volk23 writes "Klaus -- pioneered by car maker Volkswagen AG -- drove in public for the first time around a German test circuit using three laser scanners, a stereo camera, video and satellite navigation systems and radar hooked up to a computer, VW said. "
173 comments
"I'm gonna shove coal so far up your stocking...
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 1
...that you'll be coughing up diamonds!"
No, no, no
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 1
No, no, no. I said autobahn, not an autobot. Start over.
Re:The real problems are legal.
by
whoop
·
· Score: 1
Hmm, if they were to become available, I'd head right for McDonald's, pick up a cup of coffee, and "spill" it on said robot. When everything shorts out and crashes, my family has it made for the rest of their lives. What right does McDonald's have selling coffee capable of killing me?? Woohoo!
Re:But where's the Fahrvergn�gen in that!?
by
whoop
·
· Score: 1
As others have said, the problem is you rely entirely on the lead car's radar to see deer and the like. But the other down side is you must have only one car type. Every one in the convoy must have the same brakes et al so they can stop simultaneously. I'm sure the MPAA would love to branch into the car bidness, but it's not for me.
Sure you can have 43,572 sensors for every little screw/nut in the car, but something will inevitably happen to that lead car (airplane or UFO falls out of the sky) and then everyone is screwed.
We don't need robot drivers in a human controlled world. We need to replace the entire infrastructure to allow computers to do ALL driving!
How it would work: Computerised cars and computerised signal towers every few hundred feet or so. The signal towers would control pretty much everything the cars do.
All the human would have to do is tell it to go to whatever address. Then take a nap!
Computers should be able to do everything more efficiently, working together with each other. This should have side benefits like saving gas and almost eliminating traffic deaths.
Heck, it would probably even be cheaper in the long run. Cars could have many of their controls removed, computers are cheap, and like I mentioned, it should be able to save on gas.
I guess the biggest barrier to this is just that - replacing the infrastructure. We could use the same roads (at least for a while) but we'd need huge amounts of computer equipment, and then we'd need to force all human drivers off the roads. THAT is what would be hard.:-)
The vast majority of cars sold in Europe are manual, and automatics are seen as the exclusive preserve of little old ladies, disabled people and fat businessmen. In fact, in most (all?) countries you have to take your test on a manual, otherwise you will get a licence that limits you to driving only automatic cars. No self-respecting person under the age of 60 would be seen driving an automatic (unless they were disabled of course) and the idea of an automatic sportscar is just bizarre - props to Audi for refusing to pander to North American tastes by decining to offer an auto version of the TT (I shudder at the thought...)
Nick
-- --
"It's a sad day for American capitalism when a man can't fly a midget on a kite over Central Park" - Jim Moran
Old news. Mercedes had one a few years ago.
by
Colin+Smith
·
· Score: 1
Mercedes have had a computer operated car for years. They tested it on the German Autobahns.
-- Deleted
Re:Knight Rider Revisited!!!!
by
cpt+kangarooski
·
· Score: 1
well the germans *do* love david hassellhoff;)
-- --
This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
Re:Dont sue me, the Dummy was driving!
by
cpt+kangarooski
·
· Score: 1
so that would be following the ethernet philosophy of packet collision;)
-- --
This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
Re:Thoughts on computer guided vehicles...
by
Chris+Hiner
·
· Score: 1
Minor problem... We don't use dots up here where it snows. The snow plows would eat them. (Or the salt.)
Besides, I like driving. I've been known to just pick a direction, and drive that way for a while. Of course, this is much more fun when you're driving a fun car, like a 944TS.:)
But besides the time factor, why do people drive, rather than taking public transit? For the thrill of the open road, the feeling of power when you are behind the wheel. Robot drivers take that away!
Well, the time factor is a big thing. And convenience. Let's see, my choices are:
1. take my car to the store, get there in about 10 minutes
2. walk to the bus stop, wait for the bus to show up, hope I've got exact change, find a seat that isn't too disgusting, endure the stares of drooling weirdos, transfer a couple of times all the while seeing parts of town that are way out of my way, and then finally arrive at the closest bus stop, which is a ten minute walk from my destination.
While in University, I didn't have a car, and having a car is immensely more convenient than a bus for far more reasons than "the thrill of the open road".
Actually, I do like driving, sometimes, so I would like the option to drive myself. But there are many times I wish my car could drive itself. Times like:
- I'm tired and I just want to get home - really long trips - I don't know where I am (imagine an automated driver hooked up to GPS and a mapping system) - busy cities. I hate driving in busy cities, especially in downtown areas.
Re:Expect this in a real situation.
by
Captain+Nitpick
·
· Score: 1
(3) it's performance won't be degraded by emotional state
So, you're saying an automated vehicle wouldn't suffer from "code rage"?
AAAHHH!! A pun! Get it off! Get it off!
-- But then again, I could be wrong.
Re:But where's the Fahrvergn�gen in that!?
by
rc-flyer
·
· Score: 1
You know, you're rather bigoted. Either that, or you have no conception of the limitations of public transit. Except in major cities, public transit is limited to major routes, etc. What about getting to public transit? What about if you want to go from point A to point C, which would be a 15 minute drive, but if you have to take public transit you have to go from point A to point B, and then to point C, which would be an hour drive?
Try public transit and see how useful it is, and also how limited it is.
drove in public for the first time around a German test circuit
Was it a live test (as implied by "in public") or was a it a closed track (as implied by "test circuit")? --
--
Linux MAPI Server!
http://www.openone.com/software/MailOne/
(Exchange Migration HOWTO coming soon)
there crumples another industry
by
ClarkBar
·
· Score: 1
Quick sell stocks in the chauffeur industry. Computers are taking over!!!
Re:Don't ever expect this in a real situation.
by
Jonathan_S
·
· Score: 1
Of course this appears to be a higher standard than many human drivers are held to. Particularly the part about slowing down for bad weather.
CMU's No Hands Across America
by
Chuan-kai+Lin
·
· Score: 1
Anybody remember the NHAA Project from CMU back in 1995? An autonomous steering vehicle took two Robotics Institute researchers all the way from Pittsburgh to San Diego, with the computer program RALPH steering more than 99% of the time. Granted, the people have to handle the throttle and brakes, and it only works out on highways, but that is still quite amazing considering that took place some fregging 5 years ago.
Now all we need is a utility to have this system kick in after one too many good German beers.... #include "disclaim.h" "All the best people in life seem to like LINUX." - Steve Wozniak
--
#include "disclaim.h"
"All the best people in life seem to like LINUX." - Steve Wozniak
Uh, wrong. I'm decent at HTML but pretty new to C and C++. However, this is covered in what I have learned so far. In the #include directive, when you quote around header files like "disclaim.h", this means look in the current working directory for a custom header file (i.e. you must keep your.c and.h files together). If you use angle brackets < > then it means "look in the standard directories" for standard ANSI headers like <stdio.h>. It works for me at least... Of course, if I meant "include standard disclaimers" I should indeed have put #include <stddisclaim.h> but since I'm a lawyer I get to write my own custom disclaimers;-).
#include "disclaim.h" "All the best people in life seem to like LINUX." - Steve Wozniak
--
#include "disclaim.h"
"All the best people in life seem to like LINUX." - Steve Wozniak
He is probably aware of that, and just knows very little about html... that would be my guess. Instead, you should tell him that he can type <disclaim.h> to get that.
You can simplify that a little bit as only the < needs to be escaped. To render <disclaim>, you only need to use <disclaim>. (Yeah, we're not dealing with 48K Apple II+s anymore, but it's still nice to save a byte or two once in a while.:-) )
He is probably aware of that, and just knows very little about html... that would be my guess. Instead, you should tell him that he can type <disclaim.h> to get that.
-- linuxisgood:~$ man woman
-- Restating the obvious since nineteen aught five.
You can use either double quotes or angle brackets to specify a filename for the #include directive for the C/C++ preprocessor. Usually angle brackets are used for system includes (since it searches the include paths), and double quotes for user includes. In his case, he probably did mean double quotes.
Excuse me sir.. er ma'am.. er thing. Do you know how fast you were travelling?
Exactly 103.29801 km/h sir!
But they still offer every other car in Automatic
by
Johannes
·
· Score: 1
Atleast they use a clone of the Porsche Tiptronic automatic transmission. Thankfully they offer most of them in Manual here in the US as well.
Just can't wait until the Multitronic makes it's way to US. Hopefully a real CVT for once.
Re:So, Klaus is a woman driver?
by
Afrosheen
·
· Score: 1
What? The article didn't mention anything about the robot applying makeup and backing into light posts while driving. And although it will dodge objects, it won't flip the car going 60 mph to avoid a little kitty. It knows that a little thump-thump is ok sometimes.
It'd be easier than cleaning a person off the inside of their car, don't you think? Ever hit a deer going 75 mph? Didn't think so, because you wouldn't be alive if you did.
Dodge a deer? Why? It should be able to frag the deer. It'd be much more exciting and safe. Also it'd need some gps gear (which I believe it has) to predict traffic jams and reroute your trip.
Re:I don't know how to feel about this.
by
Afrosheen
·
· Score: 1
That's true. Why does every movie with Germans in it by americans portray them as evil geniuses or terrorists? My guess is that because Jewish folk write the screenplays and they have a big grudge against Germanic people, all germans regardless of german americans or what. Not every german worldwide was involved with and condoned ww2 but that's not how the media would have you think. From an engineering standpoint, we'd probably still be riding bicycles and canoeing across rivers if it weren't for the germans. So show some respect.
...yeah, but how many times did it fail?
by
Monte
·
· Score: 1
Talk about a misleading headline - when I first read this I thought the blasted thing had gotten a license!
But I don't understand the article: "German Robot Klaus Passes Driving Test" and below: "Although Klaus is not ready to take to the public highway,..."
But it's strongly recommended to drive on the highway during your driving test...in Germany. You have to drive about 45 min. On all kinds of streets!!! I can't imagine that this roboter took the driving test...
I see the testers obeyed the cardinal rule of driving in Italy: stay the hell out of Rome.
--
-- This is not my sandwich.
Re:Expect this in a real situation.
by
theonetruekeebler
·
· Score: 1
Nasa doesn't hand the landing back over to the highly-trained human: they move the landing
But they do hand the decision about how and where to land over to humans--a meteorologist, flight control, the pilot and mission commander. I would have used an example from chemical refineries, but I know less about them than I do about space shuttles. I do know that in the late 1980s, software controlling nuclear reactors, if it didn't know what to do next, used to simply scram the reactor. When it turned out that a new reactor in Aiken, South Carolina was executing an "emergency shutdown" two or three times a week--much to the delight of the press--they adopted new procedures: if the computer knew something bad was happening, it would scram; otherwise, it would ring a bell in the control room, as if to say, "Excuse me, but would you be so kind as to put down the magazine and look at the goddamned gauges? I'm a nuclear reactor, you jackass! Pay attention!"
As for driving by Ouija board, that would explain a whole lot. It's either that or dice, given the traffic around here.
In fact, in most (all?) countries you have to take your test on a manual, otherwise you will get a licence that limits you to driving only automatic cars.
That's exactly the way it should be. In fact, I'd wager to bet that a *large* portion of the licenced American drivers could not pass a German driving test even *with* an automatic transmission. This country's licensing system is an absolute joke. Five minutes of driving on a lightly-travelled road will not show the examiner much of anything about how the driver will drive in the real world. A real driving test would deal with emergency braking, emergency lane changing, and how to drive in the real world.
An example: thanks to the NHTSA, most Americans think that slower = safer. As a result, I'm often stuck behind soccer moms in their Expeditions who try to merge into Atlanta traffic at 45 mph. Speed doesn't kill, speed differential does (ok, that's velocity, but you get the point). These are things that people are not taught in driving school and not tested on when taking the licensing test. And don't even get me started on lane discipline.
I've always said that if I buy a automatic transmission in the future, I will promptly drive it over a cliff. In my biased view, automatic transmissions are for those who don't really care about driving (with a few exceptions, such as the disabled) and therefore people with automatic transmissions are generally poor drivers compared to manual tranny drivers. Of course this theory has to be adjusted for socioeconomic class, but the basic idea still stands.
One question about this automatic driver: can he parallel park without scraping the corners of the other parked cars? Because God knows most people can't.
