Love the idea of kicking back on a high speed train. Finding myself in Vegas.......not so much.

exactly, the prize is up for grabs by whoever has the best luck (or tailwind) that day. The requirement that it be "economically viable" will not disqualify anyone...could you imagine the lawsuit over the meaning of "economicaly viable" with 10 million at stake? The race will be interesting in a comic sort of way. The litigation afterwards will be just sad.

I'm glad I ran across this editorial. I can't agree more with what Yates wrote, our dependence on cars creates a problem almost as massive as the benefits we derive from their use. Its hard to convince people that its not just stupidity that is driving this problem, most people have a fair idea about the costs and benefits involved and act (fairly) rationally.

Here's where Autoblog readers might stop reading. I think there is good reason to believe the solution is closer than most people think. We are close to refining a tool (the computer) that can remove the design flaw that has been with cars since they were first built (the driver). I do not claim to know exactly how this transformation will take place but I believe it is the most likely solution to a problem that has to be solved.

Up till now I've not seen a good description of the true implications of the automation of cars. The idea that it means you could drink a latte and work on your laptop misses the point entirely. It will rework the structure of society as deeply as did the train, the container box, and the car.

Perhaps I should have said vague instead of weak. The problem is that its hard to specify just what is a technology or design that is ready for "mass production". I just can't imagine that a team that wins the highest mpg rating is going to be disqualified because their design can't be "mass produced". With that much money at stake there would be massive, endless, litigation. So we may end up with teams gaming the system and very little useful innovation.
It wouldn't bother me so much if the x-prize wasn't one of the few creative initiatives with some real money behind it. They were able to get guys like Rutan to start a new space race, but with this effort they'll likely get funky cars with creative bodywork. The rules could have been more focussed and more likely to get useful results.

Yeah, lets stop buying cars.....right. Actually the prize is so poorly conceived that it might just be a guy working with his garage, using no really grounbreaking technology but with a little bit of luck, that might walk away with 10 mil. This prize might actually work against our search for viable solutions to a real problem by putting on display a lot of really weak technology. I'd say the big three might be staying away because it could all end up looking very silly.

Just a comment on the critical mass concern. I agree that in the open environment of todays roads it would require a high level of participation to get the powerful advantages of telematics(car to car communication). In a more restricted, dedicated roadway (say an isolated lane on the freeway) the benefits could be developed much more quickly.

cool! Make it so.

Just because your car is receiving information through the network doesn't mean it couldn't develop a picture of what's going on using its own sensors. It could then report back to the net that someone(you) is screwing around.

The effect of higher gas prices on purchasing decisions is a marginal one. Once you get above 25mpg the share of the average car's operating costs devoted to gas becomes fairly small--in the 25% range--and even large increases in gas prices are not terribly significant. The scary thing is that the effect on the efficiency (the "greenness") of our transportation system is even smaller. Each car, small or large, has got about a 20year lifespan. It will take over a decade after we start buying them in large numbers for the more efficient cars to begin to outnumber the guzzlers. Sadly, in fifteen years a Prius may be (if we're lucky) among the most inefficient cars out there--now part of the problem rather than the solution. We may have the time and resources to improve our system at such a gradual rate, or we may not. Can we afford to take the chance?

The early entrants to this contest are giving us an idea of what the race might look like; a bunch of impractical 100mpg cars that can somehow claim to be "mass production" ready. The competition seems to be poorly designed. Its too bad because the prize is serious money and could have been used to stimulate really useful basic research like DARPA's grand challenges.