Government Wants Cars To Talk To Each Other

[Jesus Malverde]

Last edited Mon Feb 3, 2014, 02:51 PM - Edit history (1)

Source: Time

The Department of Transportation announced plans Monday to move forward with technology that will allow vehicles to communicate with each other in order to prevent collisions.

The government agency estimates that vehicle-to-vehicle (v2v) communication could prevent up to 80 percent of accidents that don’t involve drunk drivers or mechanical failure.

The DoT proposal would require all car manufacturers to install v2v communications in cars and other light vehicles. The systems typically feature transponders able to communicate a car’s location, direction and speed at up to 10 times per second to other cars surrounding it, using a dedicated radio spectrum similar to WiFi. The vehicle would then alert its driver to a potential collision. Some systems could automatically slow the car down to avoid an accident.

Earlier...
FEDS TO DECIDE ON CAR-TO-CAR COMMUNICATIONS
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_TALKING_CARS?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2014-02-03-10-48-29
Federal officials are planning to announce Monday whether automakers should be required to equip new cars and light trucks with technology that enables vehicles to communicate with each other to prevent collisions. Such vehicle-to-vehicle communication could transform traffic safety.

The Department of Transportation scheduled an announcement for midday. Transportation officials estimate the technology could prevent up to 80 percent of accidents that don't involve drunken drivers or mechanical failure.

A transponder would continually transmit the vehicle's position, heading, speed and other information 10 times per second in all directions using radio signals similar to Wi-Fi. Cars would receive the same information back from other vehicles. A vehicle's computer would alert the driver to an impending collision. Some systems could automatically brake to avoid an accident.

"It will change driving as we know it over time," said Scott Belcher, president and CEO of the Intelligent Transportation Society of America. "Over time, we'll see a reduction in crashes. Automobile makers will rethink how they design and construct cars because they will no longer be constructing cars to survive a crash, but building them to avoid a crash."

Read more: http://nation.time.com/2014/02/03/government-wants-cars-to-talk-to-each-other/

[LiberalEsto]

1. I can see it now

Vehicle one: Hey asshole, you're hogging the fast lane. Move the f*ck over.

Vehicle two: You're talking to me, sh*thead? Well f*ck you! I'm about to make a left turn.

Vehicle one: F*ck that sh*t, MOVE!

(CRASH)

[thesquanderer]

6. "I'm afraid I can't do that, Dave." (n/t)

[Exultant Democracy]

2. Great, humans are not qualified to drive cars, but these training wheels will help.

At least until we get to the mass production of self driving cars, at which point I will be trying my hardest to get all human drivers licenses revoked.

[MannyGoldstein]

3. This is a @$!#ing Awesome Idea!

Best wishes,

General Clapper
Starship Cmdr. Alexander

[notadmblnd]

27. If only they would require a gizmo for our toilets that could tell people

when their load was to large and that a clog was immenent. Then the government would really know where we are, when we shit, and how big it is.

[One_Life_To_Give]

33. Poo-Pori ratted out by smart toilet?

That is going to have more young women in therapy than the system can possibly cope with.

[seabeckind]

4. Fantastic idea...

Not simply on the car to car capability but how about car to situation?

Ever been caught captive on an interstate? Nowhere to move. No way to escape, no idea how long it'll be?

WiFi? Forget that. How about turning the whole cell technology idea into a public utility and use that? Text warnings pop up on the dash. 911 calls.

At some point we've got to have somebody in charge with vision...like we did pre-Reagan...that identifies national interests.

[happyslug]

8. Remember this is connecting your car computer to a transmitter

And that transmitter is what is doing the connections with other transmitters. Those "other Transmitters" can be along the highway, making sure you car does NOT exceed the speed limit. i.e. if you enter a school zone, your car transmitter will send a message to any transmitter is the area, and a transmitter tied in with any 15 mph sign would transmit a message to your car to drop its speed to 15 mph no matter what you did.

Car to Car transmission sounds better then speed limit signs to car transmissions, but I suspect it is the later that will be the most common. Speed is the primary cause of most accidents NOT involving alcohol thus it will be the #1.

Do not think staying with a car without a transmitter will be a way around this requirement. Such transmitters are cheap and I can see States requiring them to be retrofitted to older cars or you will be denied the right to get a plate for such cars.

Even if cars are NOT retrofitted, as more and more cars have these devices will force all other cars in area of high traffic density to go the same speed just be volume of traffic.

The single biggest obstacle to the above is that many states will refuse to implement such a program do to lost in revenue tied in with such programs. The system would be overall safer, but in most States and outside of urban inner centers, most police forces, tickets pay for police. Thus how do you pay for police with the fines for speeding if no one is speeding? This will be the biggest impediment to implantation of any computer and net system to control speed and other traffic hazards.