-- --
"Complacency is a far more dangerous attitude than outrage." -Naomi Littlebear
But how many of the test administrators want to spend more than 5 minutes with the test taker. The wages the BMV in my area pays (minimum) does not offer any incentive to go out of my way to do a job well.
I think if a DMV tester actually took the time to make sure the testee knew how to drive, (s)he would be reprimanded. Apparently the DMV as a whole feels that their current test is satisfactory in determining if someone is skilled enough to drive. The new testing procedure needs to come from the top - it needs to be completely overhauled nationwide.
I for one would not want to be driving a manual transmission for the simple reason that it IS 1 more thing to have to concentrate on. I don't know where you live, but around here it snows and the road gets slick. I have other thing to concentrate on, like the moron in front of me, besides switching gears.
I live in Atlanta, which certainly has it's share of traffic and idiot drivers. However, I can't remember one time when having to shift hindered me from driving. Unlike so many of my friends, I've never been in an accident when I was behind the wheel. Driving a stick is one of those things that I don't have to think about. Of course the possibility of getting caught in the wrong gear is there, but that really just comes with predicting what is going to happen while driving.
An aside: I happen to drive with a Valentine One. There are many people who claim that radar detectors make the roads more dangerous and that "speed kills." I think this is a fairly narrow view of the subject. I tend to be extremely alert while driving, always scanning the horizon and checking my mirrors. I've found this to be much safer than the sort of passive driving that I see most of the time.
-- --
"Complacency is a far more dangerous attitude than outrage." -Naomi Littlebear
Re:another car driven by Linux
by
iainh
·
· Score: 1
I can just picture the upcomming Windows port
BSOD will have new meaning
The difficult part is the hand over
by
Korova
·
· Score: 1
If you want to automate only the "simple" highway driving you still have the problem of handing control back. The simple solution is to have the robot pull over and stop before the human takes over. Anything else is hard.
Re:The difficult part is the hand over
by
Straker+Skunk
·
· Score: 2
It shouldn't be that hard. The car would probably slow down to about 60 km/h, and release its "grip" on the wheel over an interval of a few seconds. The dangerous thing to be on guard for (which I imagine is what you had in mind) is if the wheel controller is applying a torque at the time of release. A momentary snap of the wheel, at highway speeds, can indeed cause an accident. Releasing the wheel gradually should take care of that.
In any case, if the car's on a straightway, it shouldn't be applying torque to the wheel anyway. It's only an issue if you're on a turn, or if your steering is waaaay out of alignment:-]
When I first saw that image on the article before I enlarged it I thought the car's headrest was the robot's "head"! It reminded me of the art in those old Basic Computer Games books, where the robots look vaguely and comically human. Gave me a warm fuzzy feeling inside.:)
I've got the rusted out Camaro thing. People look at the rust, the dents, and the longhair behind the wheel. Then when you wipe them up, they quit laughing. 6.3 with a driven top speed of 165. A few have taken me off the line, and even to 60, but they NEVER lose me.:) (I love the new TT. It keeps pace to 100, at which time the smart drivers stop accelerating and I stroll by them waving. The dumb ones don't and I have to let off before they kill themselves.)
Re:reasons Klaus won't work out on American roadwa
by
jhunsake
·
· Score: 1
But I like the way he drives.
Robot Drivers aren't the answer
by
mhelie
·
· Score: 1
What we need is a rail based "ferry" system. You drive from your home to the station, drive the car onto the train. The train goes at 200 mph (or whatever speed fast trains go these days) to your long distance destination. Then you just drive off the train back onto the clogged roadways of our cities. The best of both worlds.
--
-------------------------
"After Careful Consideration, Bush Recommends Oil Drilling" - The Onion
I'm reminded of Neal Stephenson's analogy of the various OS's as car dealerships.
-- Unbreakable toys can be used to break other toys.
Re:reasons Klaus won't work out on American roadwa
by
donutello
·
· Score: 1
IANAAE (I'm not an Aerodynamics Engineer) but I don't think the car in front loses any mileage at all. In fact it gains it because the drag is lessened by the fact that the other car is behind it.
AAARRGGH! If I never hear another car-to-software analogy again it will be too soon. What is it about computer geeks that we like to compare everything we do to cars anyway?!
Manual = more activity, which means you're forced to be MORE ALERT.
Of course, the people you're talking about can't even be bothered to signal, fasten seat belts, or use their brains... so yeah, let 'em doze off and drive into a pole on the side of the highway.
:P
Inappropriate Uses of Technology
by
Col.+Panic
·
· Score: 1
How long before some terrorist group uses it to drive a bomb into an embassy?
Oops... shhh!
Re:I cant wait for them to sell these thing.
by
MullaH
·
· Score: 1
the reason they use a robot and not the car might be that you can use the carpool-lanes in NW europe:)
Re:reasons Klaus won't work out on American roadwa
by
MicroBerto
·
· Score: 1
So if this computer has overclock errors, gets too hot, or gets a virus, does it become a drunk driver?
I wonder why they chose to make him drive a stick shift as opposed to an automatic. He could have one less leg!
But wouldn't designing the robot to hande a stick shift make it platform independent? ie. You would only have one robot design that could then be fitted to practically any car regardless of transmission type (Of yourse you might need different shift arm designs for floor vs colum shifters).
-- -JeremyH
"...mounted in the car itself"
by
colnago
·
· Score: 1
An excerpt: "In order to test the vehicle extensively under different traffic conditions, road environments and weather, a 2000km journey was undertaken June 1 through June 6, 1998. During this test, ARGO drove autonomously along the Italian highway network, passing through flat areas and hilly regions including viaducts and tunnels. The Italian road network is particularly suited for such an extensive test since it is characterized by quickly varying road scenarios, changing weather conditions and generally a fair amount of traffic. The tour took place on highways and freeways, but the system also proved to work on sufficiently structured rural roads with no intersections."
This is a fairly interesting, linux based, driving platform where the technology is integrated into the car (well integrated the best it could be for the expense taken) instead of acting on the car.
Re:reasons Klaus won't work out on American roadwa
by
illustir
·
· Score: 1
The drafting principle isn't the biggest advantage of this technology. You'll be able to use the road more efficiently by driving closer to the next car and by driving at a constant speed. Especially the last benefit (constant speed) will prevent a lot of traffic jams from forming.
-- --
Alper
Re:mmm. A lifetime of learning--20 is too late
by
Error27
·
· Score: 1
I grew up in Africa and have been in the US for 3 years...
I think that the main cause of the problems you are describing is not that it is impossible to learn how to drive at 20 it's just that no real mechanism exists to do so.
When I arrived in America even simple things like crossing a street were tricky. In Zambia where I lived streets were rare and cars were rarer. (of course in the Zambian cities it's different.) It takes a while to learn to judge speed in cars if you normally travel at walking speed. A lot of things are harder then they seem.
I don't have a car and I don't know how to drive really but I got my drivers license by taking the test 4 times in 2 weeks. I have driven one time since that day about a year ago...
American kids normally learn from their parents at ages 14 to 17. International students normally learn from their friends in a couple months.
Friends don't want to bore you to death with details... They want to make assumptions about your knowledge. And people in their twenties aren't famouse for being safety consious. One's friends may not have had a lot of driving experience themselves.
This doesn't mean that it's not possible for one to learn how to drive at age twenty.
In Zambia I have Missionairies complaining about the driving of young Americans who came over. Driving conditions in America and in Zambia are much different so the Americans were destroying vehicles by driving too fast. The missionairies felt that the Zambians who had never had any driving experience before they came to work for them were much better drivers.
This makes sense to me because in teaching the Zambians how to drive the missionairies had no false assumptions about what the Zambians knew. The Zambians did not feel they needed to impress anyone by driving recklessly as your international students may. The teachers were experienced drivers. There was no presure to be able to handle Dallas traffic right away or pass the drivers test in two weeks.
So yes international students learning to drive may be worse as a group than other new drivers. But it's not because they can't learn it. It's because the teaching mechanism is flawed.
At age 20 the average american has been learning to drive for 5 years. You have to allow for an equally long time before you should start saying that internation students can *never* be taught how to drive.
Re:I don't know how to feel about this.
by
Mendax+Veritas
·
· Score: 1
I agree with the great musical satirist Tom Lehrer, who wrote of von Braun:
Gather 'round while I sing you of Werner von Braun,
A man whose allegiance is ruled by expedience. Call him a Nazi, he won't even frown; "Ah, Nazi, Schmazi," says Werner von Braun.
Some have harsh words for this man of renown, But some say our attitude should be one of gratitude, Like the widows and cripples in old London Town, Who owe their large pensions to Werner von Braun.
Don't say that he's hypocritical; Say, rather, that he's apolitical. "Vonce ze rockets are up, who cares where zey come down? "Zat's not my department," says Werner von Braun.
You, too, may be a big hero Once you learn to count backwards to zero. "In German, oder English, I know how to count down, "Und I'm learning Chinese," says Werner von Braun.
--"Werner von Braun", from the Tom Lehrer album That Was The Year That Was (1965)
Bwah.. Those 'Stickered Up Civics' Annoy the crap out of me.
You and every other human on the road.
Just let me start by saying only one euro has taken my car;-) And.. It was a Blue Acura Integra and uhm.. Whatever he had in that thing it was so freaking fast 0-60 In VERY short order. Under 5.8 Seconds because thats what my car has been timed at.
There has yet to be any four wheeled vehicle that has ever taken me on my ZX
Laffs, Anyways I just leave most of them slack jawed because my car looks like a regular beat up 1990 Mustang LX five oh.
It's even more fun when they don't understand the magic of 'Power to Weight Ratios'...
Editor's Note: No, the above link isn't a pic me, but the bike is just like mine.
Yes. They will, I know they will because they do. BMW do a car with a computer controled enginee. That enginee is limited to 140 (?) mph, you can get it "chipped" (yes, just like a playstation) to move the limit to 180 (?) mph. I know this because I know someone who's done it. Thad
As is usually the case with technology news there aren't enough details about this. I'd like to see some stats on how fast it can respond to something.
I also would like to know how it handles unexpected events. For example an animal running out in front of the car. I wonder if it has "panic" responses like slamming on the brakes. If anyone has a link to a site with some more details on this or a similar project, please post it.
Re:But where's the Fahrvergn�gen in that!?
by
Gurlia
·
· Score: 1
Coming in 2004: The Microsoft Beetle. It's their biggest bug yet!
ROTFL!!!
But seriously, I'd be really concerned what something like that happens... I mean, drunk drivers are bad enough... but at least we know a drunk driver when we see one. The problem with buggy robot drivers is that, in a future society filled with these things, people will have way too much confidence in these machines. It will be too late to realize your trust was misplaced when the buggy robot drives you off the highway into a tree at 100mph...
And of course, the other side is that future generations of open source hackers will produce an open source GNU driver, and some l33t skr1pt k1dd135 will think it's 3l33t to recompile their driver bot to cut corners and show off what a human driver would never dare to do. Yet another way to impress girls, but definitely a recipe for disaster...
But I'll bet the bastard STILL won't pick you up at the airport.
--
Ceci n'est pas une sig.
So, Klaus is a woman driver?
by
(void*)
·
· Score: 1
Re:So, Klaus is a woman driver?
by
cvillopillil
·
· Score: 1
Ummm, nope. Klaus actually passed the driving test:) Now, my female collie is a pretty smart dog, but if collies could take driving tests, I don't think she'd have as much chance as a male collie:)
-- no sig
Re:But where's the Fahrvergn�gen in that!?
by
BlckKnght
·
· Score: 1
Many of those failures come on gradually and could be detected by sensors hooked to the computer. If it detects falling tire pressure or something, it could pull out of the convoy and inform the occupants.
Sure there is a chance that something will fail anyway, but I would still think that computers could respond better than any human driver could.
I wonder why they chose to make him drive a stick shift as opposed to an automatic. He could have one less leg! I know manual transmission cars are more common in Europe, but they have automatics there too and I would think that with a complicated project like this, going with an automatic might be a better idea. Of course the hardest part is not shifting gears, it is navigating in traffic, avoiding obstacles, knowing when to brake, etc, but an automatic would be one less thing for Klaus' creators to worry about.
