Smart Cars to Save Stupid Drivers? 476
bl8n8r writes "Ford spokesman Mike Vaughn said they tested computerized optical scanning and a variety of warnings: a vibrating steering wheel, the sound of a car driving over rumble strips and a visual warning projected on the windshield. Researchers also tested a so-called "active" system in which the vehicle would actually adjust the steering automatically if it veered too far one way or the other."
Smart Cars to Save Wealthy Drivers... (Score:5, Funny)
What's normal? I routinely drive w/o my hands on the wheel. I also tend to take "half-naps" by closing one eye. If it doesn't learn my behavior how is it going to work for me?
It will be offered this fall on 2005 models of Infiniti's FX sport utility vehicle, then again next spring on the 2006 M45 luxury sedan.
Apparently only those wealthy enough can afford to be saved while the rest of the 1500 people a year that croak because of drowsy driving have to suffer.
Bah!
Re:Smart Cars to Save Wealthy Drivers... (Score:4, Funny)
Could you let me know before you're going out for a drive.
Re:Smart Cars to Save Wealthy Drivers... (Score:5, Funny)
In this same vein, an individual in my defensive driving class last year when asked why he got so many speeding tickets:
"I only speed when I'm drunk or high, but that's pretty much all the time"
Re:Smart Cars to Save Wealthy Drivers... (Score:3, Insightful)
Its a new murder method!
Just tweak the settings a bit, change the program slightly, and oops! It was an accident.
I wonder how traceable such changes would be.
Frankly, I wonder if you could do that now, with how automated cars are becoming....
Much subtler than doing something physically nasty to the brakes or whatnot...
Re:Smart Cars to Save Wealthy Drivers... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Smart Cars to Save Wealthy Drivers... (Score:2)
Re:Smart Cars to Save Wealthy Drivers... (Score:4, Funny)
My friend was driving on this road and he noticed there was a winnebago out in the middle of this field with a confused elderly couple kinda disheveled. As he got closer he saw that the road had made a little jog to the left, and the tire tracks from the winnebago went straight off the road, through the fence and into the middle of the field.
He got out of his truck to see if they were alright. As he was talking to them, the elderly gentle man sat confused. "I put the thing on Auto-Pilot, went back to get a soda, and next thing I know we're out in the middle of this field!"
I think that's why most people call it cruise control now, instead of auto-pilot.
Re:Smart Cars to Save Wealthy Drivers... (Score:3, Insightful)
Well I don't remember it ever being called "auto-pilot", but let me expand on your point a little bit regardless (and using that analogy).
The problem that I see with systems such as this is that they teach you to be a lousy driver. Notwithstanding some of the comments posted here, having to drive manually pretty much forces you to be competent. If you're not a competent driver, eventually you're probably going to die.
Re:Smart Cars to Save Wealthy Drivers... (Score:3, Insightful)
That's a silly position! I hadn't realized Luddites were allowed to use the WWW. As technology marches along, old skills like firebuilding, equestrianism, and Morse code are forgotten. Some people will always lament the passing of old ways, but those specializations are genuinely no longer needed.
(Side note: We're a
Safe Cars to Save Wealthy Drivers... (Score:5, Insightful)
Your complaint appears to be a subset of a larger complaint, and of a larger debate. "Safe for wealthy drivers." Why should somebody (and his family) be safer on the road than you just because he can afford a Volvo, Saab, etc. while all you can afford is a used Ford Pinto?
Then again, why should somebody who makes more money be afforded superior health care just because he can afford to pay more for it?
Are you suggesting that if someone places less value on short term leisure and recreational activities, invests more in his education, works harder and longer, and as a result earns more money, that he (and his family) should be relegated to the same relatively unsafe car (and relatively unsafe medical care) as the person who invested and worked less?
Re:Safe Cars to Save Wealthy Drivers... (Score:4, Insightful)
At least, that's the typical Slashdot attitude.
Re:Safe Cars to Save Wealthy Drivers... (Score:3, Insightful)
I think what he was saying was that these devices really should be in all cars. Human life is more valuable than money.
Re:Safe Cars to Save Wealthy Drivers... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Safe Cars to Save Wealthy Drivers... (Score:3, Insightful)
How many of us here started learning on computers because our parents bought a $2000 MS-DOS box or whatever when we were young. Take all our computer access away until we become college freshmen and what would we be like? Oh wait, what if we couldn't afford college? Now we're 22 and barely know how to use a mouse.
Look up "Social Darwinism", it was shown to be total bunk a LONG time ago.
Re:Smart Cars to Save Wealthy Drivers... (Score:5, Funny)
Kid you not.
