Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
News

Smart Cars to Save Stupid Drivers? 476

Posted by CmdrTaco from the soon-we'll-blame-the-cars-for-that-too dept.
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."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Smart Cars to Save Stupid Drivers? More

Smart Cars to Save Stupid Drivers?

Comments Filter:

  • Smart Cars to Save Wealthy Drivers... (Score:5, Funny)

    by garcia ( 6573 ) * on Thursday April 08, 2004 @01:38PM (#8805487)
    Spinella said automakers have studied systems that use cameras to scan drivers' eyes or sense when they're loosening their grip on the steering wheel beyond normal.

    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)

      by TheFlu ( 213162 ) on Thursday April 08, 2004 @01:40PM (#8805524) Homepage
      "I routinely drive w/o my hands on the wheel. I also tend to take ?half-naps? by closing one eye."

      Could you let me know before you're going out for a drive.
    • Caffine and steering wheel grips are still cheap.

    • Re:Smart Cars to Save Wealthy Drivers... (Score:4, Funny)

      by goodhell ( 227411 ) on Thursday April 08, 2004 @02:00PM (#8805784)
      Reminds me of a little story.

      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.
      • I think that's why most people call it cruise control now, instead of auto-pilot.

        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.
        • 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.

          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)

      by David Hume ( 200499 ) on Thursday April 08, 2004 @02:03PM (#8805813) Homepage

      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.


      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)

        by John Starks ( 763249 ) on Thursday April 08, 2004 @02:08PM (#8805888)
        I think he's saying that the wealthy people should be expected to pay for superior health care and safer cars for everyone because if they don't, they're greedy.

        At least, that's the typical Slashdot attitude.
      • "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?"

        I think what he was saying was that these devices really should be in all cars. Human life is more valuable than money.

    • Re:Smart Cars to Save Wealthy Drivers... (Score:5, Funny)

      by modecx ( 130548 ) on Thursday April 08, 2004 @02:06PM (#8805862)
      You've not seen anything till you've seen a guy steering with one knee, other foot on the gas...Playing a FLUTE...passing you on the shoulder.

      Kid you not.

    • Re:Smart Cars to Save Wealthy Drivers... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by ragnar ( 3268 ) on Thursday April 08, 2004 @02:15PM (#8805980) Homepage
      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.

      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.

      • That's how I like to think of rich people:

        Crash Test Dummies.

      • "your current auto is no less safe tomorrow as it is today because of this technology"

        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
      • > your current auto is no less safe tomorrow as it is today because of this technology

        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)

      by pjt33 ( 739471 ) on Thursday April 08, 2004 @02:21PM (#8806089)
      I routinely drive w/o my hands on the wheel.
      After I passed my driving test, my instructor drove me back to the centre of town, and it was quite an eye-opener. I already knew he could be a bit aggressive, but I wasn't expecting him to drive part of it steering with his knees while he wrote his mobile number down so that I could pass it on to anyone I knew who wanted to learn.
    • 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.

      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)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Smart Cars to Save Stupid Drivers?
    Clearly, people who fall asleep at the wheel are stupid, not tired.

    • Re:Yeah. (Score:2, Insightful)

      by SkiddyRowe ( 692144 )
      Well yeah. People are stupid to think they'll be able to stay awake.

    • Re:Yeah. (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Rotting ( 7243 )
      Here in Toronto we like to blame the highway.

      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)

    by onyxruby ( 118189 ) * <onyxruby&comcast,net> on Thursday April 08, 2004 @01:39PM (#8805498)
    Doomed to failure. Trying to pit engineering against the almighty demon known as human stupidity. The poor engineers don't stand a chance. Time for my favorite Einstein quote.
    Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.
    /me still bitter about the driver of a full size truck that rear-ended me on the freeway because he was looking at a tow truck in the ditch and not the road. He wasn't malicious, he was just plain stupid, and no avoidance system could have prevented it.
    • A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools. -- Douglas Adams


    • "No matter how idiotproof you make a device, an ingenious idiot in the field will discover a workaround."