Perhaps they were trying to match the performance of Ferrari's "F1" transmission. It is a "manual" gear-driven transmission that shifts automatically (faster than Mario Andretti can) -- unlike an automatic transmission (plain-jane, or Porsche's Tiptronic) which uses a torque converter and thus less performance (acceleration, gas mileage).
If this is the case why do so few people drive automatics? The US is the only country where automatics outnumber manuals. Or are all non-Americans 'esoteric freaks' and all Americans 'normal people' to use your language?
Nick
-- --
"It's a sad day for American capitalism when a man can't fly a midget on a kite over Central Park" - Jim Moran
*cackle* not the obvious exclusion of motorcycles! rofl. One day I pulled up to a couple of guys on some CBR's. I knew in my heart they would leave me behind when we went. I looked over at the guy with a foolish grin and smiled. The light turned green I gunned it.. but alas they were already so far ahead of me I felt like I was not even moving. Laffs. And this was with my car in its current state.. Needless to say I dont bother with you motorcycle people.:p
ID be dead if I owned a motorcycle.
And that is another awesome point. You need a car that does not go into lift-off mode to use 600 HP. (No kidding saw on a mag cover walking thru the grocery store. )Honda Civic with 600HP and how they did it!. I was like Uhm.. And the point is.....
Mustangs ive found are rather fun to mod out the ass. I have a 1:11 Saleen Mustang rear end..:-) But I have a huge respect for motorcycles. I just enjoy my cars.
ROFL, I am one of those smart drivers. Id be like *sighs* I know I can run this guy.. then id mutter and pull in behind you so we can both be alive in 5 seconds as the mass of traffic rapidly appraoches:p
I do agree my car was recently in an accident. ( NOT MY FAULT ) and someone popped my airbag and busted up my front bumper just a lil. sighs
I would not dream of taking the stock Mustang above 120, had to have a lot of work to keep it feeling 'good' most people dont even understand:p and im like.. listen peeps I can tell:P laff.
Bwah.. Those 'Stickered Up Civics' Annoy the crap out of me.
Just let me start by saying only one euro has taken my car;-) And..
It was a Blue Acura Integra and uhm.. Whatever he had in that thing it was so freaking fast 0-60 In VERY short order. Under 5.8 Seconds because thats what my car has been timed at.
Laffs, Anyways I just leave most of them slack jawed because my car looks like a regular beat up 1990 Mustang LX five oh.
It is a lot of fun and I just love cars period. Its sort of ironic I suppose but now that I have been able to afford in recent times the engine and 'other' modifications and have even had most of them done to make my car faster I dont even drive like I used to *sigh*. Maybe getting nailed by a suburban doing 70 has something to do with it:p
arg my mind is fried im trying to memorize new pwords today and they have 58 in them. (gasps dont hax0r me please) 5.2 seconds is how fast my car does 0-60:-)
Re:reasons Klaus won't work out on American roadwa
by
jallen02
·
· Score: 1
Heh, Well he does have three arms im sure the mfinger thing can be hacked.
You are supposed to use your turn signal for lane changing, since when.... heh heh. LAFF it is funny.
Jeremy
Redundant? (Not this post, the robot).
by
medicthree
·
· Score: 1
It strikes me as somewhat redundant to have an actual robot mechanism driving the car. If you can program a robot to move its arms, shift gears, push on the pedals, etc., it would seem to me that you should be able to program the car itself to drive. Wouldn't it make more sense for a mechanism within the car to do all these tasks, instead of having an extra physical thing to accomplish the task? If you ask me, it seems like it's a bit pointless to introduce an extra physical mechanism with the possibility of failing. Why would you want to worry about an arm/leg malfunction when you could just program the car to take care of all the tasks itself? This is not a rhetorical question, I'm interested in what advantages a robot might have over an on-board computer.
Re:Don't ever expect this in a real situation.
by
MrScience
·
· Score: 1
yes. Right now, though, you need a beowolf of Crays to pull it off. Give it 10*18 months, and the computer in your right fingernail could do it no problem.
You should never, never doubt what nobody is sure about.
--
You quitting proves that the karma kap worked. The most annoying of the whores shut up. --CmdrTaco
Carnegie Mellon has been developing working prototypes of this kind of technology for years. So far, they have automated cars, buses, and trucks. (Can anyone say "Maximum Homerdrive?") check out this link The news release is almost 3 years old, but it conveys the point. -j
"If I have seen further, it is by standing upon ye shoulders of Giants" -Isaac Newton to Robert Hooke
-- -sigs of the world unite
Re:Don't ever expect this in a real situation.
by
geekoid
·
· Score: 1
Can a computer: Realize that it's foggy, or likely to be icy and what patches of the road are likely to be icy and adjust appropriately? Yes Notice a driver late at night that's weaving slightly, pick him out for a drunk and take appropriate action to avoid him? Yes See the reflection of the eyes of a deer in the bushes and be prepared for it to jump in the road? Kinda(Infra red) There is very little technical reason we can't have automated freeway system right now. The biggest hurdle is Funding, Public acceptance. On a side note, I don't think 50% of current drivers do Half the thing you mentioned. Plus it could be programmed to do some things safer, such as actually Stop when a school bus is dropping off children.
-- The Kruger Dunning explains most post on/. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
I can hack my neighbors car to make late night runs to the local all night drive-thru and get me a burger! The scary thing is, they'll want to install a remote shut down system for "emergency's". And what good is that unless they know where your at? It's not a paranoid as it sounds. I mean even if the people in all the goverment jobs had only are best interests in heart, what about the next generation of officials? McArtheism(sp?) happened once in america, it can happen again. feel free to replace McArtheism(sp?) with the dictatorship of any other country if you like.
-- The Kruger Dunning explains most post on/. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
McCarthy. As in Joseph McCarthy, U.S. Senator. The fact he was Dick Nixon's mentor and a freind to John and Bobby Kennedy for a fair number of years may make you want to re-read 'All the Presidents men' and rethink the motive for the plumbers, and consider JFKs psychotic aversion to Cuba. He also spawned Barry Goldwater and indirectly Ronnie Raygun, with their anti-communist tendancies.
Re:Don't ever expect this in a real situation.
by
cybergremlin
·
· Score: 1
Actualy there is one situation that I can think of that one would prefer a robotic driver. One of my professors is doing research for CalTans (California department of Transpertation). He is designing and prototyping a "shadow vehile" that would follow a truck driven by a human. The theory is that a lot of caltrans workers are hurt when the car the the drive (very slowly) down the road is rear ended by a speeding car. Under this setup the "shadow vehicle" may be totaled but the workers would be safe (the speeder is toast either way). Klaus may put him out of a job.
Re:Expect this in a real situation.
by
tylerh
·
· Score: 1
Excellent point - but I think you just agreed with me. With regards to windy Space Shuttle landings, Nasa doesn't hand the landing back over to the highly-trained human: they move the landing. Your point about variables beyond the control of the software being crucial is right-on-the-money. This is true whether the "driver" is a human, a computer, or ouija board.
No one said this technology would make insurance companies obsolete!
-- "one treats others with courtesy not because they are gentlemen or gentlewomen, but because you are" --G. Henrichs
Nothing exists except atoms and empty space; everything else is opinion.
--
blah blah blah....
I cant wait for them to sell these thing.
by
cmpemt10
·
· Score: 1
I cant wait for these thing to hit the market. I mean I hate driving long distances. My question is why make a robot why not just make the car do it itself instead of talking up a seat with a robot. Anyway I can really see these cathing on and someday you be able to pick one up at Walmart.:)
Re:I cant wait for them to sell these thing.
by
3247
·
· Score: 1
My question is why make a robot why not just make the car do it itself instead of talking up a seat with a robot.
It's probably easier to just hook some arms to the steering wheel and pedals than to modify the car. There might also be some legal problems with tests on public roads they can avoid this way. (In Germany, all vehicles must be tested in order to be allowed to be used on public ways. Such a modification might require sophisticated and expensive testing.)
I don't feel that any robot is up to outright driving all the time, but as a backup for sleepy drivers, I could see a use. However, I doubt he could drive much worse than some of the people I know
Re:Dont sue me, the Dummy was driving!
by
FangVT
·
· Score: 1
The big advantage to using a robot instead of mounting the gear in the car is that the robot will count towards being able to drive in the carpool lane...
Re:But they still offer every other car in Automat
by
Refrag
·
· Score: 1
What manufacturer is working on the Multitronic? Being a Porsche-ophile, and not having heard of it I assume is isn't Porsche.
Nissan is supposed to have some real nice CVT technology. And it is supposed to be on its way to the US. Honda has a CVT version of the Civic that gets good mileage, but not much pep because current production CVT technology don't allow for much torque or horsepower. If the Multitronic is by Porsche, it must handle high torque and horsepower so I'll definately look forward to it in VW's and Audi's, but I'll still to a manual in any Porsche.
Well, if i was VW I for one would use it to test my cars. they're just a whole lot better than a crash test dummy!, and probably cheaper (maybe) than a platoon of precision drivers for all kinds of risky situations... Also, if the thing does catch on, it could be kind of like a co-pilot that kicks in on very specific situations, like when you're on the phone.
how great it would be to just tell it you'll be using the phone and be there "just in case". routines for what people usually do wrong while on the phone or after a few drinks should be "easy" to implement. Also, think about crippled people. if you had no legs, the thing could do the pedals for you while you control the wheel... I'm sure the list will go on, but this is comparable to saying "why do we need computers if they will never think like we do?" well it's not there to do what we do better, but to help us do what we do better (and to do some things we just can't do)....
--
There are two kinds of people in the world: Those with good memory.
Automotive companies have been working on systems that will make this more and more feasible for years. Already, some features are in cars and some will be in just a few short years. I would say that a driver-less car is 5-10 years from being comercially viable. A while ago Delphi Automotive and GM built a car that drove across the US by itself. A driver sat in the drivers seat and could take control at anytime (and also was there so no one else on the road would freak out at the sight of a vehicle driving down the road with nobody in it). The computer controlled car, for the most part, did just fine, and rarely got confused.
It is absolutely amazing how well the auto industry has kept the level of technology in cars so un-noticeable. You would be surprised to see all the stuff that goes into cars these days. The automotive company that I work for develops electronics for a bunch of car companies, and I get to see some pretty nice stuff. So much of a cars operation is computerized, and most every component is connected to an in-car "intranet", that an automatic driver is not that far off. The antilock brake controller knows every performance detail of your car and, when needed, can tell the engine and transmission to do certain things in order to get the maximum braking performance. Traction control is the same way. In many new cars, when the airbag goes off, the doors unlock and the hazard lights start blinking. Very soon, your going to see a certain car:) that has a cruise control system that uses radar to see everything around it, and doesn't let you hit things (of course if theres not enough room to stop...), and does the automatic passing thing (you have to steer, of course). And then theres the satellite navigation systems, of which I think that GM's OnStar is the best. Despite not having a screen, it can do much more than give you directions. If you lock your keys in your car, call OnStar and they will tell your car to unlock itself. If your car gets stolen, call OnStar and they will tell the Police exactly where it is. If you get into an accident, your car will automatically call OnStar and a person there will ask you if you are OK. If not (or you don't respond), then an ambulance is sent to you (your car will tell them exactly where you are). All of these things are possible only because of the level of integration of computer systems into cars now. An automatic driver is only a few servos, motors, a camera or two, and a box with some AI programmed into it, which is not really much of a strech for the big auto companies and their R&D departments.
And to all you MS bashers out there, don't worry - MS is not going to be showing up in automotive control systems anytime soon. Much of the stuff requires real-time systems and has very limited amounts of memory. Plus, with all the testing that the stuff goes through (where I work, things go through *years* of testing before they go out the door. And the variety of tests that are run leave you wondering "when would that situation ever come into play?") its doubtfull that an MS product would survive past the development stage. Or at least thats the opinion that I, as well as numerous other people, hold.
