Safety Feautures taking over

[Dr HaxZaw]

Why intuition tops innovation | They are NOT the Stig

Thought this article was pretty well true... the more safety features car makers bring in the lazier drivers get

[ari666]

agreed. seen that "self parking" business? ill bet in a few years itll be ADR 104 and vicroads wont even test parallel parking anymore.

[Jesterarts]

Yep, the concern being that if someone can't be trusted how to park a car then how are they allowed to drive it at speed?

Plus it adds a certain novelty to driving, which is never good as people will not take is seriously.

I think a prime example of why this technology is bad are those radar guided cruise control systems the Merc's Volvo's and Beemers have. Mainly because the driver can turn it off, forget they have turned it off and end up ramming into the back of someone at full speed.

[Reaper]

agreed. seen that "self parking" business? ill bet in a few years itll be ADR 104 and vicroads wont even test parallel parking anymore.

I firmly believe that if you can't park the car you shouldn't be driving it. Same goes for those stupidly annoying proximity sensors. I do find the reversing camera handy though.

Reaper

[monkeys437]

Agreed. I hate being in the car with people that utilise traction control and stability control as though it's all part of the driving experience. Those features are there as a backup for the very rare instance where your driving skills fail and ideally they should never really activate. People who don't alter their driving style in the wet because "stability control will straighten me up" are just asking for trouble. And don't get me started on adaptive cruise control. If your need a computer to stop you from rear ending someone on the freeway time to hand in your license

[MikeCuzzy]

I drive a VT S1 Exec, which as you all know has power steering as it's driver/safety assist option.

I learned to drive on this car, I have never had a prang and have managed to achieve this with no ABS, no traction, no stability management. I've never drove into anything while parking. I reverse park 95% of the time. I don't have cruise control, yet by apparent magic to my passengers, I hold 100kph dead for hours on end. To my mind, that's the way it should be, I learned to drive without driver assist options, hell the power steering pump was dead for a few months so that taught me the wonder of it :P

My brother learned to drive in my Dad's VE SV6, which has all the above options on it. And to be honest it brings out worrying traits, like not looking out the rear window to reverse, cause it has the sensor. Not realising that ABS won't work on all surfaces, he doesn't know how to change a tyre should it go flat as "that's why the NRMA are there".

I think the issue is as cars are more advanced, people feel more disconnected from the car, and see it as a magic box rather than a mechanical one. Of my friends, those who have craptastic old cars are the better drivers by far. The rest got given newer cars, or their parents helped them get newer ones, most have written them off usually cause they don't understand that 1.5 tonne of car needs time to stop...

Mike.

[DAKSTER]

The article posted is in reference to cars that will totally drive themselves. That particular car was a Google experiment.

The ultimate extension of this technology is cars being 'networked'. When your car drives you to where you want to go, it will communicate with the network, planning routes, destinations, and even planning and booking a specific carpark for when you get there.

Merges will be seamless, because all of the other cars will co-operate. Accidents wont happen, because of course computers never fail... Traffic will run smoother and safer than it ever has, probably at very high speeds too.. and if an area has a potential problem your car just wont take you that way.

Of course that means you wont be driving the car. You wont have control, and you wont be able to override, because it would throw the rest of the network out. You'd be a passenger, like it or not.

**** that.

[some_guy]

I learnt to drive in a 63 beetle. It was my first car for a while too. The driver assist list that accompanied that puppy = nil. I could even legally drive with no side mirrors, as it was released without them.

I would never use cruise control or let a computer park my car.

In daksters words "#### that"

[DAKSTER]

How cool is that.. my first car was also a 63 Beetle. 6 volt electrics, it was hard to even find a radio that suited them let alone stability control. It has no seat belts either, and no legal requirement for them back then for the same reason as the mirrors, dont know about now. Mines still in the shed out the back

I love cruise control though. But in this futuristic world, you wont have the option of turning it off, or it will mess up the traffic. Not having the option, thats the bad part.

[some_guy]

Mine was running a 12 volt conversion baby, oh yeahhhhhh.

More on topic, I myself will drive similarly to will smith on irobot, that is if we head towards a system like dakster speaks of.

[monkeys437]

The article posted is in reference to cars that will totally drive themselves. That particular car was a Google experiment.

The ultimate extension of this technology is cars being 'networked'. When your car drives you to where you want to go, it will communicate with the network, planning routes, destinations, and even planning and booking a specific carpark for when you get there.

