The Dark Future of Transportation: "Beyond Traffic" a USDOT Report

As reported by The Verge: The US Department of Transportation (USDOT) just released "Beyond Traffic," a study best described as a dire warning about how the country's arterial lines will clog and implode over the next several decades. As far as USDOT secretary Anthony Foxx is concerned, pretty much everything is in bad shape and getting worse: roadways, railways, waterways, the whole nine yards.

The problems are endless: ancient infrastructure is crumbling without the money to repair or replace it. Renewable energy strategies aren't materializing quickly enough. Rapidly growing urban centers are buckling under the weight of the commuting residents that occupy them. And all the while, the specter of global warming threatens to quite literally sink everything.

In a perfect world, the DOT would be coming to the table with a slate of solutions — not problems — but it's not. Instead, it's calling Beyond Traffic "an invitation to a conversation" about how to fix things. "Everyone uses our transportation system, which means anyone can help build its future," a slide deck highlighting the study reads.

Here are some of the major takeaways.

We're basically doomed unless we radically change things

"America's transportation system is a fossil in 2045," reads the slide deck. That's not wrong: even today, American bridges are regularly cited as being structurally deficient with no replacements in sight. It warns about the rise of new urban centers — "Omaha is the new LA" in the DOT's dystopian vision of the future — and rail systems so overcrowded that trains never actually stop to pick anyone up. No one can get to work.

The USDOT seems to be really excited about millennials and ride-sharing

The study makes reference to several trends unique to younger people — a downturn in driving paired with a huge uptick in the acceptance of technology. "Data enables innovative transportation options, such as car-sharing, ride-sharing, and pop-up bus services, and more rapid delivery of goods," the presentation notes. (Notably, Ford announced at CES this year that it's testing practically all of these things.) This might ultimately be terrible news for car lovers, but great news for the environment, infrastructure budgeting, and just about everything else.

Self-driving cars are definitely happening, because the regulatory people are on board

It's widely understood that the biggest hurdle to getting self-driving cars on the roads over the next couple decades won't be a technological one — it's regulatory. Lawmaking is almost always a bureaucratic nightmare, with special interests pulling strings and naysayers gumming up the works. For companies like Google and major automakers pursuing their own self-driving projects, though, this is probably good news: Beyond Traffic makes reference to the advent of driverless tech. "Imagine eliminating 9 out of every 10 car crashes. That's the bright promise driverless technology holds over the next 30 years," the presentation reads. A three-decade time horizon probably isn't what Google has in mind, but at least they've got the Department of Transportation talking about it in a sharply positive light

FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler: This Is How We Will Ensure Net Neutrality

As reported by Wired: After more than a decade of debate and a record-setting proceeding that attracted nearly 4 million public comments, the time to settle the Net Neutrality question has arrived. This week, I will circulate to the members of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) proposed new rules to preserve the internet as an open platform for innovation and free expression. This proposal is rooted in long-standing regulatory principles, marketplace experience, and public input received over the last several months.

Broadband network operators have an understandable motivation to manage their network to maximize their business interests. But their actions may not always be optimal for network users. The Congress gave the FCC broad authority to update its rules to reflect changes in technology and marketplace behavior in a way that protects consumers. Over the years, the Commission has used this authority to the public’s great benefit.

The internet wouldn’t have emerged as it did, for instance, if the FCC hadn’t mandated open access for network equipment in the late 1960s. Before then, AT&T prohibited anyone from attaching non-AT&T equipment to the network. The modems that enabled the internet were usable only because the FCC required the network to be open.

Companies such as AOL were able to grow in the early days of home computing because these modems gave them access to the open telephone network.

I personally learned the importance of open networks the hard way. In the mid-1980s I was president of a startup, NABU: The Home Computer Network. My company was using new technology to deliver high-speed data to home computers over cable television lines. Across town Steve Case was starting what became AOL. NABU was delivering service at the then-blazing speed of 1.5 megabits per second—hundreds of times faster than Case’s company. “We used to worry about you a lot,” Case told me years later.

But NABU went broke while AOL became very successful. Why that is highlights the fundamental problem with allowing networks to act as gatekeepers.

While delivering better service, NABU had to depend on cable television operators granting access to their systems. Steve Case was not only a brilliant entrepreneur, but he also had access to an unlimited number of customers nationwide who only had to attach a modem to their phone line to receive his service. The phone network was open whereas the cable networks were closed. End of story.

The phone network’s openness did not happen by accident, but by FCC rule. How we precisely deliver that kind of openness for America’s broadband networks has been the subject of a debate over the last several months.

Originally, I believed that the FCC could assure internet openness through a determination of “commercial reasonableness” under Section 706 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996. While a recent court decision seemed to draw a roadmap for using this approach, I became concerned that this relatively new concept might, down the road, be interpreted to mean what is reasonable for commercial interests, not consumers.

