Innoventions to finally close?

[Wizzard419]

Some things I think are touring (since they do exhibits elsewhere), some of the things might actually be on loan, and then they probably would have trouble making an ever-green exhibit. The original gallery had a similar problem.

[Botts]

Back on original topic: Is there any reason why Disney shouldn't update Innoventions with D23 exhibits? Seems almost a natural fit, and gets extended value out of things conceived for the exhibition. Of course, it wouldn't necessarily be called Innoventions anymore, but rather some play on the 'exhibition' phrasing.

I was thinking about something similar today.

A D23 exhibit would be awesome. You could sell a ton of D23 memberships with it, and even put a "Private" D23 store in for D23 members only. You'd have to develop some great D23 merchandise for it, but it would probably make a good deal of money. I'm not sure the Carousel building is the right place, but it's definitely something I'd like done.

I think there's a definite opportunity to use the Carousel space for showing off future tech. Team up with groups like SpaceX, NASA, Google, and others to fill it and keep it up to date. Look at how much attention Cmdr. Hadfield brought the space program from the general public. I'm a space geek, but even friends who cared nothing of space before were glued to his twitter feed and YouTube video. I'm not saying make a Mission: Space or another Star Tours, but maybe a dark ride moving past SpaceX, NASA, etc. exhibits.

Slightly off topic: but in regards to the fellow who suggested removing Autopia would be a benefit, or at least converting to electric -> this is my suggestion:
1: Work with Google, or BMW, or one of the other firms involved in autonomous vehicle projects.
2: Switch propulsion of vehicles to electric.
3: Make vehicles crash-proof using autonomous systems.
4: Remove guide rails.
5: Benefit from improved public perception of autonomous vehicles, and kids will feel like they're doing even more of the driving.

[Wizzard419]

You mean basically build aquatopia.

[Amy]

You mean basically build aquatopia.

But on dry land ~ neat idea Botts! I love Aquatopia

[Wizzard419]

Ok fine, you meant build the parking pods they have at Heathrow?

[GeoffS]

Or like Pooh's Hunny Hut at Disney Tokyo? Trackless, electric, and technology already exists.

[Amy]

Or like Pooh's Hunny Hut at Disney Tokyo? Trackless, electric, and technology already exists.

Yup, and prohibitively expensive. Doubt TDO will ever spring for it

[Wizzard419]

Possibly not, but in the role of a "driving attraction" it probably wouldn't be a whole lot of fun to not be able to drive at all because the cars would steer and propel themselves for safety and this basically becomes a request for the people mover again.

[GeoffS]

Jeez, if only we could make real cars steer and propel themselves for safety. Take the idiot out of the loop, so to speak.

[Amy]

Jeez, if only we could make real cars steer and propel themselves for safety. Take the idiot out of the loop, so to speak.

They do have them, they just aren't affordable yet And it would take a whole bunch of training to get people to trust them...

[Wizzard419]

They also aren't legal in most states, autonomous cars only just got clearance in CA this year. Considering the business model that Google would also use to sell them (buy direct from Google/the maker) they also wouldn't be legal in many states. Tesla is running into the problem now since car dealer associations have laws on the books to prevent car makers from selling direct to consumers.

[Amy]

They also aren't legal in most states, autonomous cars only just got clearance in CA this year. Considering the business model that Google would also use to sell them (buy direct from Google/the maker) they also wouldn't be legal in many states. Tesla is running into the problem now since car dealer associations have laws on the books to prevent car makers from selling direct to consumers.

Interesting. I didn't even know they had been approved in any states yet.

[Wizzard419]

It apparently was a really long battle, which is probably still moot since not everyone will have the cars and take care of them in the same way. Such as the co-worker who apparently has their car serviced only when something goes wrong.

[GeoffS]

"Making them legal" is kind of a funny way of looking at it. Nevada was the first to give the official okay to them, with the explanation that autonomous driving was no different that adaptive cruise control - as long as a human is capable of taking over in an emergency, it's technically allowable. If it's not forbidden, it's "legal". Many of the universities and research labs use this loophole in their testing. Chicago's downtown has quite the underground reputation for being a testbed.

I personally love 'em. I don't think enough drivers have full awareness of their surroundings. With over 30,000 deaths every year in the US alone from motor vehicle accidents, it's beyond time to fix the problem.

[Wizzard419]

Testing is something that doesn't fully matter, in regards to legality, since it is under controlled conditions, limited risk etc. But when they want to make a consumer product, it becomes different. Even if the driver can take control in an emergency, it doesn't mean they are more capable or will make a good decision. I am sure there is also the concern of drunks getting behind the wheel, they aren't driving, but they could.