Re:Smart Cars to Save Wealthy Drivers... (Score:5, Insightful)
Suffer? I hope this is in jest, because your current auto is no less safe tomorrow as it is today because of this technology. In addition, many safety items are first produced on high end cars because the cost is more easily absorbed by the purchaser. If the system works it will become a commodity item and become affordable for more people.
Re:Smart Cars to Save Wealthy Drivers... (Score:3, Funny)
That's how I like to think of rich people:
Crash Test Dummies.
Re:Smart Cars to Save Wealthy Drivers... (Score:3, Interesting)
Actually, you're safer. Less likely to be rammed by a sleepy rich person. Not every traffic fatality is the fault of the person who dies.
I once almost hit a trailer (i.e. mobile home) because I fell asleep for a second, woke up, thought I missed my turn, and turned hard right...a hundred feet early. Of course, this system might not have helped with that much as the first two (falling asleep and waking immediately) sti
Road Surface Innovations (Score:3, Interesting)
EXACTLY. There is one thing they could do, albeit the front-end investment is high. Stop using asphalt. Seriously how old is this material? When was the last time we saw a serious innovation in road surfacing? What about that hard rubbery stuff they make indoor tennis courts out of? Make a smoother version and lay the stuff down! Think of the added traction, flexibility of the road, lack of potholes, better heat
Re:Smart Cars to Save Wealthy Drivers... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Smart Cars to Save Wealthy Drivers... (Score:3, Insightful)
No it's more like trickle down protection: While it's true that initially the wealthy will see more benefit than the poor, some of those current fatalaties were people hit by the driver of the other car falling asleep and crossing the median. So while it may be a long time before I can afford a car with sleep protection in it, my chances of dying in an
Yeah. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Yeah. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Yeah. (Score:2, Insightful)
There is a highway here (401 south) that often has accidents on it and has been referred to as the "killer highway". One time some girl fell asleep while driving her friends home and unfortunately they all died. The blame was put on the killer highway. So typical. Place the blame elsewhere. Obviously what happened is the highway started singing a lullaby when the driver was least expecting it.
Hopefully this system helps as accidents do happen too often with a s
Stupidity 198823, Engineers 42 (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Stupidity 198823, Engineers 42 (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Stupidity 198823, Engineers 42 (Score:3, Funny)
"No matter how idiotproof you make a device, an ingenious idiot in the field will discover a workaround."
Still... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Still... (Score:4, Interesting)
That is why we will never see the fabled car that drives itself to your destination. If you and I are in an accident, and both of us were letting the cars drive themselves, who is at fault? The manufacturer(s) of course. The liability of such systems is unbelievably high.
I've often suspected the automated highway project demonstrated in CA was canceled for this reason. I imagine some high level people after the demo finally realizing what it was really about and then realizing what happens when it DOES break down in some way.
Re:Stupidity 198823, Engineers 42 (Score:2)
All it needs to detect is.... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:All it needs to detect is.... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Don't mind me--just griping (Score:3, Insightful)
You racist. How dare you go and imply that African Americans are aggresive thugs without a sense of humor.
Smile.
Jumps and Leaps ahead in Technology (Score:2, Funny)
I like to drive but I they could develop a car to drive for me than I will turn of the reigns without any squabble. But in this article they're making strong strides towards sleepy drivers by shacking the wheel when the drive nodes. Revolutionary yes (with a touch sarcasm) - Yet the driver will immediately unplug this devise when he's sitting at a drive movie theater with his girl friend and this thing goes off; she'll think he's a perv.
Re:Jumps and Leaps ahead in Technology (Score:2)
Warning ! (Score:5, Funny)
If they keep protecting stupid people (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:If they keep protecting stupid people (Score:5, Funny)
Re:If they keep protecting stupid people (Score:2)
I'm sorry, I must have missed evolution's spectacular successes in this endeavor over the last few millenia under the current conditions...
Yeah... (Score:2)
Re:If they keep protecting stupid people (Score:2)
Or maybe the engineers will use the extra money that they make from all this to have a few extra tykes.
Of course, stupid people still breed faster, so I don't have much hope for 'evolving a better person.'
Re:If they keep protecting stupid people (Score:2)
Infact, no matter how stupid you are, if you have the moolah to pay, you can get (almost) everything.
BTW, since the article says that this system is due to appear in "2005 models of Infiniti's FX sport utility vehicle, then again next spring on the 2006 M45 luxury sedan", which I bet will cost $60,000+ (may be even $100,000+), can't these super-rich-super-idiots, hire a chauffeur to drive the damn thing sensibly ??