    • Still... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by dolo666 ( 195584 ) on Thursday April 08, 2004 @01:49PM (#8805664) Journal
      To me, the most interesting part of the whole Smart Car debate, is the human facets of it, whereby humanity has to decide if they are going to relinquish control of their driving to a more automated system. The benefits are there, indeed, but some people just hate giving up power (which will cause the big problems, if you ask me). Eventually this will lead to a total-control model, whereby drunk driving would become a thing of the past, tickets would be a thing of the past, driving lessons would be a thing of the past, and speed limits would be a thing of the past. Accidents will likely still occur until the system had all the kinks worked out of it.

      • Re:Still... (Score:4, Interesting)

        by gr8_phk ( 621180 ) on Thursday April 08, 2004 @02:09PM (#8805905)
        "Accidents will likely still occur until the system had all the kinks worked out of it."

        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.

  • All it needs to detect is.... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Chris_Stankowitz ( 612232 ) on Thursday April 08, 2004 @01:39PM (#8805503)
    Estrogen levels!!!!

    /ducks

  • We're confident we can do it in ways that drivers will accept

    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.

  • Warning ! (Score:5, Funny)

    by AtariAmarok ( 451306 ) on Thursday April 08, 2004 @01:40PM (#8805527)
    Coming from the Onstar speaker: "You are approaching 88 mph. Your flux capacitor is set to Europe at the time of the Black Plague. Are you REALLY SURE you want to take the DeLorean there?"

  • If they keep protecting stupid people (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 08, 2004 @01:41PM (#8805532)
    How do they expect evolution to produce a better human species?

    • Re:If they keep protecting stupid people (Score:5, Funny)

      by dr_dank ( 472072 ) on Thursday April 08, 2004 @01:49PM (#8805670) Homepage Journal
      I somehow feel that the answer involves the Ice Capades.
    • How do they expect evolution to produce a better human species?

      I'm sorry, I must have missed evolution's spectacular successes in this endeavor over the last few millenia under the current conditions...
    • Bike helmets and the banning of all the fun playground equiptment (merry-go-rounds, swings, etc) has stalled natural selection in our species. This is not a good thing.
    • Stupid people buy stupid things and thus have less money to support their third child?

      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.'
    • They keep protecting "rich" idiots!!

      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 ??
    • Evolution is short-sighted. Natural selection has no goal, but the product (living organism) is something that "works" for the environment. And works means able to reproduce life.

      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)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 08, 2004 @01:42PM (#8805551)
    So when you swerve to miss the idiot ahead of you who's wrecking due to his smart car BSODing, your car will automatically adjust the steering so you plow head on into him. Where do I sign up?
    • I think the Urban Legend was: At a recent COMDEX, Bill Gates reportedly compared the computer industry with the auto industry and stated: "If GM had kept up with technology like the computer industry has, we would all be driving twenty-five dollar cars that got 1,000 miles per gallon." Recently General Motors addressed this comment by releasing the statement: "Yes, but would you want your car to crash twice a day?"

  • Not sure how it relates... (Score:4, Informative)

    by paranode ( 671698 ) on Thursday April 08, 2004 @01:42PM (#8805552)
    But in Texas, all of the major highways have a specific kind of etching on each side of the road in the pavement. When you go over this with your tire, it creates a really loud noise that vibrates the entire car. It would wake up just about anybody, and I think it's been around for a good number of years.

    So if this is what they're talking about, it's pretty effective I think.
    • They're called rumble strips, and are a feature found on nearly every interstate and major highway that has had some work done to it in recent times. They are very effective at getting your attention if you drift.
    • Others may not be aware that the Roads in Texas have things called 'road tites'. They're reflective markers glued to the road where white and yellow lines would be. At night they light up very bright from headlight reflection and if you're going the wrong way they reflect red. If you 'wander' in your lane and run of them you'll now it - they have various levels. Small medium and large. As you can guess the small ones are for yellow lane change markers. Medium for right medians and turn lanes. Large w
    • Ontario has those too, although they're used differently. They are placed in regular intervals leading up to intersections. Most intersections still don't have lights, stop signs, or anything like that (at least in rural Ontario); apparently scoring the road in this way is cheaper than some alternative means of keeping drivers alert near intersections.

    • But in Texas, all of the major highways have a specific kind of etching on each side of the road in the pavement. When you go over this with your tire, it creates a really loud noise that vibrates the entire car. It would wake up just about anybody, and I think it's been around for a good number of years.

