Our gradual loss of control as the driver continues...

[Ace-Garageguy]

2039 the 1000 car pileup was found to be caused by a 15 year old hacker who thought it would funny to change autonav sottware safety ptotocals. In other news Microsoft is releasing more updates and security patches to their autonav software.

You understand perfectly.

But let's face it. To most "drivers", driving is just another one of life's petty but necessary annoyances that takes time away from watching the Kardashians or Bieber, or yagging / texting on the cell phone about some stupid inconsequential BLAH_BLAH_BLAH_BLAH. Well-engineered machines are vastly more competent than the average human at a variety of tasks already, and a correctly-functioning "driverless" car would most likely be a far better-controlled vehicle than the majority of those on the roads at any given moment now.

Every time I'm on the interstate, or even just driving my little 4 miles to work, I'm amazed that there are only the paltry number of vehicle-related fatalities that occur annually (paltry compared to the number of vehicle-miles driven in the USA). EVERY excursion beyond my driveway invariably requires me to compensate for some inattentive, distracted or just plain incompetent fool who shouldn't be operating ANY machine, much less one that weighs 2500 lbs, can travel in excess of 120mph, and is loaded with at least 10 or 15 gallons of highly flammable and potentially explosive liquid fuel.

The trick will be getting the engineering right the first time, and making it fail-safe and hacker-proof.

Good luck with that.

Edited May 30, 2014 by Ace-Garageguy

[tbill]

GM was fooling with this idea years ago, like 20 or so, at that time though, it relied on sensors in the road to navigate the vehicle.

most of your crash avoidance systems only work over a specified mph, so, someone standing in front of a stationary vehicle trying to stop it's movement won't happen.

as a new car dealership tech, I see all the latest/greatest techno-foolery that is on GM cars, some of it is cool and a good idea [blind zone detection, rear back up camera/or sensor system are a couple that come to mind], but ya, some of it is borderline insane. have you seen a new car owners manual lately? you need a few college courses to figure out how to work everything.

at the same return, I bet 'back in the day' people thought turn signals and brake lights were foolish add ons, heck, we already have hand signals, who need blinking lights?

myself, I am still waiting on the flying car

[Danno]

"I'm afraid I can't let you turn there, Dave."

"I'm afraid I just can't let you do that."

[Ace-Garageguy]

...myself, I am still waiting on the flying car

Putting millions of moron drivers in things that fly probably isn't a really good idea. It's hard enough to find a very competent private pilot already.

[Lownslow]

im all for this when it concerns certain drivers of age that shouldnt be behind the wheel

[bbowser]

at the same return, I bet 'back in the day' people thought turn signals and brake lights were foolish add ons, heck, we already have hand signals, who need blinking lights?

myself, I am still waiting on the flying car

LOL, how true. Then it was automatic transmissions so you don't have to pay attention to shifting, power steering so you can tool around with one finger on the wheel, then power brakes because pushing that pedal is just "so difficult". Power windows and door locks, so if the battery goes dead you can't even get into the car, never mind that's it's locked in park and the steering wheel is locked so you can't push it anywhere. It's a slippery slope and we haven't gotten to the bottom yet

[Harry P.]

Sort of semi-related to this... that Progressive Insurance electronic nanny gizmo that you put in your car and it tracks your driving habits (acceleration, how many "panic stops" you've made, etc.) under the guise of "lowering" your insurance rate.

It seems to me that all the proof an insurance company needs that you are a relatively safe driver would be the fact that you haven't been involved in an accident! No insurance claims... safe driver. Lower rates.

I have to wonder what the real reason is that Progressive wants to track your driving habits (I seriously doubt the intent is to lower your insurance rates, which makes no sense for the insurance company!). Obviously it's somehow beneficial to them and not to you to have that information, but I'm not quite sure what their angle is. They claim that data collected by the device will not be used as a reason to raise the rates of what they consider an "unsafe" driver (based on the data collected)... but I have to wonder...

[tbill]

Putting millions of moron drivers in things that fly probably isn't a really good idea. It's hard enough to find a very competent private pilot already.

lol, guess it's a good thing it never 'took off'

[alangarber]

Why do they put so much effort into foolishness like this. They need to come up with a better solution for gasoline replacement as we are being robbed each fill up.

[tbill]

oil shortage my behind........pure greed at work there.........

[Maindrian Pace]

The new Ford steering system is a variable ratio setup that improves driving feel, it doesn't take away any driver control. And Euro-lux car makers already have it.

I recently heard that the gummint is working with cell phone manufacturers and providers to be able to turn on your microphone and listen to your private conversations in a room, whether your phone is on or off. Might be true, not worth getting all worked up over something you can't control.

A few days ago, I passed a horrific accident that I later learned killed three people. So as for autonomous cars, if they keep the distracted/drunk/stoned/red light running drivers from smashing into and killing people, then praise be Google, et all.