Re:If they keep protecting stupid people (Score:3, Interesting)
If being fundamentalist causes more children (which it seems today) and they spread their genes, then in terms of natural selection, it's a better gene (though obviously, there is a great interdependence between nature and nurture, single genes affecting multiple characteristics and multiple genes combining to influence one).
"Be
Nice... (Score:5, Insightful)
Reminds me of the Urban Legend - (Score:3, Funny)
Not sure how it relates... (Score:4, Informative)
So if this is what they're talking about, it's pretty effective I think.
Re:Not sure how it relates... (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Not sure how it relates... (Score:2)
Re:Not sure how it relates... (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Not sure how it relates... (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Not sure how it relates... (Score:3, Interesting)
Me too! (Score:2)
Re:Not sure how it relates... (Score:2)
You mean like rumble strips? That's actually one of the "sounds" that the computerized system they tested uses as a warning (presumably because people are already familiar with that noise):
Re:Not sure how it relates... (Score:5, Insightful)
Unfortunately, it's the reaction that some drivers have when suddenly jarred awake that's the problem.
Not that the reactions of many drivers are much better when they aren't dozing. It amazes me no end how we give a person license to pilot a 5000-pound missle - day or night, and in all types of weather - when all they've proven that they can drive it around a small parking lot and answer a few questions.
Want to reduce accidents? Want to save lives? Mandatory driving skills and car control training before you get a license. As it stands, we're so concerned with car control here in the USA that you'll get a Reckless Driving ticket for doing donuts in a big empty parking lot while testing out the limits of your ride to see how it behaves in a skid condition.
Won't Somebody Think Of The Children?
Re:Not sure how it relates... (Score:4, Interesting)
We can then discuss where one person's rights end and another person's rights begin, but the real point I'm trying to get across is that I don't know of, say, a public skidpad I can drive down to this afternoon and test out how my truck behaves in a slide and how I need to react to counter it.
It is completely ludicrous to me that we expect people to learn how to control a vehicle in a dangerous situation by giving them free reign to go out and get into that situation on public highways without any prior knowledge or training.
Like anything else, some people will have a natural affinity for car control and not have many accidents. Others will find it difficult to grasp the concepts involved and may have several wrecks a year. Both people could benefit from training before they hit the road at 75mph. The motoring public at large benefits as well.
When my stepdad taught me how to drive in the snow, we came to a long bridge with nobody else around. He told me to take it up to about 40mph, and then said abruptly, "Now jam the brakes." I did, and we slid for about a third of the length of the bridge before stopping. I still recall his next words to this day: "Remember how long it took to stop."
I'm not arguing for preventing anybody from driving. In my opinion, in much of the US today driving should be a right rather than a privilege. What I am arguing against is underskilled and unprepared people driving.
I have to take NRA safety classes before I get a hunting license to go out into the public (or other) woodlands to hunt game with a firearm.
I don't feel that car control training before a driver's license is issued to go out on the public roads with a three-ton SUV is any different. Don't even get me started on the parents that buy 16-year-old Johnny a 300HP Mustang and fail to enroll him in classes on how to keep it pointed straight.
Some accidents aren't preventable. Most are. Speed itself is less of a problem than driver error. Most driver error could be prevented with training.
OK, I'm done now.
This will only be effective (Score:2, Funny)
I'd settle (Score:2)
HAH! I kid.
The smart car even kill's CATs! (Score:3, Funny)
http://dune.moldova.net/qt/KA2.mpeg
So what if it screws up? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:So what if it screws up? (Score:5, Insightful)
The answer is that they asked that question early in design. It detects anomalies and shuts the system down. I expect it to be the same with "auto-steering".
Re:So what if it screws up? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:So what if it screws up? (Score:2)
Then you're hosed. Systems fail, and accidents (sometimes fatal ones) happen.
Odds are good that the last aircraft you flew in was driven by a computer, and you didn't die. The question is, would smart cars create a net reduction in roadway casualties?
Computers can be made fail-safe and fail-soft. Just because Microsoft can't do it doesn't mean it can't be
Re:So what if it screws up? (Score:2)
-Colin [colingregorypalmer.net]
Smart cars to save stupid drivers? (Score:5, Insightful)
Really - the solution to drowsy drivers shouldn't be of a technical nature, but of educational nature. If you're drowsy don't drive the fsckin car .
Re:Smart cars to save stupid drivers? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Smart cars to save stupid drivers? (Score:3, Insightful)
yeah.... (Score:2)
QM (Score:4, Interesting)
Well, looks like no matter how you build these systems, quantum uncertainty is going to prevent your product from comming to market.