Re:I don't know how to feel about this.
by
NetFu
·
· Score: 1
I'm sorry if I'm supposed to be a good Slashdot citizen and not reply to trolls, but WHAT THE F*CK IS YOUR PROBLEM, Anonymous Coward!?!? Why in the HELL can't Americans like you once-and-for-all give up this constant German-bashing!?!? As a German-American and therefore a member of the largest ethnic group in America (check the stats in the past 5 years), I am damn sick and tired of this! This constant stereotyping of Germans hurts as many Americans as it does Germans. This is like stereotyping "white" people like me as being in the same group as the slave-owners who founded this country when my ancestors didn't get here until 100 years later! Who agrees with or supports that kind of prejudice?
I hate to tell you, jerk, but those god-damn "krauts" you're talking about are right here in your back yard so I can see why you are so afraid to show your real identity. Why don't you have enough balls to post with your real identity, coward??????
All I can say to bring this back to the subject at hand is that this development IS important as a development of yet another computer-assisted feature used in mechanical devices we use every day! If a technology derived from this crude first step can make driving safer for EVERYONE then who would oppose it? An extremely controlling or dictatorial person? A fascist? A nazi? Gee, then wouldn't that make you a nazi? Interesting what is discovered when one actually thinks instead of spewing prejudice....
I'm sure the lawyers would love it if, in addition to being an automaton operating a large machine, it were also in control of deer-fragging equipment. (a.k.a. ye olde BFG)
Now i know where our Prince Claus has been hanging out lately... i admit he's a bit of a stiff, but he's no robot! I wonder if Queen Beatrix was sitting next to him...
Re:reasons Klaus won't work out on American roadwa
by
joshsisk
·
· Score: 1
Their reaction time to the next drive slaming on the breaks due to a deer crossing the road is nil.
I don't feel very secure about this... I mean, can "Klaus" tell the difference between a deer in the road or a big paper bag/empty cardboard box? What about driving in areas that have poor road conditions? Or in my area, where during the rainy season, it is not uncommon have visibilty drop down to five feet or less, either due to rain or morning fog?
I think the mythical "computer controlled" highway is just that... a myth. Maybe this will happen after we're all so old that we have to have computer controlled cars to drive, but in the next fifty years... Forget it.
At least in America... I don't know anything about Europe so I can't comment, but here in the USI see lots old cars on the road, ones that are 20 to 30 years old. These cars will ruin the "networked highway" for everyone else. Not to mention, America's driving ethic will keep resistance to this idea high. I remeber a scene in a movie, I believe "Singles" where the main character is extolling the virtues of public transportation to his girlfriend and she says something like: "Yeah, you're right... But I love my car. I love to drive."
This is the average, non technical, non geek American. They love their cars. They bitch about how cars used to be better and how they "watched their Dad fix his car when they were kids and why do they have to make things so damn complicated these days." This is what will delay the networked highway. And I'm one of them... It's about a 30-40 minute drive to my work. And I love it, It like meditation to me. I would buy an networkable car for the cool factor, but turn it off.
Josh Sisk
Re:It is Firts of April in Germany
by
3247
·
· Score: 1
It is Firts of April in Germany
No, not yet. (99 minutes to go.)
This is actually real but rarely news: There was an article in c't 5/2000. The current issue (and the one which contains the April fool's jokes) is 07/2000.
Will the move to automated driving systems make our journeys out on the highways any better though? Well, this depends. For some folks who don't really enjoy the "driving task", then yes, it might. But besides the time factor, why do people drive, rather than taking public transit? For the thrill of the open road, the feeling of power when you are behind the wheel. Robot drivers take that away! Are we as a society willing to give up that gift that Ford gave us over 80 years ago? Since the Ford produced the first car for the people, our culture, socity, and lives have been transformed by them. What this means is good news for the enviorment (Computer Cars would probally drive in the most fuel efficent way), but less personal pleasure. As big a fan of the enviroment as I am (I'd rather see NO cars...), people will never give up that personal love afair with the car. All that said, I'd still love to sit in one, but only if it ran linux. Knowing MS, the car would have brakes v 1.23, and tires v 1.02, and there'd be a conflict, and you coulnd't stop.
-- Driven by 100% sarcasm - fueled by the need to be heard.
What we realy need to do
by
logicnazi
·
· Score: 1
What they really should do is make a human look alike robot and see if they can pass him throough the DMV's driving test. No more waiting in lines at the DMV send your robot instead.
--
If you liked this thought maybe you would find my blog nice too:
Alack! why do the denizens of Slashdot Insist on the spelling of "Beowulf" With an O as its final vowel? Truly it pains me; those who doubt My authority should consult This Wednesday's New York Times. Does my Nobel Prize naught signify?
What would happen with car insurance?...I can see it now... Me dialing Nationwide Insurance... Nationwide: Hello? Me: Hi I would like to get a quote. Nationwide: Okay, on what kind of car? Me: A 2001 Mazda 626. Nationwide: Okay, and what automated driver do you have? Me: Microsoft Driver 2001. Nationwide: I'm sorry, we don't insure Microsoft automated drivers. Me: Well, it CAME with the car! Nationwide: You will either have to upgrade to Microsoft Driver 2005 or switch to another system. Me: What about Linux? Nationwide: We don't support Linux. Sorry. Me: Damn Bill Gates!...It could happen...
Didn't you learn anything from the Futurama episode with the crazed robot Santa?
I guess not everybody watches Futurama but they had an episode with a robot Santa that went out of control a long time before and ever since then, everybody ran inside before night on Christmas so they wouldn't be killed by the robot. It was a pretty funny episode if I remember correctly.
Re:reasons Klaus won't work out on American roadwa
by
bluGill
·
· Score: 2
6) Refuses to tailgate car in front of it
Accully I would want him to tailgate the driver in front of him. However the car in front should also be controlled by Klaus. The car right in front will see a slight drop in gas milage, but that is more then made up for by the next car behind savings. Remember, these are all computer controlled cars. Their reaction time to the next drive slaming on the breaks due to a deer crossing the road is nil.
Bicyclists use the drafting principal to ride 25 mph all day in a race, where the average lone biker is doing well to maintain 15 mph.
mmm. A lifetime of learning--20 is too late
by
hawk
·
· Score: 2
There's something too that. We can't even teach lots of people.
After being at a school with several thousand foreign students, I'm inclined to believe that some of them can *never* be taught to drive.
It's not that they're foreign; it's that they've rarely been in a car before arriving in the U.S. Here (and in other developed countries) we've been in cars from birth, and flowing through traffic. That very flow is missing from these folks; it's entirely an artificial environment. There's some amount of instinct we pick up along the way. Maybe it's like language; far more easily and naturally learned while young.
As a group, those learning to drive here aren't merely worse than more experienced drivers. As a group, they seem to be worse than new drivers (as a group).
If we can't teach this to people, it's going to be really hard to teach it to a machine.
hawk, pondering
There can be only one. (n/t)
by
MenTaLguY
·
· Score: 2
--
DNA just wants to be free...
Re:Automobile autopilot
by
Jeffrey+Baker
·
· Score: 2
Yeah, that would be pretty great right up until some joker painted reflective stripes across the road leading into a bridge support. Then you'd be glad that the robot was tracking the reflective lines!
Great, now when his Aibo gets sick, he can drive it to the vet. Or is that the electrician?
-=Bob
Re:But where's the Fahrvergn�gen in that!?
by
Bearpaw
·
· Score: 2
Actually, public transport is for people who realize that there's not much Fahrvergnügen to be had sitting in an overpriced metal box on a six-lane parking lot, sucking up carbon monoxide fumes.
I wonder if they're aiming this thing to be capable of driving around a city scene (e.g. Manhattan). A very hard problem, no doubt.
But heck, likely the benefit of most value to the majority of drivers out there would be automatic highway driving. And that wouldn't be nearly as difficult to implement. All you'd really need are two electric eyes to watch the road lines (keeping the car centered in its lane), and a distance sensor to keep the car a safe distance from the one in front. Making it safe to, say, read a book while you're cruising along.
Such a system has much room for refinement, of course (automatic passing?) but it would make highway driving less of a bore/chore, and would likely reduce a great number of accidents caused by falling asleep at the wheel.
-- iSKUNK!
Re:Automobile autopilot
by
Straker+Skunk
·
· Score: 2
Things like major obstacles entering the road (e.g. deer, or maybe a swerving car) and such would be tricky to handle. At least they're rare circumstances. You might have the car sound an alarm, to let the driver take the wheel and do what it necessary.
Or possibly, a rear-facing distance sensor could detect how far back is the car behind you, and if the space is wide enough, the system could then safely slam on the brakes. (Passengers had better be using their seat belts!)
Traffic jams, slowdowns, etc. would need no special logic to handle. As long as the car is aware of where the next one in front of it is, all it needs to do is drive at the highest speed that keeps it a safe distance away, without exceeding the limit. So if it ran into a traffic snarl, it would (in theory) slow down automatically.
Refinements: 1) Be able to dodge a deer that all of a sudden jumps into the middle of the road. 2) Know when you will want to exit the highway so that you don't pass it... 3) See far ahead for the a$$hole who tries to pass someone in your lane, so as to avoid a head-on collision. 4) Know when to slow down if it detects a cop...:) 5) Know when to slow down if it's a construction zone or an otherwise lower speed limit than before. 6) basically just be able to predict what other drivers are going to do... accidents that you can avoid by swerving/slowing down, the computer would have to be able to do too.
Re:But where's the Fahrvergn�gen in that!?
by
Randy+Rathbun
·
· Score: 2
It is also extremely dangerous. What if the car in front blows a tire, throws a rod, breaks a driveshaft, has a wheel come off? They are mechanical things and mechanical things break.
There is a show on the Discovery Channel called "Future Cars" or something like that which deals with robocars. I suggest you check it out. It is a great show.
Re:Puts a whole new spin on "System Crash"
by
overshoot
·
· Score: 2
Actually, back in 86 our team had a poster up with a picture of a pilot punching out of an F16, and the caption, "Fly-by-wire gives a whole new meaning to 'system crash.'"
-- Lacking <sarcasm> tags,/. substitutes moderation as "Troll."
On the dots - I forgot about snow country (I live in Phoenix, Arizona - maybe that's part of the problem - though I have seen it snow here). You are correct in stating the snowplow would "eat" them.
A solution to this would be to use "magnetic" paint (I don't even know if such a thing can be created, but it seem feasible) - ie, the paint would have magnetized particles suspended in it, so that when it is put down, it would have a weak magnetic field that could be detected by the sensors on the car (in fact, the car should have both the smart dot sensors and mag dot sensors, and smart dots should have a magnet buried in them as well, in the event of failure of the dot's electronics). This is one solution. Another solution would be to bury the dots flush with the road surface, though this might be expensive.
I don't think you would have to put down as many dots as you have on the roads today, only a smart/mag dot every 10-20 feet, with regular dots placed between them. Maybe with the mag-paint striping as well.
I agree that it is fun driving, but my solution is more for the interstate driving/commuter driving crowds (I tend to like doing "fun" driving on back country freeways/roads/dirt roads - off the map stuff), and it doesn't remove choice from the driving, it merely acts as a safer form of cruise control.
-- Reason is the Path to God - Anon
Re:But where's the Fahrvergn�gen in that!?
by
Saige
·
· Score: 2
I like driving. I take long car trips just for the sheer pleasure of it. If this freedom is taken away from me I will be very very unhappy.
Oh, I'm sure that, at least for a while, there will be plenty of space for everyone who likes to drive to do so. Of course, it may not be on the public interstates, where it may be mandated to use autosteering. Of course, that would really help traffic problems, and we could end up getting there twice as fast without any congestion much more easily... but if you want to stick to your driving, I'm sure they'll allow you to at least on the side roads. ---
-- "You know your god is man-made when he hates all the same people you do."
Re:But where's the Fahrvergn�gen in that!?
by
Saige
·
· Score: 2
I can't see the purpose in robot cars.... except maybe for people who CAN NOT drive themselves. Whish is what public transport is for.
You're saying that not once have you had to go somewhere, such as a long trip, and not wanted to drive the entire way?
I personally would love to be able to enter my destination and not have to drive the vehicle. And if everyone else was using automated vehicles also, imagine how much safer the road would be - I wonder what percentage of accidents are due to driver error? 99%? I'd stop having to worry about all the idiots on the road. ---
-- "You know your god is man-made when he hates all the same people you do."
Re:But where's the Fahrvergn�gen in that!?
by
speek
·
· Score: 2
That's why the future of software is massive regulation. And the Open Source movement won't be allowed to play in Real Life.