Merges will be seamless, because all of the other cars will co-operate. Accidents wont happen, because of course computers never fail... Traffic will run smoother and safer than it ever has, probably at very high speeds too.. and if an area has a potential problem your car just wont take you that way.

Of course that means you wont be driving the car. You wont have control, and you wont be able to override, because it would throw the rest of the network out. You'd be a passenger, like it or not.

**** that.

Sounds like the perfect plan.....Computers never crash or stuff up for no reason right?

[DAKSTER]

and your car probably wont even have a steering wheel for you to save yourself when it goes haywire...

[ucwepn]

solid axle lsd fishtails are character building

[Rufys]

It's actually been studied a number of times and the number one problem with cars is they require human drivers.

In an ideal world, and also the not too distant future, cars will drive themselves 100% of the time as well as communicate with all other cars that will be passed along the route. This will mean an end to traffic jams, stopping at lights and most importantly - CRASHES!!! (except in the even of mechanical failure).

Yes I know there are the age old "what if systems fail?" etc... And no, nothing is 100% fool proof. However even the small percentage of issues after multiple redundancies and safety mechanisms have failed, the resulting reduction in road crash, injury and death incidents will be HUGE. And bring it on I say.

[MikeCuzzy]

It's actually been studied a number of times and the number one problem with cars is they require human drivers.

In an ideal world, and also the not too distant future, cars will drive themselves 100% of the time as well as communicate with all other cars that will be passed along the route. This will mean an end to traffic jams, stopping at lights and most importantly - CRASHES!!! (except in the even of mechanical failure).

Yes I know there are the age old "what if systems fail?" etc... And no, nothing is 100% fool proof. However even the small percentage of issues after multiple redundancies and safety mechanisms have failed, the resulting reduction in road crash, injury and death incidents will be HUGE. And bring it on I say.

Yes human error is a big factor, but it's like how planes can easily fly by themselves. But I wouldn't get in a plane without a pilot. Realistically, the day where all cars are automated is unlikely to come about while there is oil left in the world. In fact I would be surprised if there are fully autonomous cars this century.

And this is essentially why I will never get in an automated car:

Insane Volvo brake test epic fail - YouTube

I have studied computer systems and networking and have qualifications in System Administration, Networking and Software.

I will walk before I go in a networked car.

[Rufys]

Yes human error is a big factor, but it's like how planes can easily fly by themselves. But I wouldn't get in a plane without a pilot.

You'd be surprised to know that the majority of landings are fully automated. Can't say regarding take offs.

I will walk before I go in a networked car.

You'll be walking...

Fact is that anything automated in the future will have a lower error rate than humans.

And this is essentially why I will never get in an automated car:

Insane Volvo brake test epic fail - YouTube

I have studied computer systems and networking and have qualifications in System Administration, Networking and Software.

Studied and have qualifications but not "worked in" I take it? Because if you worked in the real world, you'd understand why that so called 'epic fail' video is actually a GOOD THING!!! It's in TESTING that you want problems like that to happen. It's in TESTING that you actually design things to fail. It's in testing that you work through every possible permutation so that once released, there are no such issues.

Would you be surprised to know that the Volvo system in that video is in Volvo production cars and is working very well? Or are you too busy focusing on a failure in a test environment?

[MikeCuzzy]

You'd be surprised to know that the majority of landings are fully automated. Can't say regarding take offs.

I do know most landings are automated, take-offs can be as well. But I am talking full flight. You hit a thunderstorm or turbulence, you want a human and the controls. There are some things computers simply don't have, instinct, and the ability to give a best guess.

You'll be walking...

Fact is that anything automated in the future will have a lower error rate than humans.

By the time this mystically utopian future is here, I will probs be long dead lol. But regardless, Computers, are only as good as the people who build them.

Studied and have qualifications but not "worked in" I take it? Because if you worked in the real world, you'd understand why that so called 'epic fail' video is actually a GOOD THING!!! It's in TESTING that you want problems like that to happen. It's in TESTING that you actually design things to fail. It's in testing that you work through every possible permutation so that once released, there are no such issues.

Would you be surprised to know that the Volvo system in that video is in Volvo production cars and is working very well? Or are you too busy focusing on a failure in a test environment?

I have not worked in, only just finished studying (though fingers crossed for a few jobs I will hear back from soon).