-Colin [colingregorypalmer.net]
clarification (Score:5, Interesting)
a visual warning projected on the windshield? (Score:2, Funny)
http://www.visi.com/~tdo/bsod.jpg
How about ticket warnings? (Score:3, Interesting)
Finally! (Score:5, Funny)
Finally!
Now when I'm talking on my phone, reading the newspaper, and eating breakfast on the way to work, I can look down to pick a DVD or refresh
Re:Finally! (Score:3, Insightful)
Someone who's right on the threshold of falling asleep at the wheel will rationalize in their completely irrational fatigued-mind state that they can "let go" and drift off for a moment because the car will stay on the road and come to a nice safe stop.
Re:Finally! (Score:4, Funny)
Reckless drivers, on the other hand...
What scares me is... (Score:3, Insightful)
I think we can all enjoy the versitility of things like vinyl, analog devices and hacker friendly consumer electronics (see: all the support for the dreamcast in the Poll). I just fear that after a while cars might be restricting smart/clever driving with "safeguards" and eventually get some smart driver killed...
As long as you can shut off things here and there, this system sounds kind of nice...
Flight Control Systems - Stick Shaker (Score:5, Interesting)
I worked on the B-2 Bomber's Flight Control System. We had a "stick shaker" wired to the pilot's controls that would vbrate when a stall condition was detected. This was activated after a warning light and tone were already used to alert the pilot. I have no experience with any other flight control system, but I would suspect that this is not unique to the B-2.
Perhaps another slashdotter can post and let us know.
C172 (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Flight Control Systems - Stick Shaker (Score:2, Interesting)
This is a common alert mechanism in both military aircraft and commercial aircraft, although even without any such warning mechanisms (of which simple older aircraft will have none), when an aircraft approaches a stall the disruption of airflow across the wing that precedes the stall causes the whole aircraft to shake and buffet.
You'll know if you're stalling.
But who needs to worry about pilots? The training required for piloting an aircraft ensures that a pilot understands how much danger he/she is in
Safe & easy? (Score:2, Offtopic)
You know what would work even better? (Score:5, Interesting)
The bus, the subway, the train, the bike, and walking.
Re:You know what would work even better? (Score:2)
Of course, that's the answer! Perfect for the majority of people who live in the suburbs and have to commute 20-30 miles into the city for work! The buses stop at every door and there's enough for everyone! Don't like the bus? It's a well-known fact that *every* city in the country has a subway system! Don't like subways? Just bike or walk the 30 miles in the 15-degree weather, with sleet/rain. It's a blast!
Smart cars may not be a be-all, end-all answer, but given the geographical layout and populat
Re:You know what would work even better? (Score:3, Informative)
Train and bus service in my area is a joke.
I love mass transit, and human powered systems...when and if they are practical. Which in many cases in this country, they are not.
Oh no... (Score:3, Insightful)
but the steering wheel gives me a giggle and turns me back into the poor creature now smeared all over my hood.
I'll pass.
Re:Oh no... (Score:2)
Nevermind the fact that high-end cars have for years been able to detect the difference between an emergency stop and a routine press on the brake pedal and act accordingly (maximum braking power engaged sooner than normally would occur). Such technology has already started to trickle down to lower priced cars.
Liability (Score:5, Interesting)
"Risk homeostasis" (Score:5, Insightful)
It will make things safer for a short time. Then everyone will get less alert, because they'll expect the car to take care of warning them.
People will make their own decisions about whether they are too drowsy or intoxicated to drive, and if driving is a little easier they'll let themselves get a little drowsier or intoxicated than they would have before, and things will be just about as safe as they were before.
Reminds me of a quote (Score:2, Funny)
"Make something fool proof and someone will build a better fool."
Well not always stupid drivers. (Score:2)
I'm more afraid of this actually working. (Score:5, Insightful)
That means no erratic driving, and no way for a police officer to potentially head off an accident from a drowsy or drunk driver.
And I admit, I have been one of those people who have fallen asleep at the wheel, and have realized that I was in a different lane than I remembered having been in. I have probably been saved by the little rumble strips along the edge of the highway at least half a dozen times.
But I'm not comfortable with this if it means that drowsy people are more likely to drive, because their car will warn them if something might go wrong. And there's no way in hell that I want rich alcoholics having an extra excuse for throwing back a few extra before they hit the road.
In some ways, I'd almost prefer that they just took the driving completely away from humans. [well, all animals... I don't want there to be some monkey driving, even though I know in Cannonball Run [2, I think], he wasn't really driving]
Who's Calling Stupid? (Score:2)
I think one of the most promising technologies will be scanners that watch the eyes and perhaps other biometrics to detect nodding off, and sound some sort of alarm. Most people could use something like this now and then.