-- First, make it work, then make it right, then make it fast, then, make it bloated!
Re:The Purpose of Robot Cars
by
speek
·
· Score: 2
If the only thing a robot car had to deal with was other robot cars and the road, I would agree. But robot cars will still have to deal with tire blowouts, deer, fallen trees, ice patches, snow plows, salt on the camera lens, low-visibility conditions, flooding, legacy systems (unauthorized human drivers breaking the law), etc. After taking all these things into account, robot cars will probably be able to drive faster and closer together than good human drivers, but not quite as extreme as you indicate.
-- First, make it work, then make it right, then make it fast, then, make it bloated!
does he ride the clutch? does he burn out? does he squeal the tires? does he tailgate old ladies? does he race those stickered-up-chromed-out 89 civic hatchbacks?
Exactly!! I have 'lost' to many a 'Vette because the owner was too dumb to know when to stop the game. Owner looks at the speedo, thinks "I've still got 20 to go" and ignores the fact he's already doing 120, and that there is a turn 1/4 mile up, and that there are cars approaching too rapidly to continue the game for any longer.
The TT's are even more funny though. Car is unstable. They've recalled it three times for a mixture of spoiler, brake and front end tweaks to keep it on the road. I've driven the 'stock' model. At 70, they're great. At eighty they act like the road is wet, and at 100 you might as well be on ice. I wasn't willing to go any faster in it.
Exactly!! I have 'lost' to many a 'Vette because the owner was too dumb to know when to stop the game. Owner looks at the speedo, thinks "I've still got 20 to go" and ignores the fact he's already doing 120, and that there is a turn 1/4 mile up, and that there are cars approaching too rapidly to continue the game for any longer.
The TT's are even more funny though. Car is unstable. They've recalled it three times for a mixture of spoiler, brake and front end tweaks to keep it on the road. I've driven the 'stock' model. At 70, they're great. At eighty they act like the road is wet, and at 100 you might as well be on ice. I wasn't willing to go any faster in it.
-- .sig: Now legally binding!
Puts a whole new spin on "System Crash"
by
Cy+Guy
·
· Score: 2
Re:Expect this in a real situation.
by
theonetruekeebler
·
· Score: 2
I know numerous engineering examples, from the Space Shuttle to chemical plants, where the "dumb" computer, uttlerly lacking intuition, outperforms the human.
With due respect, the situations you describe are very controlled environments, and while the consequences of error are obviously much higher than smacking into a lamp post, nearly all the variables of interest are within the control of the software. Please note that when--for example--there are high, gusty cross winds at a given landing site, Shuttle Control postpones or relocates the landing, because they know this is a situation outside the software's capabilities. On the road, there are an astonishing number of things outside one's control. Sooner or later the car's software will come across a situation it can't handle, but whose solution would be blindingly obvious to a human.
--
-- This is not my sandwich.
Re:But where's the Fahrvergn�gen in that!?
by
ucblockhead
·
· Score: 2
There are things automated cars can do that humans can't. For example, if they are networked together, they can "convoy", each car driving down the freeway at seventy miles per hour, only a foot from the car in front of it. Because they are in constant communication, they can all stop and start safely despite being at a distance that would be wildly unsafe for humans.
Cars closer together means that you can fit many more on the freeway, which means that you have less traffic.
What they didn't show is the female robot in passenger seat, critical to making it drive faster.
--
The cake is a pie
Re:reasons Klaus won't work out on American roadwa
by
technos
·
· Score: 2
Actually, I usually don't move. Hurst independant brake lockers, with momentary safety toggles bolted to the shifter. There's a small bit of intentional air in the front circuit, so I can optionally grind the car forward. The only one in danger is the fellow behind me, and even then only from the smoke off the tires. Ruining a pair of cheap Thompson and intentionally smacking into some geriatric in a LeSabre are very different things!
Oh, yeah. My last ticket was in March of 1997. The exhaust on my F-150 was a little loud.
Actually, knowing MS, you'd have Microsoft Brakes 2000 and Microsoft Tires 2000 but if you didn't buy Microsoft Axle 2000, Microsoft Hubcaps 2000, and Microsoft Timing Belts 2000 but rather went for Corel Hubcaps 2000, Netscape Timing Belts 2000, and Ford Hubcaps, your car wouldn't be able to start, but if you did manage to get it to start, your hazard lights would go off, the horn would start to blow inconcessantly, and the only way to turn them off would be to hold the accelerator pedal down while holding down the Microsoft Power Windows button, and at the same time holding down the cruise control button. Then it would shut down so you could replace the offending parts.
I think I'd have to buy an Apple Macintosh car. They'd come in five flavors and have one button in the entire car, which depending on what the car thought you wanted to do, would do it. The hood of the car would be a translucent color, so you can peer through there and go WOW but never open it to touch anything. My "blueberry" car would have the "new car" smell of artificial blueberries...
A Robot Car. A perfect digital map. A network flow optimization algorithm that gets you to where you want to go, taking into account current and historical traffic patterns.
Yup, some people are able to do already in their heads but read on:
No traffic lights, no stop signs, no speed limits. Your car will be able to avoid other traffic without these things designed to make driving safe for imperfect human drivers.
Except during rush hour in the biggest most congested cities, most roads are >50% unused. Huh? you say... traffic is everywhere? No, most places, people tend to leave at least 1 car length, and cars tend to travel in "packs" because some slow clod won't let others pass.
None of that. Cars are *right* upto one another. Nearly no space. They already have this in a special highway in San Diego. And no attitutes, no slow people to block your way... everyone is going really really fast.
And that's not it. Stick in an entertainment center, a reclining chair... man you're set. Get a good book, maybe pop a movie into the DVD drive. And since speed limits are a thing of the past, you'll get there in 3 hours going at 200km/h. And it'll be safer.
3 hands, 3 legs, satellite navigation systems, lasers, stereocameras, powerful computers, hughe research org/university to back it up. And the damn thing still cant play criss cross in traffic and drive in and out of NYC the way any teenager with a license around here can. It's moments like these that make me laugh at matrixes of all kinds and feel safe from any sort of "computer takeover" doomsday scenario:)
So when's the robot sleigh coming? ---- Don't underestimate the power of peanut brittle
-- ADVENTURERS! - ANTIHERO FOR HIRE - CARDMASTER CONFLICT
Expect this in a real situation.
by
tylerh
·
· Score: 2
Hofstadter commits a comman fallacy: the new technology can't mimic the way human does it, so the machine can't do it. *BZZZT* I know numerous engineering examples, from the Space Shuttle to chemical plants, where the "dumb" computer, uttlerly lacking intuition, outperforms the human.
All that cognition isn't always a benefit: it also makes more mistakes possible. A "dumb" driving algorithm might actually be safer because (1) it doesn't get tired, (2) it doesn't make erroneous assumption, (3) it's performance won't be degraded by emotional state.....
-- "one treats others with courtesy not because they are gentlemen or gentlewomen, but because you are" --G. Henrichs
3 legs huh... are we SURE the third on is really a leg? It IS a guy, after all... aardWolf64
It was all going so well until...
by
unitron
·
· Score: 3
"Observers said the test was going quite smoothly up until seconds before the fiery spectacle when the robot began the 'Talking on the cell phone and putting on make-up in the rear-view mirror' portion of the test."
--
I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.
Dont sue me, the Dummy was driving!
by
Bald+Wookie
·
· Score: 3
Imagine the look on the face of the state trooper. Klaus is driving, holding a Lowenbrau in his fourth arm. Youre curled up in the back seat taking a nap, and your AIBO is sticking his head out the window.
I really dont see robotic chauffers as the future of automated driving. It seems like it would be better to mount all of this stuff in the car itself. Granted they do take things up a notch on the cool factor. Personally I am pushing for these auto-drive systems to be implemented like bumper cars. Get a big ass grid, metal freeways, and put bumpers all around. See Mr Gore, you can have your electric cars now...
I think automated highway driving will become a reality long before fully automated robotic cars can handle city driving. On car trips I often enjoy the scenery and the conversation, but I have no problem handing the driving over to a computer. Imagine taking a nap during the mindless drive between Chicago and St. Louis. Anyway, I would much rather have the computer drive than my girlfriend.
-B
Re:reasons Klaus won't work out on American roadwa
by
technos
·
· Score: 3
Does not blare horn 2 seconds after light turns green
I usually wait to the count of one and start turning the tires after that. If seeing a huge chunk of Detroit steel launching itself at your back end, coiled in the dense fumes of burning rubber and redline screaming at the tune of 6000 RPM doesn't get you off the line, you deserve to be roadkill.
-- .sig: Now legally binding!
Re:Don't ever expect this in a real situation.
by
spagthorpe
·
· Score: 3
Realize that it's foggy, or likely to be icy and what patches of the road are likely to be icy and adjust appropriately?
Actually, yes. It's been done. A number of car manufacturers have been working with active suspension systems that take this into consideration.
Notice a small child at the side of the road and slow down or and be ready to stop immediately?
Through the use of infrared, no problem.
Notice a basketball being shot at a hoop above a hedge that obscures a driveway and assume that children might be playing behind the hedge and slow down?
Subtle difference than the little girl, but yes again.
Notice a driver late at night that's weaving slightly, pick him out for a drunk and take appropriate action to avoid him?
Yes again.
See the reflection of the eyes of a deer in the bushes and be prepared for it to jump in the road?
Same deal again....
Other obsticles considered....
Yes, I think that a computer system could do much of the above. In fact, I don't think most humans do most of the above.
More importantly, here are some things that it can do much better than a human:
+ Not fall sleep behind the wheel
+ Not drink and drive
+ Much faster reflexes, and imagine the ability to be wired into the ABS and traction control mechanisms of the car, so that you KNEW where the limits really were.
+ See things ahead in the roadway that we can't with normal vision. Yes, I'm aware of the IR feature in one of the new cars coming out.
+ Not slam on it's brakes and hit a tree, schoolbus, or whatever if a squirrel runs across the street in front of it.
+ Connect via network to other robo-cars in the fast lane, close together, so that they may all use drafting to reduce energy costs. Because each knows what the other is doing, no pileups.
+ No road rage.
The list really goes on, but the point is, that there are many things that a computer can do well in place of a human.
Certainly, there is a lot of intuition and experience that it will be very hard and even impossible to duplicate. I'm not saying that it will be a technology that will eliminate the need for human intervention, but I can see the day, when I can put my car on auto-pilot on the freeway and take a nap. Sure would make those 5-hour trips to Vegas a lot nicer....
--
WWJD -- What Would Jimi Do?
(Smash amp, burn guitar, take home the groupies)
But where's the Fahrvergn�gen in that!?
by
Bug-Y2K
·
· Score: 3
I can't see the purpose in robot cars.... except maybe for people who CAN NOT drive themselves. Whish is what public transport is for. --chuck goolsbee
This page describes a car driven by a Linux computer. It's called the ARGO project, and it's in Italy. It's driven a long distance around Italy in what they called the "MilleMiglia in Automatico Tour".
Don't ever expect this in a real situation.
by
brad.hill
·
· Score: 4
Robot drivers may be fine for controlled situations like factory floors or closed courses, but they'll never be able to approach real drivers for real world situations.
Douglas Hofstadter (AI researcher and author of the wonderful Godel, Escher, Bach) comments on this very problem in his latest book, Le Ton Beau De Marot. He says the problem is as difficult as good machine translation, and that it's extremely unlikely a machine will ever do a good job.
Driving a car is actually one of the most complex things we do. An incredible amount of awareness and thought goes into it. Can a computer:
Realize that it's foggy, or likely to be icy and what patches of the road are likely to be icy and adjust appropriately?
Notice a small child at the side of the road and slow down or and be ready to stop immediately?
Notice a basketball being shot at a hoop above a hedge that obscures a driveway and assume that children might be playing behind the hedge and slow down?
Notice a driver late at night that's weaving slightly, pick him out for a drunk and take appropriate action to avoid him?
See the reflection of the eyes of a deer in the bushes and be prepared for it to jump in the road?
See a driver with lots of dents in his car and give him a bit more space?
Judge from the way the wind just blew that big box into the middle of the road that it's empty and safe to hit if stopping suddenly might cause an accident?
