When an Algorithm Takes the Wheel 676
Wired has an interesting look at Jaguar's new automated driving dynamics system in their new XK convertible. From the article: "During an extreme test of the XK's handling capabilities, the car only fishtailed back and forth once after I jerked the steering wheel on a wet road around a 90 degree turn while driving at about 60 mph. The car's back wheels swung first left then right before the XK's sensors registered a difference in torque between the rear tires and, transparent to me, righted the fishtailing effect by a combination of de-acceleration, tire rotation and vehicle weight distribution control. More often than not, the sensation of flatness, as if there were a vertical force pinning the car to the road, was also felt then and when taking less extreme curves at high speeds."
Fishtailing saved me once (Score:3, Interesting)
It will never happen, end it. (Score:4, Interesting)
First, and foremost, you could never have a mixed environment of automated and manually driven vehicles. Watching iRobot and seeing Will Smith take over manual control on an automated highway was completely ridiculous. In an environment where computers will have to react to the unpredictable behaviour of human drivers, the computes will always lose. How many 200 car pileups will have to occur before it is realized that computer drivers and human drivers won't mix. Computers cannot anticipate the irradict behaviour of a drunk driver. Nor can they anticipate a woman swearving across 6 lanes of traffic to hit her exit because she was too busy putting on lipstick to pay attention to the exit signs. Humans and computers won't mix.
Secondly, you need to either put the highways underground or put a cover on them. There is no way a computer driven vehicle will respond appropriately if a deer rushes on the road, or suddenly there is a freak blizzard and the road conditions go from dry to slick. Putting highways in tunnels will mean your eliminating weather and most other external obstacles from interfering with computer driven vehicles. A human might pick up a deer standing still off the side of the road and slow down anticipating if it might jump out. A computer probably wouldn't register the deer was standing there until its firmly embedded in its windshield.
Lastly, simple fact will be that there will be some significant flaw in the entire system. Your not going to get all car manufacturers to use the same systems. Your going to need some external system regulating the traffic and communicating with a variety of different systems which will vary city to city, state to state. Even if the communication protocol is standardized, your still going to have some car manufactures that implement automated driving better then others. A Jaguar or other high end vehicle is going to react faster and have better handling them some Geo Metro or Ford Escort.
Bottom line is, in an environment with so much variation, something will go wrong, and it will cost significant human life. When this happen, people will abandon the concept of computer driven vehicles.
Its a nice hobby, but its a complete waste of time. Unless they invent anti-gravity and force fields, your never going to have an automated highway system.
Comment removed (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Intrusive. (Score:5, Interesting)
The robot cars are coming. At first it will just be for safety, then auto collision evasion, then auto interstate driving, then mandatory auto interstate driving, then auto street driving in select cities, then auto street driving, then auto road driving, then mandatory street/road driving.
Eventually you'll just be booting up the car and selecting a recent destination, bookmarked destination, or searching for a new destination with Google Auto Mapper.
Pros: extremely high traffic density at high speed and environmental legislation will prevent cars from being used for travel less than ten miles---excepting for the elderly with an exemption (otherwise bicycles will be required, thus combating both pollution and obesity). Much higher traffic safety, particularly at rush hour and during inclement weather. Safety is maintained by a combination of centralized regional routing control and client verification of instruction (the car will refuse a central signal that tells it to drive 120mph into a brick wall).
Cons: We don't get to drive anymore.
Better idea than auto-driving. (Score:5, Interesting)
Humans are worse at thinking logically in situations where they have to emergency brake, or steer, etc. and are more prone to panic. If the computer could figure out these functions for the driver, that would make driving a car a lot safer in hazardous conditions.
ABS=Increased Stopping Distance (Score:3, Interesting)
I wish I had done the same. My vehicle was involved in one moderate crash over a thirteen year span (I bought it new) and two minor ones due to the fact that the ABS controller was not programed with an optimal solution for downhill on ice, i.e. acceleration despite intervention by the controller. As a result not only was my stopping distance increased, but I was unable to actively steer the vehicle into the curb to gain additional traction from the median snow and from the collision with the curb.
Don't give me the "but the systems have improved since you first bought yours". No, they haven't. Try this on a northern winter day when conditions are icy - go out for a test drive in a new vehicle with ABS. Go to the nearest mall/shopping center, whatever. Get the car going, try to stop, measure the stopping distance. Now find the ABS fuse and remove it. Repeat test. Result: ABS makes car stop straighter, but increases stopping distance. In addition, ABS makes car stop dead-straight, (no you can't steer with ABS in near-zero-traction conditions - total myth - try it), so any chance you have of using a skid to maneuver yourself out of the way is completely out the window.
Go a bit far afield... (Score:2, Interesting)
...but, had I not had the ABS, I probably would have stopped sooner. It was a dry, high desert winter night in southeast Oregon. The deer couldn't decide to jump right or left so it jumped left (good idea) then decided to jump BACK into the path of the car. On the good side, I was driving a '90 Volvo 970. The box design did what it was supposed to do, it killed the-ever-living-frack out of Bambi, and my wife and I were able to make it down the road to check for repairs and send a reservation trooper after the carcas. We continued our trip.
Now, don't get me started with Volvo rounding the frame of their new cars. Nothing beats 300 pound livestock like a square nose.
Re:Dangerously incorrect (Score:3, Interesting)
An easy way to show this effect is to try to push something heavy through gravel: the gravel will gather up and the object will become harder and harder to push.
By that logic... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Intrusive. (Score:3, Interesting)
http://www.ghostriderrobot.com/ [ghostriderrobot.com]
-Lazn