There's an easy fix for this. (Score:5, Insightful)
15 hours of how to move in traffic isn't driving instruction. People need to know what to do when they understeer and oversteer. They need to have done it before, over and over, so they learn how to react.
Controlling a car isn't hard, and the majority of times people think their car is out of control, its not so far gone a knowledgable driver couldn't recover safely.
We just don't teach anyone how to drive in this country. Fifty bucks and fifteen hours behind the wheel of a minimum wage driving teacher shouldn't cut it.
Re:There's an easy fix for this. (Score:4, Interesting)
Step 1: After five years, your name is added to a pool of people who are eligable for retest.
Step 2: Every year, X percent of that pool are required to be restested. You get one 'grace' rescheduling, but if you miss your test, your license is yanked. Period.
Step 3: If you fail your test, you get sent to a retraining course, at your expense. If you can't afford it, your license is yanked. Period.
Step 4: If you, after taking the retraining, fail your test again, you are reduced to a G1 (for non Canadians: you may only drive with a fully licensed and five-years experienced driver in the passenger seat, only during daytime, and not on major highways, 0.0 BAC, and other minor restrictions) for a period of one year.
Step 5: If you pass your test either time, your name is removed from the pool for five years.
Step 6: If you have demerits/fines/etc, your name is more likely to be chosen from the pool, if it's in the pool. X amount of demerits or fines/traffic offences automatically send you for a restest as normal.
Step 7: NO EXCEPTIONS. No hardship waivers, nothing. If driving is that important to you, you shouldn't have driven like an idiot.
This way, the system isn't too overburdened with retests, idiots get retested more often, and people are encouraged to actually drive properly.
The point being what? (Score:2)
This is anti-darwinitism. Against natural selection.
Dream a little dream with me (Score:3, Insightful)
1. No driving below the age of 18; if you can't be charged as an adult for a crime, you can't be given the responsibility of driving a vehicle that can kill if you're careless.
2. No driving until you've completed a TRUE driving school, one that teaches you accident avoidance and skid control, like motorcycle schools and high-performance driving schools currently offer.
3. No driving until you've learned to change a tire, check your oil and diagnose a broken fan belt...and until you know what every gauge in your car means.
4. If you want to drive a truck, SUV, or performance car, you have to take an additional course focusing on the specific dangers and control issues that these vehicles have before you can get license plates and/or permission to drive that class of vehicle.
5. Your license is a lifetime document, and after a certain number of points, you lose your license for good.
6. MUCH stiffer penalties for speeding and reckless driving*.
This will never, ever, ever happen, because people in the US for the most part believe driving is a right, not a privelege.
*in Chicago, speeding tickets were cheap, and you could get probation (to avoid the ticket showing on your record) even more cheaply. I sped more often than not. In Los Angeles, speeding tickets are a few hundred dollars, and getting traffic school to avoid the ticket showing on your record costs EVEN MORE. After my first speeding ticket in Los Angeles, I stopped speeding. Period.
I can see it now... (Score:3, Funny)
Driver: Holy Crap! Theres a large boulder in the middle of the road!
Driver swerves to avoid boulder.
Car corrects back into original path, head on to the boulder.
Driver: What the hell!
Car: I'm sorry Dave. I'm afraid I cant let you do that.
Formula 1 does it already... (Score:5, Interesting)
F1 should embrace this stuff, and eventually go to a driverless format. You think I'm joking, but I'm not. Ferrari, BMW, Mercedes and jaguar, along with Honda and Toyota and Ford, should all be duking it out to create the ultimate race car, minus a pilot.
At this point, F1 is only really about the tech anyhow, and Montoya has been saying for a couple years now that F1 cars could break the one minute threshold at Indy, except that the human body can't stand that much force, esp. in braking. Baaaaah, toss em! Let's see cars that absolutely FLY. It needs 4 wheels, and it has a weight and dimension minimum, and then, it's all on from there! THe advances those guys would make would be gigantic in just a few years.
Re:What we need, really (Score:5, Funny)
A rapidly diminishing group
Yeah, where is the flying car? (Score:2)
Re:What we need, really (Score:2)
Re:Don't cheat, you n00b!!! (Score:2)
While I agree completely with your sentiment, I'm afraid the public's reaction will be, "If I can't rely on it, why should I pay for it?"
So all we'll see is a little half-hidden sticker somewhere and a disclaimer in the owner's manual. They can't afford to belabor the point. It would be a marketing disaster.