[jakeXT]

5. So you could spoof a car that's about to hit another one and make it stop

I don't know if it's worse than the EU version

EU group mulls 'remote car-stopping device' for police
...
The technology could impact on both road safety and civil liberties.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-25961096

[bemildred]

7. What could go wrong? nt

[Demeter]

9. the mind boggles

Have a car do all the detecting it wants to.

Have it brake itself.

But keep the other guy out of my machine!

[bemildred]

13. Well, the possibilities for surveillance and manipulation alone ...

Frankly I won't have WiFi in my car. The Internet is a place I visit, not someplace I want to live.

[jeff47]

22. It's not WiFi. They're just talking about RF frequencies.

It's a shitty metaphor in a story written for mass consumption. There's nothing Internet-related about this proposal.

[bemildred]

23. It's radio, so is WiFi. Same deal.

Maybe they don't use 4G, but it's still an I/O port for the onboard computer that runs your car, and it WILL be hacked, if there is any way at all to hack it, and spoofing looks like it should be easy, just record what you want and play it back.

[jeff47]

24. And quickly find yourself pulled over for the spoofing

after all, all the other cars will be reacting to your transmission. So you'll be pretty easy to find.

[bemildred]

25. Right. No way you could have two in your vehicle.

One of them lying it's ass off about speed, location, and direction? How would the cops see that? They'd have to triangulate to establish a location. And all you need is a transmitter.

[happyslug]

12. I see the police opposing this....

Police outside of the inner cities are generally paid with the revenue from traffic tickets. If you adopt a "car to car" transmission system, that also means a car to any other receiver and transmitter that people may install along the roadway. This can include transmitters that sends to your car's computer orders to stay below a certain speed no matter what the driver does. This would reduce accidents for the #1 source of accidents is excess speed. By keeping the speed of all vehicles below the legal limit you will reduce accidents immensely.

The problem with this reduction is speed, will be no one will be speeding so no one can get a speeding ticket. Thus no revenue from speeding tickets and thus how to you pay for the police? Thus there will be pressure to reduce costs and the Police, no longer a source of revenue but a cost, will be cut. Thus the Police will oppose use of these car to car transmissions to control speed, for that means less speeding, less speeding tickets and thus less police.

[bemildred]

15. It shall be interesting to see what argument is presented for that.

And I think you are most likely right.

[bl968]

10. Slippery Slope

Police will insist on the VIN being broadcast as well, so they can track passing vehicles; as well as automate the issuing of speeding tickets

[Jesus Malverde]

11. You should patent that...

You have a world of opportunities with your out of the box thinking...

[truthisfreedom]

14. Because license plates are too complicated?

[Hassin Bin Sober]

17. Agree. Your plate is already "broadcasted"

[happyslug]

16. Why? Most cars are computer driver today.

Thus not only the VIN can be transmitter, but the speed of the car itself AND the car could be ordered to go a certain speed or even ordered stopped. The technology exists, all you need is a cheap transmitter to exchange the data from the car to the police or from the police to the car. In many ways no need for a VIN, the police will be able to tell instantaneously the speed of the car, where it had been the last 15-30 minutes and its speed during that time period. Most of today's cars have chip in them that retains information about speed, turns, brake usage electrical usage for a period of 15-30 minutes.

[liberal N proud]

18. Think about the ultimate possibility - someday you the driver could be obsolete

You simply get in your car, enter the destination and sit back.

Your car backs out of the driveway, merges into traffic, no one cuts you off, you don't have to stop at the stop light because the car works with the other vehicles and no one has to stop.

Now, think about old age, and the trouble older people have with driving, driver-less cars eliminate that concern, you will not have to give up your car, because you are too old. If you can get from your couch to the car and enter the destination of your doctor, the car will do the rest.


http://www.cbsnews.com/video/a-world-of-cars-that-drive-themselves


I hope these cars are available before I get too old to drive.

[enlightenment]

20. I've been waiting for that my entire life.

[seabeckind]

26. It's called mass transit

It's a nice thing to have. Anyone who thinks driving across South Dakota would be less boring by being able to play scrabble is delusional. The only thing which makes a lot of driving less boring is avoiding it.

Before going any further...buses and airplanes are not mass transit.

As far as commuting and not having to stop? Explain how that works when the car in front of you quits working. Is your computer gonna fix their fan belt?

Maybe it's time to change the paradigm. Why does your personal transportation have to be yours?

[seabeckind]

28. As I think about it...

Recalling events of the last few weeks. Atlanta. GWB. Even my own city here that came to a standstill because of snow and ice.

Isn't it well past time to think about trying to correct the problems? Somebody said that in Atlanta there are people who commute on the highway 40, 50 miles. I even heard that when I lived in Seattle there were people who did 100 miles -- each way, over the Cascades. Lord.