That is why I am proposing that the FCC use its Title II authority to implement and enforce open internet protections.

Using this authority, I am submitting to my colleagues the strongest open internet protections ever proposed by the FCC. These enforceable, bright-line rules will ban paid prioritization, and the blocking and throttling of lawful content and services. I propose to fully apply—for the first time ever—those bright-line rules to mobile broadband. My proposal assures the rights of internet users to go where they want, when they want, and the rights of innovators to introduce new products without asking anyone’s permission.

All of this can be accomplished while encouraging investment in broadband networks. To preserve incentives for broadband operators to invest in their networks, my proposal will modernize Title II, tailoring it for the 21st century, in order to provide returns necessary to construct competitive networks. For example, there will be no rate regulation, no tariffs, no last-mile unbundling. Over the last 21 years, the wireless industry has invested almost $300 billion under similar rules, proving that modernized Title II regulation can encourage investment and competition.

Congress wisely gave the FCC the power to update its rules to keep pace with innovation. Under that authority my proposal includes a general conduct rule that can be used to stop new and novel threats to the internet. This means the action we take will be strong enough and flexible enough not only to deal with the realities of today, but also to establish ground rules for the as yet unimagined.

The internet must be fast, fair and open. That is the message I’ve heard from consumers and innovators across this nation. That is the principle that has enabled the internet to become an unprecedented platform for innovation and human expression. And that is the lesson I learned heading a tech startup at the dawn of the internet age. The proposal I present to the commission will ensure the internet remains open, now and in the future, for all Americans.

SpaceX Targets Sunday Launch; Will Retry Booster Landing

As reported by USA Today: SpaceX is targeting a 6:10 p.m. ET launch on Sunday of the Deep Space Climate Observatory (DSCOVR) mission from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, NASA confirmed Friday.

The mission is a collaboration between NASA, the Air Force and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

After launch, SpaceX again will try to land the Falcon 9 rocket booster an ocean platform. The first try last month resulted in the rocket hitting the "autonomous spaceport drone ship" with a fiery crash that did not cause extensive damage.

Though it hasn't landed a booster successfully yet, SpaceX last week released a concept video showing all three boosters from a Falcon Heavy rocket, which has not yet launched, flying back to a landing pads at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station.

SpaceX last week also revealed a picture of the Dragon capsule it will use to test a key system needed for future human missions to the International Space Station, targeted for 2017.

U.S. Air Force Budget Sets Stage for GPS Satellite Competition

As reported by Reuters: The U.S. Air Force's fiscal 2016 budget plan earmarks $7.1 billion for space programs, including a 10th Global Positioning System III satellite by Lockheed Martin Corp, and sets the stage for future competition for such satellites.

Lockheed won the contract to build GPS-III satellites in 2008, beating out Boeing Co, which had built earlier GPS satellites. The program has since run into delays due to technical challenges with a key sensor built by Exelis Inc.

The Air Force had no immediate details on the potential competition, how many satellites it would include, or when the process would begin.

Lockheed said it would review the budget in the coming weeks to understand the specific impact to its business. "We are completely focused on the execution and performance on our existing contract," said spokesman Chip Eschenfelder.

Boeing had no specific comment on the prospect of a GPS competition, but said it remained focused on improving productivity and lowering the cost of weapons systems.

The GPS system provides worldwide, 24-hour position, navigation and timing information for military and civilian users. The Air Force plans to buy a total of 27 GPS III satellites.

The fiscal 2016 budget for the GPS program includes $673 million in research and development funding, and $265 million in procurement funding for a total of $938 million, down from $1.02 billion in fiscal 2015.

If approved by Congress, the 2016 budget request would pay for GPS III satellite 10, and continue work on a next-generation ground control system being built by Raytheon Co. The Raytheon program was restructured last year, doubling its cost.

The program is due to be reviewed by the Pentagon's chief arms buyer this month.

No comment was immediately available from Lockheed or Boeing about the potential competition.

The Air Force space budget also funds five launches under the Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle program, of which three would be set aside for competition, according to an Air Force spokeswoman.

The United Launch Alliance, a joint venture of Lockheed and Boeing, is the only provider of launches under the EELV program at the moment, but the Air Force has said it expects to certify privately held Space Exploration Technologies, or SpaceX, to compete for EELV contracts by mid-year.

The budget also begins funding for an effort aimed at ending U.S. reliance on a Russian-built engine now used to power the Atlas 5 rocket built by United Launch Alliance.

BMW Patches Wireless Security Flaw Affecting Over 2 Million Vehicles

As reported by The Stack: BMW has fixed a security bug which left 2.2 million cars, including models from Rolls Royce and Mini, exposed to hackers.