Of course it's a good thing, no doubt Volvo got a lot of important information and that particular problem won't occur again, I'm betting Volvo fixed that quick smart. That wasn't my point. My point was they showcased it to the public before it was ready, and it bit them in the backside. And this will always be a problem, humans tend to jump the gun and errors occur. Testing isn't designing things to fail, it's testing to see IF things fail, or pushing them so far that they do - to see how much they can take. If it does not meet requirements, it is redesigned and re tested. Volvo did not intend that car to hit the truck, that was failed testing, they thought it was ready but it wasn't.

I am focusing on this failure as it highlights that automated systems, like humans, can fail.

Nothing is perfect.

[Rufys]

Congratulations on missing my point. If you're looking for IT Sys Admin work in Melbourne let me know so I don't waste my time - currently recruiting.

[Dr HaxZaw]

Best example i can think of is what happened at work a couple of years ago: essentially 2 safety valves were meant to open and the computer program was such that it assumed that once they were told to open, the 2 valves would actually open because there was never an example of these valves failing. In this case both valves didnt open. The machine was offline for a month and then put back in service on a massive restriction in effeciency. 3 months later it had to be taken offline due to safety concerns for 6 months until new parts could arrive and millions of dollars were lost.

Humans look at everything as risk and effect... for a huge crash to be avoided you have to be able to take into account everything and that is something humans have never been good at except for trial and error. And i dont want to be on the freeway doing 100kph when that errors occurs thankyou

[MikeCuzzy]

Congratulations on missing my point. If you're looking for IT Sys Admin work in Melbourne let me know so I don't waste my time - currently recruiting.

You missed mine too.

Good to know you won't waste your time with people who have slightly different opinions to you, good luck to your future employees.

Back to the hypothetical, the future autonomous cars MUST have overrides available. And the ability for other cars to adapt to a driver in another car unexpectedly changing course/speed.

[Drawnnite]

like someone said before. it makes me think of IRobot with Will Smith.
but as usual movies are never like in real life. even though it would be pretty cool.

then again they do have auto pilot in planes, so you never know =P
and also a plane can not take off in autopilot. i asked the old man who works in avionics if you want my source.
but yes they can be programmed to land.

also if you cannot control a normal car or know how to park etc you shouldnt be driving.
i drive a car that the only thing it has is power steering. no fancy stuff to go wrong. hell i even have to wind my own windows up =P

[Darren_L]

there will always be the option for humans to override electronic assist/drive systems.
You don't have to be an electronics or computer technician to realise even the best computers and electronics do get it wrong. They still aren't intelligent (granted it could be said nor are a lot of human car drivers....) and therfore can't deal with unforseen situations, conditions, failures. Humans still have this ability over computers.

If computers/electronics and it's software never got it wrong, then computers wouldn't crash. But they do, regularly. Even state of the art electronics used by NASA sometimes get it wrong.

[MikeCuzzy]

Even state of the art electronics used by NASA sometimes get it wrong.

Half of all missions to Mars have failed, some were Soviet, but still.

[DAKSTER]

I am actually in favour of the use of technology in this way, and I do have faith that it can be made reliable. Every technology takes time to develop and refine, and this will happen I have no doubt.

In the cities, it will be absolutely awesome, a networked bunch of cars will make traffic flow so quickly, reliably and accident free. Without human input, the system will run wonderfully well. For city networks, I think its a great idea.

In the Irobot version, if I remember correctly, there was a mechanical driver that operated controls. He ripped the driver out, and operated the controls himself. Am I thinking of the right movie?

When this stuff happens, as I am sure it one day will, there wont be any mechanical driver.. or controls. Thats what bothers me. The network could only work if you could not disable your part of it. Otherwise your single car becomes an unpredictable variable, potentially throwing an entire city of traffic into chaos as the system tries to adjust for your random movements.

All you will be able to do is tell it where you want to go. Thats fine, in the city where you cant use a car for fun anyway. It will make commuting the easiest part of the working day.

The thing that scares me is that this will eventually happen to all cars and I will no longer be able to experience the joy of driving a car, even on an open highway. Thats not a car, its a mode of public transport. You dont drive it, you ride in it. I hate being a passenger.

Maybe, if we get lucky, the controls will stay, but our ability to override the computer will be disabled when we are within certain areas.

[ari666]

fellas fellas. we already have an automated network of cars.


its called "public transport"