See the canoe on the roof of the car ahead of you isn't very securely tied down and pull back or change lanes in case it falls?
These are just a few of the thousands of situations that come up routinely in driving and which try the intuition of even the smartest human drivers every second we're on the road. As much of an accomplishment as this is, it's mostly empty PR. A computer will not be able to safely navigate a car on public streets for a LONG time, if ever.
Thoughts on computer guided vehicles...
by
cr0sh
·
· Score: 4
The problems with creating a computer guided vehicle are enormous. Just getting the computer to recognize the lines, etc of a road without veering and such, and doing it in realtime - that is a huge problem. Doing the same on a normal road when you have four or five (or more) cars around you, with normal humans (and the woman in the Expedition putting on makeup and chatting on the cell phone - yikes!) is near impossible. Then comes avoiding the small stuff (kids, balls, cats - well, maybe not cats - just kidding)...
I think we shouldn't be concentrating on a complete computer guided car concept, but more on an advanced cruise control for vehicles. Front and rear looking radar (maybe side radar too), combined with a simple vision system (a single B/W low-res cam should do OK here), and smart dots - these things could be done in such a way to make an easy an affordable "smart" cruise control for the freeway commute or interstate drive.
The radar portion would be for speed and avoidance control - this portion is already in limited use in luxury vehicles, as well as some commercial vehicles. The cam system would be forward looking, and would be a system to do edge detection - to help keep the car centered going down a lane. The processing power to do the real-time edge detection and centering should be able to be accomplished with current cpu's, at max maybe a small Beowulf style cluster parallel computer (to process in sections of the image - kinda like the 8x8 processing of jpegs). The final portion would be the smart dots...
What I am calling a smart dot here would be the only infrastructure change needed - and if such a thing hasn't already been created and patented, well, it probably should've been. If not, then what follows I am placing under the GPL - the design, and implementation of anything remotely like it (I doubt this will hold up in court, though). Anyhow...
A smart dot would replace those dots that separate the lanes on the freeway. The new dots would be similar, except that they would have a small circuit in them that put out a very low power 900 Mhz signal, that can only be detected by being near to the dot. The lower edge of the dot would be 3M reflective white, the upper top curved portion would remain clear, to focus sunlight onto a small solar cell to recharge a small NiMH batttery that powers the thing. This "lens" would only be about the size of a quarter or so, maybe even a dime size hole would do it. At any rate, the rest of the dot would be the 3M white, so at night (the battery should be able to last through a night of use - this thing will be very low power) it will show up in the headlamps of the car as normal. This same style dot could be used for the frustum/rectangular style dots, with only a few simple mods.
All the dots emit the low power signal, so low you must be within a foot or less to pick the signal up. Sensors on either side of the car would pick the signal up, so that the car knows it is drifting, and can compensate left or right, and update what it is seeing in the camera vision system to account for the drift. These dots would be the last line of defense (well, not the last line - since this IS a cruise control, the driver is still behind the wheel, and can take over in an emergency). The dots could also emit information, such as a certain exit coming up, or cars need to slow down for road work ahead, or merge left/right (they could be programmable as well - maybe these things use a funky iPic, like that webserver). If they really wanted to be cheap, the dots could encase small rare-earth magnets, and hall effect sensors would be placed on the cars (with appropriate compensation for the earth's magnetic field). However, these kind of dots wouldn't be as flexible, though they would cost only fractions of a penny more than the current dots in use, and probably wouldn't take much to retool for manufacturing them, vs the smart dots.
This kind of system, while not as whiz-bang, would solve a LOT of problems (such as people not being able to merge properly, and vehicle density issues vs speed). It might make traffic move smoother during rush hour, and make it easier to get on and off freeways during these times.
It won't allow you to read a paper or take a nap and catch those few extra minutes of sleep while you go to work - but when it comes to cars, I wouldn't trust any system to allow me to do that!
-- Reason is the Path to God - Anon
The real problems are legal.
by
ucblockhead
·
· Score: 4
The real problem with getting automated drivers on the road is legal, not technical. The way the legal system works (at least in the US), any company that sells these is at a huge risk of being sued out of existence. Even if automated cars are one hundred times safer than the average human driver, the lawyers will still pounce on the company that makes these for a huge amount on the first accident involving one. And given the way juries often work, they'd likely win.
That is the trouble with new technologies. The legal system often demands they not just be better, but that they be perfect.
Will the move to automated driving systems make our journeys out on the highways any better though? Will we end up leaning out of the window and yelling "Stupid MS Driver"? Will we have robots giving us the finger (arm, apendage, tentacle if bioengineering gets going) as they overtake us on the hard shoulder? Will people hack their robot driver to go faster, park on rear-bumper doing 100mph or cut more corners in an effort to avoid traffic lights/ pedestrians/ the police? Will we be attacked with a denial of driving attack by some script kiddie? Or worse, have a UCITA-like end-of-license removal where the originator of the driving OS produces a new version and wants us to upgrade? Stay tuned... I like the look of the bicycle personally:-)
Cheers,
Toby Haynes
-- Anything I post is strictly my own thoughts and doesn't
necessarily have anything to do with the opinions of IBM.
reasons Klaus won't work out on American roadways
by
Lurking+Grue
·
· Score: 5
1) Does not properly extend middle finger at random times 2) Actually comes to complete stop at stop signs 3) Signals lane changes 4) Cannot operate a cell phone while driving 5) Does not blare horn 2 seconds after light turns green 6) Refuses to tailgate car in front of it 7) Does not drive 55 mph in school zone 8) Does not drive 15 mph in fast lane 9) Stops for pedestrians in crosswalk 10) Actually passed driving test
Knight Rider Revisited!!!!
by
BRock97
·
· Score: 5
Wow, and people laughed when Kitt the talking car was driving Michael Knight around while he slept! We have arrived people!
Michael, I have some bad news.
What is it Klaus? Are we running behind?
No, but I did hit two pedestrians and drove through a corn field.
But we aren't running behind.
No.
Good then.
Bryan R.
--
Bryan R. The price of freedom is eternal vigilance, or $12.50 as seen on eBay.....
Slashdot Mirror
...that you'll be coughing up diamonds!"
No, no, no. I said autobahn, not an autobot. Start over.
Hmm, if they were to become available, I'd head right for McDonald's, pick up a cup of coffee, and "spill" it on said robot. When everything shorts out and crashes, my family has it made for the rest of their lives. What right does McDonald's have selling coffee capable of killing me?? Woohoo!
As others have said, the problem is you rely entirely on the lead car's radar to see deer and the like. But the other down side is you must have only one car type. Every one in the convoy must have the same brakes et al so they can stop simultaneously. I'm sure the MPAA would love to branch into the car bidness, but it's not for me.
Sure you can have 43,572 sensors for every little screw/nut in the car, but something will inevitably happen to that lead car (airplane or UFO falls out of the sky) and then everyone is screwed.
We don't need robot drivers in a human controlled world. We need to replace the entire infrastructure to allow computers to do ALL driving!
:-)
How it would work: Computerised cars and computerised signal towers every few hundred feet or so. The signal towers would control pretty much everything the cars do.
All the human would have to do is tell it to go to whatever address. Then take a nap!
Computers should be able to do everything more efficiently, working together with each other. This should have side benefits like saving gas and almost eliminating traffic deaths.
Heck, it would probably even be cheaper in the long run. Cars could have many of their controls removed, computers are cheap, and like I mentioned, it should be able to save on gas.
I guess the biggest barrier to this is just that - replacing the infrastructure. We could use the same roads (at least for a while) but we'd need huge amounts of computer equipment, and then we'd need to force all human drivers off the roads. THAT is what would be hard.
Witzig, aber nicht ganz so practish.
Does this mean the end of their "Drivers wanted" ad campaign, now that they're obsolete? ;>
Not to mention that by "drafting" each other, the cars would become more fuel efficient thanks to less resistance due to air drag...
It's YOUR robot, YOU pay. ;>
Who would want a robot when you can drive this fine piece of VW engineering yourself? I wouldn't!
How about "like a moron?"
Like we don't have enough traffic jams? Do we really have to make robots to add to the traffic? Do the have a middle finger?
What's this space for? All my thoughts are succinct enough to be completely expressed in the subject line.
Nick
-- "It's a sad day for American capitalism when a man can't fly a midget on a kite over Central Park" - Jim Moran
Mercedes have had a computer operated car for years. They tested it on the German Autobahns.
Deleted
well the germans *do* love david hassellhoff ;)
-- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
so that would be following the ethernet philosophy of packet collision ;)
-- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
Minor problem... We don't use dots up here where it snows. The snow plows would eat them. (Or the salt.)
:)
Besides, I like driving. I've been known to just pick a direction, and drive that way for a while. Of course, this is much more fun when you're driving a fun car, like a 944TS.
But besides the time factor, why do people drive, rather than taking public transit? For the thrill of the open road, the feeling of power when you are behind the wheel. Robot drivers take that away!
Well, the time factor is a big thing. And convenience. Let's see, my choices are:
1. take my car to the store, get there in about 10 minutes
2. walk to the bus stop, wait for the bus to show up, hope I've got exact change, find a seat that isn't too disgusting, endure the stares of drooling weirdos, transfer a couple of times all the while seeing parts of town that are way out of my way, and then finally arrive at the closest bus stop, which is a ten minute walk from my destination.
While in University, I didn't have a car, and having a car is immensely more convenient than a bus for far more reasons than "the thrill of the open road".
Actually, I do like driving, sometimes, so I would like the option to drive myself. But there are many times I wish my car could drive itself. Times like:
- I'm tired and I just want to get home
- really long trips
- I don't know where I am (imagine an automated driver hooked up to GPS and a mapping system)
- busy cities. I hate driving in busy cities, especially in downtown areas.
What did they say? :)
-- Thrakkerzog
.. the much needed middle finger?
modern day geek.
--
So, you're saying an automated vehicle wouldn't suffer from "code rage"?
AAAHHH!! A pun! Get it off! Get it off!
But then again, I could be wrong.
You know, you're rather bigoted. Either that, or you have no conception of the limitations of public transit. Except in major cities, public transit is limited to major routes, etc. What about getting to public transit? What about if you want to go from point A to point C, which would be a 15 minute drive, but if you have to take public transit you have to go from point A to point B, and then to point C, which would be an hour drive?
Try public transit and see how useful it is, and also how limited it is.
-- Error: Cannot find file REALITY.SYS - Universe halted, please reboot!
I wish I had an arm sticking out of my head. That, and be able to drive without running into things.
You never really know how close to the edge you can go until you fall off.
drove in public for the first time around a German test circuit
Was it a live test (as implied by "in public") or was a it a closed track (as implied by "test circuit")?
--
Linux MAPI Server!
http://www.openone.com/software/MailOne/
(Exchange Migration HOWTO coming soon)
Quick sell stocks in the chauffeur industry. Computers are taking over!!!
Of course this appears to be a higher standard than many human drivers are held to. Particularly the part about slowing down for bad weather.
Anybody remember the NHAA Project from CMU back in 1995? An autonomous steering vehicle took two Robotics Institute researchers all the way from Pittsburgh to San Diego, with the computer program RALPH steering more than 99% of the time. Granted, the people have to handle the throttle and brakes, and it only works out on highways, but that is still quite amazing considering that took place some fregging 5 years ago.
And i bet it can drive better then most people in my city.
But does he dream of Aibo's or Electric sheep?
--
Gonzo Granzeau
Gonzo Granzeau
"Nothing the god of biomechanics wouldn't let you into heaven for.." -Roy Batty
Now all we need is a utility to have this system kick in after one too many good German beers....
#include "disclaim.h"
"All the best people in life seem to like LINUX." - Steve Wozniak
#include "disclaim.h"
"All the best people in life seem to like LINUX." - Steve Wozniak
Atleast they use a clone of the Porsche Tiptronic automatic transmission. Thankfully they offer most of them in Manual here in the US as well.
Just can't wait until the Multitronic makes it's way to US. Hopefully a real CVT for once.
What? The article didn't mention anything about the robot applying makeup and backing into light posts while driving. And although it will dodge objects, it won't flip the car going 60 mph to avoid a little kitty. It knows that a little thump-thump is ok sometimes.