      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):

      Ford spoke

    • Re:Not sure how it relates... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by briansz ( 731406 ) on Thursday April 08, 2004 @02:03PM (#8805815)
      I think everybody can agree that rumble strips on the side of roads are A Good Thing.

      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?
  • If these smart cars electrocute stupid drivers before they can start the car.
    • I'd settle for one that can electrocute those damn squeegy-kids. They're a major contributor to both road-rage and disregard for pedestrian life.

      HAH! I kid.

  • The smart car even kill's CATs! (Score:3, Funny)

    by DR SoB ( 749180 ) on Thursday April 08, 2004 @01:43PM (#8805568) Journal
    See for yourself:

    http://dune.moldova.net/qt/KA2.mpeg

  • So what if it screws up? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by ajutla ( 720182 ) <ajutla at gmail dot com> on Thursday April 08, 2004 @01:43PM (#8805569) Homepage
    What if you're driving down a perfectly straight road and suddenly your car starts weaving back and forth because it's trying to correct its path because some dirt's gotten into its sensors and screwed them up? What if you're trying to turn and the car won't let you? What if you're trying to drive and the computer intervenes doing dangerous things? There'd better be a manual override...

    • Re:So what if it screws up? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by mks113 ( 208282 ) <{mks} {at} {kijabe.org}> on Thursday April 08, 2004 @01:48PM (#8805658) Homepage Journal
      You could say the same about anti-lock brakes. "What happens if the computer decides to release your brakes at the wrong time!!?".

      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".
      • I HATE ABS ever since driving my parents' Suburban a few years back. Going down a cetain hill that ends in a T intersection (and a pond) would always kick the ABS on, and stopping became VERY difficult and scary. Seems GM should have detected more anomalies.
    • What if your hydraulic brake line fails on your manually controlled car? What if your transmission explodes and sends you into an uncontrolled skid?

      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
    • When they mentioned projecting an image on the windshied all I could imagine was the Blue Screen of Death blocking my view suddenly and causing my actual death.


      -Colin [colingregorypalmer.net]

  • Smart cars to save stupid drivers? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by broothal ( 186066 ) <christian@fabel.dk> on Thursday April 08, 2004 @01:44PM (#8805577) Homepage Journal
    Personally, I'd rather see smart drivers in stupid cars.

    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 .
  • but i bet they cant save my idiot cousin who got into 5 wrecks her first month of driving...

  • QM (Score:4, Interesting)

    by CGP314 ( 672613 ) <CGP@ColinGregor y P a lmer.net> on Thursday April 08, 2004 @01:45PM (#8805593) Homepage
    It has to be literally 100 percent fool proof before an automaker will use it.

    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)

    by kaan ( 88626 ) on Thursday April 08, 2004 @01:45PM (#8805611)
    shouldn't this post be titled "Walking, Buses, and Trains to Save Stupid Drivers"...?

  • a visual warning projected on the windshield? (Score:2, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Imagine having this pop up and block your view:
    http://www.visi.com/~tdo/bsod.jpg

  • How about ticket warnings? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by russotto ( 537200 ) on Thursday April 08, 2004 @01:46PM (#8805627) Journal
    All well and good, but if you really want to sell the system, you need warnings for more common dangers. For instance, you could add radar and lidar detectors, and enhance the optical scanning to detect police cars. The system could then indicate the location of these dangers on the screen, using the optical scanning to help filter out store security systems and such from real threats, as well as detecting cops using passive techniques. Oh, and you'd not put this in Volvos but rather Mustangs.

  • Finally! (Score:5, Funny)

    by Shaper of Myths ( 148485 ) on Thursday April 08, 2004 @01:46PM (#8805631)
    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."

    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 /. without worrying about being a hazard anymore!

    • Re:Finally! (Score:3, Insightful)

      by jafuser ( 112236 )
      Exactly. These features will only encourage people to be more wreckless.

      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.

  • What scares me is... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by The Desert Palooka ( 311888 ) on Thursday April 08, 2004 @01:47PM (#8805633)
    "Smart Cars" programmed by "Stupid" programmers, killing smart drivers...

