, which has a black population of 1.4%. She’s with her people!” he tweeted Friday.
Advertisement - story continues below
Black Lives Matter founder buys $1.4 million home in Topanga, which has a black population of 1.4%. She’s with her people! https://t.co/HIGZsV7Cj4
— Jason Whitlock (@WhitlockJason) April 9, 2021
Whitlock pointed out that Cullors could have lived anywhere, and in fact, she could’ve made an important political statement if she had chosen to live in a predominantly black neighborhood. But she didn’t.
And that says something about whether she truly believes that “black lives matter.”
“She had a lot of options on where to live. She chose one of the whitest places in California,” Whitlock said.
“She’ll have her pick of white cops and white people to complain about. That’s a choice, bro.”
Advertisement - story continues below
Others on Twitter also pointed out the hypocrisy.
Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
Is 2021’s Fictional Cyberattack Simulation Prepping Us For a Cyber Pandemic?
Many readers are aware of a simulation conducted by the World Economic Forum called Event 201 that preceded the COVID pandemic. Event 201 eerily described and seemed to predict the pandemic. (There was also a pandemic simulation called Clade X that preceded Covid.)
What some readers may not know, however, is that the World Economic Forum conducted a similar simulation, Cyber Polygon 2020. This 2020 event also predicted a global catastrophe.
A new cyberattack simulation, Cyber Polygon, will occur in July 2021.
The WEF, Russia’s Sberbank, and its cybersecurity subsidiary BIZONE announced in February that a new cyberattack simulation would occur July 9, 2021. The event will simulate a supply-chain cyberattack similar to the SolarWinds attack that would “assess the cyber resilience” of the exercise participants.
From the Article written by Whitney Webb and Johnny Vedmore, “From Event 201 To Cyber Polygon: The WEF’s Simulation Of A Coming Cyber Pandemic” :
The exercise comes several months after the WEF, the “international organization for public-private cooperation” that counts the world’s richest elite among its members, formally announced its movement for a Great Reset, which would involve the coordinated transition to a Fourth Industrial Revolution global economy in which human workers become increasingly irrelevant. This revolution, including its biggest proponent, WEF founder Klaus Schwab, has previously presented a major problem for WEF members and member organizations in terms of what will happen to the masses of people left unemployed by the increasing automation and digitalization in the workplace.
New economic systems that are digitally based and either partnered with or run by central banks are a key part of the WEF’s Great Reset, and such systems would be part of the answer to controlling the masses of the recently unemployed. As others have noted, these digital monopolies, not just financial services, would allow those who control them to “turn off” a person’s money and access to services if that individual does not comply with certain laws, mandates and regulations.
How do the event coordinators describe Cyber Polygon 2021?
The newly updated event website, Cyber Polygon 2021, ominously warns as the world is more interconnected and global digitalization accelerates “a single vulnerable link is enough to bring down the entire system, just like the domino effect. A secure approach to digital development today will determine the future of humanity for decades to come.”
From the World Economic Forum site:
What is Cyber Polygon?
Cyber Polygon is a unique cybersecurity event that combines the world’s largest technical training exercise for corporate teams and an online conference featuring senior officials from international organisations and leading corporations.
Cyber Polygon in 2021
This year discussions during the live-streamed conference will centre on secure development of ecosystems. With global digitalisation further accelerating and people, companies, and countries becoming ever more interconnected, security of every single element of a supply-chain is key to ensuring the sustainability of the whole system.
During the technical exercise, participants will hone their practical skills in mitigating a targeted supply chain attack on a corporate ecosystem in real time.
Crises seem to conveniently arise when the people in power want change.
All this ties right into Universal Basic Income. The very popular UBI, introduced with even more vigor after the COVID 19 pandemic, has popularized consistent “stimulus payments” to survive the crisis. The idea of the UBI has been thrown around as a solution to poverty for some time, with bloggers like Daisy Luther comparing it to modern-day feudalism. With the building blocks of the technological control grid already in place, adding a UBI forms a relatively strong foundation.
The WEF has settled on the model of “stakeholder capitalism.” In name and theory, it appears to be an inclusive type of capitalism. However, it would essentially merge the public and private sectors, which would, as Webb and Vedmore write, create “a system much more like Mussolini’s corporatist style of fascism than anything else.” To get to that point, however, the current system must collapse. Its replacement society will be successfully marketed to the general population as being better than its predecessor.
“When the world’s most powerful people, such as members of the WEF,” write Webb and Vedmore, “desire to make radical changes, crises conveniently emerge—whether a war, a plague, or economic collapse—that enable a “reset” of the system, which is frequently accompanied by a massive upward transfer of wealth.”
Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.