The flaw was discovered in vehicles using BMW’s ConnectedDrive software, which runs from an installed on-board SIM card. Via the smartphone app, owners can remotely control a number of functions including door locks, air conditioning and sounding the horn. The software does not operate any of the vehicles’ hardware such as brakes or steering.

Researchers from the German motorist association ADAC identified the flaw which allowed the system to connect to fake mobile phone networks, enabling hackers to remotely control the Sim card. No known hacks have been reported.

BMW has now applied a patch employing HTTPS protocol (HyperText Transfer Protocol Secure) to encrypt the data from the cars.

"On the one hand, data are encrypted with the HTTPS protocol, and on the other hand, the identity of the BMW Group server is checked by the vehicle before data are transmitted over the mobile phone network," BMW released in a statement.

For security experts the use of HTTPS should have been a given practice. "You would probably have hoped that BMW's engineers would have thought about [using HTTPS] in the first place," said security blogger Graham Cluley.

As an increasing number of connected cars are introduced into the market, experts warn of the growing threat of malware and hacking targeted at vehicles.

"I think we are going to see more malicious attacks [on connected cars]. If someone finds a vulnerability in an internet-enabled car you could have the same situation that you have now for browsers...it doesn't take much imagination to think of the abuse this could cause," Mark O’Neill of software organisation Axway, told IBTimes UK.

However, this BMW case has helped to instill confidence that software updates and patches can be distributed swiftly and effortlessly to connected vehicles, with drivers able to manually select updates to ensure they are fully covered.

Uber Opening Robotics Research Facility In Pittsburgh To Build Self-Driving Cars

As reported by TechCrunch: Driver-on-demand service Uber is building a robotics research lab in Pittsburgh, PA to “kickstart autonomous taxi fleet development,” sources close to the decision have confirmed to TechCrunch. They say the company has hired talent from Carnegie Mellon University’s Robotics Institute, including lead engineering and commercialization experts.

No one at Carnegie Mellon or Uber agreed to discuss the deal on the record but an announcement should be forthcoming.

Sources tell us Uber is hiring more than fifty senior scientists from Carnegie Mellon as well as from the National Robotics Engineering Center, a CMU-affiliated research entity. Carnegie Mellon, home of the Mars Rover and other high-profile robotics projects, declined to comment at this time, as did scientists mentioned by our source. Uber has “cleaned out” the Robotics Institute, said the source.

The source also noted that most of these technologies came through a “massive” military spending push over the past decade and should net the university millions in IP licensing fees.

Uber will be developing the core technology, the vehicles, and associated infrastructure at this Pittsburgh facility, according to sources. They have already hired a number of employees and made moves to outfit them with software, including a multi-hundred-thousand dollar investment in third-party engineering workstations.

In the past, Uber CEO Travis Kalanick has said he would replace human drivers with self-driving cars. The decision to run the facility in Pittsburgh makes perfect sense, given the proximity to CMU and the potential secrecy afforded by moving research out of Silicon Valley.

In a related story, Bloomberg Business is reporting that Google is looking into creating an on-demand car service of its own, which is very interesting considering Uber’s interest in automated vehicles. It also raises questions about Google’s David Drummond maintaining a spot on Uber’s board. Google has integrated Uber into its Google Maps products and has taken an investment in Uber via its Google Ventures arm.

No specific plans for a roll-out date or goals for Uber’s automated driving efforts were mentioned. The company recently raised $4 billion in equity and debt including $1.6 billion in convertible debt earlier this month. This follows a $1.4 billion Series D funding round over the summer as well as another $1.2 round in December. The company is now valued at $41 billion.

Tesla Model X Caught On Video At The Test Track

As reported by TechCrunch: A new model Tesla has been caught on camera at the Alameda Airport test track (via Electrek). The car looks pretty similar to a Prius, or perhaps a crossover utility vehicle, and could plausibly be either the Model X SUV Tesla has been working on for years, or, as others are arguing, a prototype of the mass-market Model 3 that the coming is planning to bring to market in the $35,000 price range.

The video doesn’t show much beyond a car driving around at a relatively high speeds both straight and through some wide loops, and the camouflaged body of the vehicle with a broad back end and what looks like a fairly high seating arrangement for the driver, which does suggest it’s a Model X test vehicle. It also has a lot in common in terms of design, body shape and apparent size with the original Tesla Model X design unveiled in 2013 by Elon Musk.

I think it’s most likely this is the Model X, because of the points raised above, and because Tesla CEO Elon Musk said earlier this month that the Model X is on track for release by the early part of the second half of 2015, meaning it should be about as road ready and design-final as the vehicle in this spy video is. That means it’s time for electric car fans who want a bit more cargo capacity to get excited.