It'd be easier than cleaning a person off the inside of their car, don't you think? Ever hit a deer going 75 mph? Didn't think so, because you wouldn't be alive if you did.
Dodge a deer? Why? It should be able to frag the deer. It'd be much more exciting and safe. Also it'd need some gps gear (which I believe it has) to predict traffic jams and reroute your trip.
That's true. Why does every movie with Germans in it by americans portray them as evil geniuses or terrorists? My guess is that because Jewish folk write the screenplays and they have a big grudge against Germanic people, all germans regardless of german americans or what. Not every german worldwide was involved with and condoned ww2 but that's not how the media would have you think. From an engineering standpoint, we'd probably still be riding bicycles and canoeing across rivers if it weren't for the germans. So show some respect.
Talk about a misleading headline - when I first read this I thought the blasted thing had gotten a license!
I remember the days when one used to just
:)
leisurely reply with an OT response, and maybe
get #1.
What the hell happened.
As my father lik@(munch munch)...
Hey! I've seen that car before. I think you were stopped in front of me at a light. Hmmm.
--GnrcMan--
I like driving. I take long car trips just for the sheer pleasure of it. If this freedom is taken away from me I will be very very unhappy.
have to be the red screen of death . . .
No, Blue.
It would be robot blood!
Work for Change & GET PAID!
That's right.
But I don't understand the article:
"German Robot Klaus Passes Driving Test"
and below: "Although Klaus is not ready to take to the public highway,..."
But it's strongly recommended to drive on the highway during your driving test...in Germany.
You have to drive about 45 min. On all kinds of streets!!! I can't imagine that this roboter took the driving test...
I asume that the article on yahoo is crap...
Yours
Michael
I see the testers obeyed the cardinal rule of driving in Italy: stay the hell out of Rome.
--
This is not my sandwich.
As for driving by Ouija board, that would explain a whole lot. It's either that or dice, given the traffic around here.
--
This is not my sandwich.
In fact, in most (all?) countries you have to take your test on a manual, otherwise you will get a licence that limits you to driving only automatic cars.
That's exactly the way it should be. In fact, I'd wager to bet that a *large* portion of the licenced American drivers could not pass a German driving test even *with* an automatic transmission. This country's licensing system is an absolute joke. Five minutes of driving on a lightly-travelled road will not show the examiner much of anything about how the driver will drive in the real world. A real driving test would deal with emergency braking, emergency lane changing, and how to drive in the real world.
An example: thanks to the NHTSA, most Americans think that slower = safer. As a result, I'm often stuck behind soccer moms in their Expeditions who try to merge into Atlanta traffic at 45 mph. Speed doesn't kill, speed differential does (ok, that's velocity, but you get the point). These are things that people are not taught in driving school and not tested on when taking the licensing test. And don't even get me started on lane discipline.
I've always said that if I buy a automatic transmission in the future, I will promptly drive it over a cliff. In my biased view, automatic transmissions are for those who don't really care about driving (with a few exceptions, such as the disabled) and therefore people with automatic transmissions are generally poor drivers compared to manual tranny drivers. Of course this theory has to be adjusted for socioeconomic class, but the basic idea still stands.
One question about this automatic driver: can he parallel park without scraping the corners of the other parked cars? Because God knows most people can't.
-- "Complacency is a far more dangerous attitude than outrage." -Naomi Littlebear
But how many of the test administrators want to spend more than 5 minutes with the test taker. The wages the BMV in my area pays (minimum) does not offer any incentive to go out of my way to do a job well.
I think if a DMV tester actually took the time to make sure the testee knew how to drive, (s)he would be reprimanded. Apparently the DMV as a whole feels that their current test is satisfactory in determining if someone is skilled enough to drive. The new testing procedure needs to come from the top - it needs to be completely overhauled nationwide.
I for one would not want to be driving a manual transmission for the simple reason that it IS 1 more thing to have to concentrate on. I don't know where you live, but around here it snows and the road gets slick. I have other thing to concentrate on, like the moron in front of me, besides switching gears.
I live in Atlanta, which certainly has it's share of traffic and idiot drivers. However, I can't remember one time when having to shift hindered me from driving. Unlike so many of my friends, I've never been in an accident when I was behind the wheel. Driving a stick is one of those things that I don't have to think about. Of course the possibility of getting caught in the wrong gear is there, but that really just comes with predicting what is going to happen while driving.
An aside: I happen to drive with a Valentine One. There are many people who claim that radar detectors make the roads more dangerous and that "speed kills." I think this is a fairly narrow view of the subject. I tend to be extremely alert while driving, always scanning the horizon and checking my mirrors. I've found this to be much safer than the sort of passive driving that I see most of the time.
-- "Complacency is a far more dangerous attitude than outrage." -Naomi Littlebear
I can just picture the upcomming Windows port
BSOD will have new meaning
If you want to automate only the "simple" highway driving you still have the problem of handing control back.
The simple solution is to have the robot pull over and stop before the human takes over. Anything else is hard.
When I first saw that image on the article before I enlarged it I thought the car's headrest was the robot's "head"! :)
It reminded me of the art in those old Basic Computer Games books, where the robots look vaguely and comically human.
Gave me a warm fuzzy feeling inside.
---
I wear pants.
I've got the rusted out Camaro thing. People look at the rust, the dents, and the longhair behind the wheel. Then when you wipe them up, they quit laughing. 6.3 with a driven top speed of 165. A few have taken me off the line, and even to 60, but they NEVER lose me. :) (I love the new TT. It keeps pace to 100, at which time the smart drivers stop accelerating and I stroll by them waving. The dumb ones don't and I have to let off before they kill themselves.)
.sig: Now legally binding!
i agree
good suggestion for him, too
But I like the way he drives.
What we need is a rail based "ferry" system. You drive from your home to the station, drive the car onto the train. The train goes at 200 mph (or whatever speed fast trains go these days) to your long distance destination. Then you just drive off the train back onto the clogged roadways of our cities. The best of both worlds.
-------------------------
"After Careful Consideration, Bush Recommends Oil Drilling" - The Onion
I'm reminded of Neal Stephenson's analogy of the various OS's as car dealerships.
Unbreakable toys can be used to break other toys.
IANAAE (I'm not an Aerodynamics Engineer) but I don't think the car in front loses any mileage at all. In fact it gains it because the drag is lessened by the fact that the other car is behind it.
Mmmm.. Donuts
AAARRGGH! If I never hear another car-to-software analogy again it will be too soon. What is it about computer geeks that we like to compare everything we do to cars anyway?!
Mmmm.. Donuts
Manual = more activity, which means you're forced to be MORE ALERT.
Of course, the people you're talking about can't even be bothered to signal, fasten seat belts, or use their brains... so yeah, let 'em doze off and drive into a pole on the side of the highway.
:P
Oops ... shhh!
the reason they use a robot and not the car might be that you can use the carpool-lanes in NW europe :)
So if this computer has overclock errors, gets too hot, or gets a virus, does it become a drunk driver?
Mike Roberto (roberto@soul.apk.net) - AOL IM: MicroBerto
Berto
But wouldn't designing the robot to hande a stick shift make it platform independent? ie. You would only have one robot design that could then be fitted to practically any car regardless of transmission type (Of yourse you might need different shift arm designs for floor vs colum shifters).
-JeremyH
An excerpt:
"In order to test the vehicle extensively under different traffic conditions, road environments and weather, a 2000km journey was undertaken June 1 through June 6, 1998. During this test, ARGO drove autonomously along the Italian highway network, passing through flat areas and hilly regions including viaducts and tunnels. The Italian road network is particularly suited for such an extensive test since it is characterized by quickly varying road scenarios, changing weather conditions and generally a fair amount of traffic. The tour took place on highways and freeways, but the system also proved to work on sufficiently structured rural roads with no intersections."
This is a fairly interesting, linux based, driving platform where the technology is integrated into the car (well integrated the best it could be for the expense taken) instead of acting on the car.
The drafting principle isn't the biggest advantage of this technology. You'll be able to use the road more efficiently by driving closer to the next car and by driving at a constant speed. Especially the last benefit (constant speed) will prevent a lot of traffic jams from forming.
-- Alper
I grew up in Africa and have been in the US for 3 years...
I think that the main cause of the problems you are describing is not that it is impossible to learn how to drive at 20 it's just that no real mechanism exists to do so.
When I arrived in America even simple things like crossing a street were tricky. In Zambia where I lived streets were rare and cars were rarer. (of course in the Zambian cities it's different.) It takes a while to learn to judge speed in cars if you normally travel at walking speed. A lot of things are harder then they seem.
I don't have a car and I don't know how to drive really but I got my drivers license by taking the test 4 times in 2 weeks. I have driven one time since that day about a year ago...
American kids normally learn from their parents at ages 14 to 17. International students normally learn from their friends in a couple months.
Friends don't want to bore you to death with details... They want to make assumptions about your knowledge. And people in their twenties aren't famouse for being safety consious. One's friends may not have had a lot of driving experience themselves.
This doesn't mean that it's not possible for one to learn how to drive at age twenty.
In Zambia I have Missionairies complaining about the driving of young Americans who came over. Driving conditions in America and in Zambia are much different so the Americans were destroying vehicles by driving too fast. The missionairies felt that the Zambians who had never had any driving experience before they came to work for them were much better drivers.
This makes sense to me because in teaching the Zambians how to drive the missionairies had no false assumptions about what the Zambians knew. The Zambians did not feel they needed to impress anyone by driving recklessly as your international students may. The teachers were experienced drivers. There was no presure to be able to handle Dallas traffic right away or pass the drivers test in two weeks.
So yes international students learning to drive may be worse as a group than other new drivers. But it's not because they can't learn it. It's because the teaching mechanism is flawed.
At age 20 the average american has been learning to drive for 5 years. You have to allow for an equally long time before you should start saying that internation students can *never* be taught how to drive.
from the Tom Lehrer album That Was The Year That Was (1965)
Needless to say I dont bother with you motorcycle people. :p
As well you should.
Not many stock cars can get to 80 mph in 4 seconds... =:-OBwah.. Those 'Stickered Up Civics' Annoy the crap out of me.
You and every other human on the road.Just let me start by saying only one euro has taken my car ;-) And.. It was a Blue Acura Integra and uhm.. Whatever he had in that thing it was so freaking fast 0-60 In VERY short order. Under 5.8 Seconds because thats what my car has been timed at.
There has yet to be any four wheeled vehicle that has ever taken me on my ZXLaffs, Anyways I just leave most of them slack jawed because my car looks like a regular beat up 1990 Mustang LX five oh.
It's even more fun when they don't understand the magic of 'Power to Weight Ratios'...Editor's Note: No, the above link isn't a pic me, but the bike is just like mine.
Thad
Thad
I'd stop having to worry about all the idiots on the road.
Yeah. You'd only have to be concerned with buggy code.
Coming in 2004: The Microsoft Beetle. It's their biggest bug yet!
Welcome to Slashdot. Please do not feed the trolls.
Withdrawal before climax is very ineffective and those who try this are usually called "parents."
Wait a minute! That's it!
that's why Bill Gates is rich!
He's never a nice guy, so he always get's a huge amount of coal for christmas. That's now naughty he is with his buisness pracices.
But then he sells the coal to the fuel market and earns millions!
----
Don't underestimate the power of peanut brittle
ADVENTURERS! - ANTIHERO FOR HIRE - CARDMASTER CONFLICT
I also would like to know how it handles unexpected events. For example an animal running out in front of the car. I wonder if it has "panic" responses like slamming on the brakes. If anyone has a link to a site with some more details on this or a similar project, please post it.
ROTFL!!!
But seriously, I'd be really concerned what something like that happens... I mean, drunk drivers are bad enough... but at least we know a drunk driver when we see one. The problem with buggy robot drivers is that, in a future society filled with these things, people will have way too much confidence in these machines. It will be too late to realize your trust was misplaced when the buggy robot drives you off the highway into a tree at 100mph...
And of course, the other side is that future generations of open source hackers will produce an open source GNU driver, and some l33t skr1pt k1dd135 will think it's 3l33t to recompile their driver bot to cut corners and show off what a human driver would never dare to do. Yet another way to impress girls, but definitely a recipe for disaster...
mikre he sophia he tou Mikrosophou.