-MJS

[martinfan5]

The new Ford steering system is a variable ratio setup that improves driving feel, it doesn't take away any driver control. And Euro-lux car makers already have it.

I recently heard that the gummint is working with cell phone manufacturers and providers to be able to turn on your microphone and listen to your private conversations in a room, whether your phone is on or off. Might be true, not worth getting all worked up over something you can't control.

A few days ago, I passed a horrific accident that I later learned killed three people. So as for autonomous cars, if they keep the distracted/drunk/stoned/red light running drivers from smashing into and killing people, then praise be Google, et all.

-MJS

Someone that gets it

Edited May 31, 2014 by martinfan5

[Harry P.]

The new Ford steering system is a variable ratio setup that improves driving feel, it doesn't take away any driver control.

Actually it's just the opposite of what you say. It's designed to take away (or lessen) driver input.

From the story... The actuator—an electric motor and gearing system—can essentially add to or subtract from a driver’s steering inputs.

Or in other words, change the driver's inputs. That is taking away control. Or at the very least, modifying or overriding it.

But my point wasn't to point out the "evils" of this system, only to make the point that this is just another step in the overall process that is happening... the process of giving more control to the car and taking more away from the driver, and questioning whether that was a good or a bad thing.

[Belugawrx]

I think that the (driverless) car will be outfitted with

Crash avoidance, GPS link to all other cars,Speed and brake sensors linked to GPS,

And wings

But when I see one I will be Pinning my GMC 2500 4wd at 'em like a squirrel!!!

[62rebel]

so Ford is making the headlines the last couple of days with a million-plus car recall for.... power steering failures.

nothing trumps a mechanical linkage between my hands and the front wheels of my vehicle. not electric, not autonomous, not guide-by-genie-smoke.....

[Belugawrx]

How many of us have disconnected the ABS system in our vehicles??

Cheers

[bobthehobbyguy]

Actually it's just the opposite of what you say. It's designed to take away (or lessen) driver input.

From the story... The actuator—an electric motor and gearing system—can essentially add to or subtract from a driver’s steering inputs.

Or in other words, change the driver's inputs. That is taking away control. Or at the very least, modifying or overriding it.

But my point wasn't to point out the "evils" of this system, only to make the point that this is just another step in the overall process that is happening... the process of giving more control to the car and taking more away from the driver, and questioning whether that was a good or a bad thing.

Harry its not the evils of the system it is the reality of the situation.

The software and the hardware for taking the driver out of the equation is complex. Couple that with car companies that don't always get it right and have to do recalls or ignore the situation and hope there aren't too many lawsuits. Second software that needs fixes and updates. And they are both saying trust us will will operate your car for you. No thank you.

[gasman]

I dont think we are going too see self driving cars become a reality for at least 15-20 years, even then its going to be very limited, its going to be like an autopilot, you can use it on the interstates, but for parking lots, and majority of roads the cars will stil require someone controlling the driving,

[Ace-Garageguy]

As has been mentioned earlier on this thread, the idea of an "autonomous vehicle" (driverless or self-driving car) has been an engineering dream for a long time. GM's Firebird II investigated some fairly stone-age technical solutions over 50 years ago.

It hasn't been until the fairly recent evolution of massive computing power in small packages, and absolutely reliable navigational systems like GPS that the dream had any hope of becoming operational reality.

Much of the current work is built on the results of several DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency ) projects.

Here's a little background and links to more actual information (as opposed to opinion), should anyone want to be better informed of the reality of the research into the technology.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DARPA_Grand_Challenge

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autonomous_car

Edited May 31, 2014 by Ace-Garageguy

[Harry P.]

Wasn't it DARPA that basically invented the internet many years ago? Or what came to be called the internet. It was called "DARPANET," IIRC. Or "ARPANET" or something like that? Basically the first time that multiple computers in separate locations were able to connect with each other using an electronic network.

(See... it wasn't Al Gore after all!)

[Joe Handley]

I think it might have been something like that Harry, and I think Al Gore voted to spend the money on it.........

[1930fordpickup]

Some how this is going to cost us more money in the long run!

[Harry P.]

Some how this is going to cost us more money in the long run!

Doesn't it always?

[Greg Myers]

Instead of cars as horseless carriages, they're becoming more like the carriage and the horse. Very, very smart horses...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dyMXYE_50Ts

[ZTony8]

Speaking of progress-many people in the 1910s thought that 4 wheel brakes would lead to a loss of steering control so that's why most of the cars through about 1928 had only 2 wheel brakes and many of those were external contracting brakes.My 1927 Chevy has that set up and,believe me,you don't want to be caught driving it in the rain!The parking brake(inside the drum!) works better for that.