Drove me crazy just going 25 or so. I changed my work hours to start 2 hours earlier. I pitied those who didn't have that option. Only time I enjoy driving is on a hilly road with the top down and no traffic. On the interstate? Hah. If the fumes don't kill me the noise will deafen me.

[liberal N proud]

30. I love to drive across country - South Dakota included.

And mass transit does not go up and down every road and street in America.

Automated personal vehicles or driver-less cars would permit the remote population to still have a safe mode of transportation.

Does a car in front of you with a broken fan belt cause you problems? Usually not, they pull over to the side of the road, so why would it not be expected the same of automated vehicles?

People are way over thinking of this in an attempt to be against it. I love to drive the roads of America, and I see this as a good thing, it could eliminate the left lane squatters.

[LeftyMom]

35. Jesus Christ that sounds awful.

Driving is FUN. If I want to go read a book and eat a sandwich while somebody else drives me someplace I'll take a train.

[liberal N proud]

36. What about when you are 90 and they tell you that you can no longer drive?

I too love the road, driving the machine on the open road or down the winding path. But when I am 90, I still wasn't to get out there and see the world or go to the store without waiting for someone to take me.

[LeftyMom]

39. Interact with human beings, I suppose.

Seems like all the people anywhere that age that I know are lonely and a bit bored. Depriving them of more human contact doesn't seem like a great idea, and I say that as a raging introvert.

[liberal N proud]

40. Why are they lonely?

Because they are alone and can't go see their friends. Give them a way to go across town to visit friends, ie autopilot car, they will no longer be alone.

Better than landing in a nursing home because you are no longer independent. Just a thought.

[LeftyMom]

41. People that age generally can't get into or out of a car without assistance.

All the ninety year olds I know are lonely because all of their friends their own age have died. Even if any of them could afford a robot car for the last few years of their lives, and could get in and out of one and had someplace to go, it would be cheaper to get human help (which most people that age need anyhow,) and they need the company.

Unless you're dying to read more stories about weeks dead seniors being found half-eaten by their pets because somebody noticed the newspapers piling up.

[Jesus Malverde]

19. One way to get "per mile" taxes..nt

[jsr]

29. Yep.

[Helen Borg]

21. False sense of security.

People will pay less attention because there is the automatic collision detector. Then, when the detector goes offline because of a malfunction, people will continue to pay less attention because they are not used to pay attention anymore.

[madrchsod]

31. the latest technology has already been hacked.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009_3-57596847-83/car-hacking-code-released-at-defcon/

[One_Life_To_Give]

32. For those who can't hear a 250W Q2B, 200W Whelan and a Pair of Stuttertones

They will still find a way to put their vehicle in the most awkward place to get around.

I think the technology won't come into it's own till the autonomous car becomes common.

[blkmusclmachine]

34. One wonders how the burgeoning Police State will abuse this technology to our detriment...

[meow2u3]

37. If the road rage from the drivers isn't bad enough

We're going to end up with the cars themselves committing road rage?!

Car in front tells tailgating car behind it: BACK OFF AND GET OFF MY ASS!

[LeftyMom]

38. My car talks to everybody. It says "I'm making a deep rumbly noise, remember when cars were fun?"

I don't want to live in the dystopic future where everybody "drives" a Beige Hondota PeopleMover that does all the work for them while they apply mascara or wank or whatever it is people who currently vaguely aim automatic transmission equipped rolling sofas will do when they don't even have to do that.

[Yo_Mama]

42. Most people need cheaper cars

How much stuff are we going to mandate? In the end it leads to people driving less safe cars. Poor people, who of course don't count when these brilliant ideas are brought up, but still....

Also, anyone who's ever driven in congested areas can imagine what auto-braked cars would do. I am not sure at all this is a good idea.

[CreekDog]

43. this type of technology could reduce traffic james, not from accidents alone, but from...

the possibility of implementing real time speed limit changes.

for example, say there's a backup 5 miles ahead. traffic monitors and computers begin slowing traffic gradually by either changing the speed limits on the fly to reduce the congestion in the slow section. because the traffic behind the backup has slowed, the congestion can begin to be reduced and with cars not coming as fast, the stop and go resulting from the small area of traffic jam won't happen.

the other thing is that if there's an accident, speed limit variations can help slow traffic modestly for miles behind to keep it moving and not have it slow down all at once just before the accident.

[IDemo]

44. My '93 Toyota pickup has 68,000 miles on the clock

Which means it's barely broken in and will suffice nicely for another few decades. And if I want to listen to Car Talk, I can get them on Saturday mornings on the FM radio.

[TheMathieu]

45. Excellent idea.

I am for anything that brings more order to chaos.

And embrace all new technologies.

I guess that's just the way us 90's kids look at the world.