    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)

    by Embedded Geek ( 532893 ) on Thursday April 08, 2004 @01:47PM (#8805645) Homepage
    a vibrating steering wheel...

    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)

      by MisanthropicProgram ( 763655 ) on Thursday April 08, 2004 @02:05PM (#8805846)
      I found out the hard way that a C172 has a stall condition warning - it would go into a dive and my pants get really wet!

    • 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

  • If this is safety in the same way that Windows provides ease of use, it will certainly help a lot of people shoot themselves in the foot.

  • You know what would work even better? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by ttfkam ( 37064 ) on Thursday April 08, 2004 @01:49PM (#8805662) Homepage Journal
    And even cheaper than getting a smart car for every stupid person. Get ready for it. Get ready for it.

    The bus, the subway, the train, the bike, and walking. ...but that's crazy talk.

    • 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
    • Trust me, you don't want to work with me after I've ridden my bike or walked to work unless there are showers on the premises.

      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)

    by qualico ( 731143 ) <worldcouchsurferNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Thursday April 08, 2004 @01:49PM (#8805666) Journal
    I'm trying to steer sharply away from the deer that just ran in front of the vehicle...
    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.
    • Yes, because the system wont be able to detect the difference between an emergency steering wheel yank and the gradual drifting off of the road that happens when you fall asleep.

      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)

    by spuke4000 ( 587845 ) on Thursday April 08, 2004 @01:54PM (#8805734)
    I'm surprised the car companies are going for this. This seems to be a huge liablity problem for them. Right now if you plow into a crowd of school children it's your fault. But if this thing malfunctions, or if someone can argue that the auto-steer system has *anything* to do with the accident, wouldn't there be a ton of lawsuits? Car companies have deep pockets.

  • "Risk homeostasis" (Score:5, Insightful)

    by dpbsmith ( 263124 ) on Thursday April 08, 2004 @01:56PM (#8805753) Homepage
    Let's say it all works just exactly as advertised and is adopted.

    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.

  • "It has to be literally 100 percent fool proof before an automaker will use it."

    "Make something fool proof and someone will build a better fool."
  • This is basically to help tired drivers nothing can help stupid ones. There were a couple of times I was driving when I shouldn't because I was to tired. Most of the time there wasn't much I could do about it. Some areas of the Highway don't have breakdown lanes so I couldn't stop and rest there. For about 45 Minutes of driving. By then I am only 15 minutes away from my house so I try to trudge the last few bits. Many times when I start these trips I am caffeinated so I am defiantly not tired when I lef

  • I'm more afraid of this actually working. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by oneiros27 ( 46144 ) on Thursday April 08, 2004 @02:03PM (#8805822) Homepage
    Especially the 'auto correct' bit.

    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]
  • Many people do a lot of distance driving, and maybe even you. Before you start calling people "stupid" for getting tired behind the wheel or otherwise lose concentration, perhaps you should post your perfect long-haul driving record? It happens to the best.

    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)

    by tgd ( 2822 ) on Thursday April 08, 2004 @02:06PM (#8805857)
    Teach people how to drive.

    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)

      by SuiteSisterMary ( 123932 ) <slebrunNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Thursday April 08, 2004 @02:16PM (#8806013) Journal

      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.

  • So, anyone can help me understand we we should opt to keep stupid people ON the road?

    This is anti-darwinitism. Against natural selection.

  • Dream a little dream with me (Score:3, Insightful)

    by DaveJay ( 133437 ) on Thursday April 08, 2004 @02:18PM (#8806042)
    Here's the right way to make driving safer:

    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)

    by emtboy9 ( 99534 ) <jeff AT jefflane DOT org> on Thursday April 08, 2004 @02:47PM (#8806479) Homepage
    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."

    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)

    by GPLDAN ( 732269 ) on Thursday April 08, 2004 @02:52PM (#8806549)
    Despite what Bernie Eccelstone says, F1 cars are practically driving themselves. This year, he threw out launch control and three years ago he banned 2-way telemetry, since cars were dynamically adjusting things like brake bias on every turn.

    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.

Slashdot Top Deals

THEGODDESSOFTHENETHASTWISTINGFINGERSANDHERVOICEISLIKEAJAVELININTHENIGHTDUDE

Close