But I'll bet the bastard STILL won't pick you up at the airport.
Ceci n'est pas une sig.
Many of those failures come on gradually and could be detected by sensors hooked to the computer. If it detects falling tire pressure or something, it could pull out of the convoy and inform the occupants.
Sure there is a chance that something will fail anyway, but I would still think that computers could respond better than any human driver could.
Steve
I wonder why they chose to make him drive a stick shift as opposed to an automatic. He could have one less leg! I know manual transmission cars are more common in Europe, but they have automatics there too and I would think that with a complicated project like this, going with an automatic might be a better idea. Of course the hardest part is not shifting gears, it is navigating in traffic, avoiding obstacles, knowing when to brake, etc, but an automatic would be one less thing for Klaus' creators to worry about.
*cackle* not the obvious exclusion of motorcycles! rofl. One day I pulled up to a couple of guys on some CBR's. I knew in my heart they would leave me behind when we went. I looked over at the guy with a foolish grin and smiled. The light turned green I gunned it.. but alas they were already so far ahead of me I felt like I was not even moving. Laffs. And this was with my car in its current state.. Needless to say I dont bother with you motorcycle people. :p
:-) But I have a huge respect for motorcycles. I just enjoy my cars.
ID be dead if I owned a motorcycle.
And that is another awesome point. You need a car that does not go into lift-off mode to use 600 HP. (No kidding saw on a mag cover walking thru the grocery store. )Honda Civic with 600HP and how they did it!. I was like Uhm.. And the point is.....
Mustangs ive found are rather fun to mod out the ass. I have a 1:11 Saleen Mustang rear end..
ROFL, I am one of those smart drivers. Id be like *sighs* I know I can run this guy.. then id mutter and pull in behind you so we can both be alive in 5 seconds as the mass of traffic rapidly appraoches :p
I do agree my car was recently in an accident. ( NOT MY FAULT ) and someone popped my airbag and busted up my front bumper just a lil. sighs
I would not dream of taking the stock Mustang above 120, had to have a lot of work to keep it feeling 'good' most people dont even understand :p and im like.. listen peeps I can tell :P laff.
Bwah.. Those 'Stickered Up Civics' Annoy the crap out of me.
;-) And..
:p
Just let me start by saying only one euro has taken my car
It was a Blue Acura Integra and uhm.. Whatever he had in that thing it was so freaking fast 0-60 In VERY short order. Under 5.8 Seconds because thats what my car has been timed at.
Laffs, Anyways I just leave most of them slack jawed because my car looks like a regular beat up 1990 Mustang LX five oh.
It is a lot of fun and I just love cars period. Its sort of ironic I suppose but now that I have been able to afford in recent times the engine and 'other' modifications and have even had most of them done to make my car faster I dont even drive like I used to *sigh*. Maybe getting nailed by a suburban doing 70 has something to do with it
Totally offtopic. Jeremy
bah.
arg my mind is fried im trying to memorize new pwords today and they have 58 in them. (gasps dont hax0r me please) 5.2 seconds is how fast my car does 0-60 :-)
Heh, Well he does have three arms im sure the mfinger thing can be hacked.
You are supposed to use your turn signal for lane changing, since when.... heh heh. LAFF it is funny.
Jeremy
It strikes me as somewhat redundant to have an actual robot mechanism driving the car. If you can program a robot to move its arms, shift gears, push on the pedals, etc., it would seem to me that you should be able to program the car itself to drive. Wouldn't it make more sense for a mechanism within the car to do all these tasks, instead of having an extra physical thing to accomplish the task? If you ask me, it seems like it's a bit pointless to introduce an extra physical mechanism with the possibility of failing. Why would you want to worry about an arm/leg malfunction when you could just program the car to take care of all the tasks itself? This is not a rhetorical question, I'm interested in what advantages a robot might have over an on-board computer.
yes. Right now, though, you need a beowolf of Crays to pull it off. Give it 10*18 months, and the computer in your right fingernail could do it no problem.
You should never, never doubt what nobody is sure about.
You quitting proves that the karma kap worked. The most annoying of the whores shut up. --CmdrTaco
Carnegie Mellon has been developing working prototypes of this kind of technology for years. So far, they have automated cars, buses, and trucks. (Can anyone say "Maximum Homerdrive?") check out this link
The news release is almost 3 years old, but it conveys the point.
-j
"If I have seen further, it is by standing upon ye shoulders of Giants"
-Isaac Newton to Robert Hooke
-sigs of the world unite
Can a computer: Realize that it's foggy, or likely to be icy and what patches of the road are likely to be icy and adjust appropriately?
Yes
Notice a driver late at night that's weaving slightly, pick him out for a drunk and take appropriate action to avoid him?
Yes
See the reflection of the eyes of a deer in the bushes and be prepared for it to jump in the road?
Kinda(Infra red)
There is very little technical reason we can't have automated freeway system right now. The biggest hurdle is Funding, Public acceptance.
On a side note, I don't think 50% of current drivers do Half the thing you mentioned. Plus it could be programmed to do some things safer, such as actually Stop when a school bus is dropping off children.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
I liked the the "Surface to Santa Missle" myself... and It was a very funney episode. And I mean funny haha not funny like my spelling...
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
I can hack my neighbors car to make late night runs to the local all night drive-thru and get me a burger!
The scary thing is, they'll want to install a remote shut down system for "emergency's". And what good is that unless they know where your at?
It's not a paranoid as it sounds. I mean even if the people in all the goverment jobs had only are best interests in heart, what about the next generation of officials? McArtheism(sp?) happened once in america, it can happen again.
feel free to replace McArtheism(sp?) with the dictatorship of any other country if you like.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
You have been in an auto accident.
(A)bort, (R)etry, (F)ail?
segfault@bellatlantic.net
I am sure that his motherboard will still make him stop and ask for directions!
segfault@bellatlantic.net
Actualy there is one situation that I can think of that one would prefer a robotic driver. One of my professors is doing research for CalTans (California department of Transpertation). He is designing and prototyping a "shadow vehile" that would follow a truck driven by a human. The theory is that a lot of caltrans workers are hurt when the car the the drive (very slowly) down the road is rear ended by a speeding car. Under this setup the "shadow vehicle" may be totaled but the workers would be safe (the speeder is toast either way). Klaus may put him out of a job.
No one said this technology would make insurance companies obsolete!
"one treats others with courtesy not because they are gentlemen or gentlewomen, but because you are" --G. Henrichs
Nothing exists except atoms and empty space; everything else is opinion.
blah blah blah....
I cant wait for these thing to hit the market. I mean I hate driving long distances. My question is why make a robot why not just make the car do it itself instead of talking up a seat with a robot. Anyway I can really see these cathing on and someday you be able to pick one up at Walmart. :)
I don't feel that any robot is up to outright driving all the time, but as a backup for sleepy drivers, I could see a use. However, I doubt he could drive much worse than some of the people I know
Fight Spammers!
The big advantage to using a robot instead of mounting the gear in the car is that the robot will count towards being able to drive in the carpool lane...
A Call for Open Standards
What manufacturer is working on the Multitronic? Being a Porsche-ophile, and not having heard of it I assume is isn't Porsche.
Nissan is supposed to have some real nice CVT technology. And it is supposed to be on its way to the US. Honda has a CVT version of the Civic that gets good mileage, but not much pep because current production CVT technology don't allow for much torque or horsepower. If the Multitronic is by Porsche, it must handle high torque and horsepower so I'll definately look forward to it in VW's and Audi's, but I'll still to a manual in any Porsche.
I have a website. It's about Macs.
I'm waiting for someone to program their AIBO to drive them around. Now that would be a nifty Designated Driver!
Well, if i was VW I for one would use it to test my cars. they're just a whole lot better than a crash test dummy!, and probably cheaper (maybe) than a platoon of precision drivers for all kinds of risky situations... Also, if the thing does catch on, it could be kind of like a co-pilot that kicks in on very specific situations, like when you're on the phone.
how great it would be to just tell it you'll be using the phone and be there "just in case". routines for what people usually do wrong while on the phone or after a few drinks should be "easy" to implement. Also, think about crippled people. if you had no legs, the thing could do the pedals for you while you control the wheel... I'm sure the list will go on, but this is comparable to saying "why do we need computers if they will never think like we do?" well it's not there to do what we do better, but to help us do what we do better (and to do some things we just can't do)....
There are two kinds of people in the world: Those with good memory.
It is absolutely amazing how well the auto industry has kept the level of technology in cars so un-noticeable. You would be surprised to see all the stuff that goes into cars these days. The automotive company that I work for develops electronics for a bunch of car companies, and I get to see some pretty nice stuff. So much of a cars operation is computerized, and most every component is connected to an in-car "intranet", that an automatic driver is not that far off. The antilock brake controller knows every performance detail of your car and, when needed, can tell the engine and transmission to do certain things in order to get the maximum braking performance. Traction control is the same way. In many new cars, when the airbag goes off, the doors unlock and the hazard lights start blinking. Very soon, your going to see a certain car :) that has a cruise control system that uses radar to see everything around it, and doesn't let you hit things (of course if theres not enough room to stop...), and does the automatic passing thing (you have to steer, of course). And then theres the satellite navigation systems, of which I think that GM's OnStar is the best. Despite not having a screen, it can do much more than give you directions. If you lock your keys in your car, call OnStar and they will tell your car to unlock itself. If your car gets stolen, call OnStar and they will tell the Police exactly where it is. If you get into an accident, your car will automatically call OnStar and a person there will ask you if you are OK. If not (or you don't respond), then an ambulance is sent to you (your car will tell them exactly where you are). All of these things are possible only because of the level of integration of computer systems into cars now. An automatic driver is only a few servos, motors, a camera or two, and a box with some AI programmed into it, which is not really much of a strech for the big auto companies and their R&D departments.
And to all you MS bashers out there, don't worry - MS is not going to be showing up in automotive control systems anytime soon. Much of the stuff requires real-time systems and has very limited amounts of memory. Plus, with all the testing that the stuff goes through (where I work, things go through *years* of testing before they go out the door. And the variety of tests that are run leave you wondering "when would that situation ever come into play?") its doubtfull that an MS product would survive past the development stage. Or at least thats the opinion that I, as well as numerous other people, hold.
I'm sorry if I'm supposed to be a good Slashdot citizen and not reply to trolls, but WHAT THE F*CK IS YOUR PROBLEM, Anonymous Coward!?!? Why in the HELL can't Americans like you once-and-for-all give up this constant German-bashing!?!? As a German-American and therefore a member of the largest ethnic group in America (check the stats in the past 5 years), I am damn sick and tired of this! This constant stereotyping of Germans hurts as many Americans as it does Germans. This is like stereotyping "white" people like me as being in the same group as the slave-owners who founded this country when my ancestors didn't get here until 100 years later! Who agrees with or supports that kind of prejudice?
I hate to tell you, jerk, but those god-damn "krauts" you're talking about are right here in your back yard so I can see why you are so afraid to show your real identity. Why don't you have enough balls to post with your real identity, coward??????
All I can say to bring this back to the subject at hand is that this development IS important as a development of yet another computer-assisted feature used in mechanical devices we use every day! If a technology derived from this crude first step can make driving safer for EVERYONE then who would oppose it? An extremely controlling or dictatorial person? A fascist? A nazi? Gee, then wouldn't that make you a nazi? Interesting what is discovered when one actually thinks instead of spewing prejudice....
:) yeah, that's a lotta f&@#!n' coal
And will it think they've been naughty or nice up in Redmond?
"Aaaahhh.. Quick, reboot, reboot!"
I'm sure the lawyers would love it if, in addition to being an automaton operating a large machine, it were also in control of deer-fragging equipment. (a.k.a. ye olde BFG)
Now i know where our Prince Claus has been hanging out lately... i admit he's a bit of a stiff, but he's no robot! I wonder if Queen Beatrix was sitting next to him...
Their reaction time to the next drive slaming on the breaks due to a deer crossing the road is nil.
I don't feel very secure about this... I mean, can "Klaus" tell the difference between a deer in the road or a big paper bag/empty cardboard box? What about driving in areas that have poor road conditions? Or in my area, where during the rainy season, it is not uncommon have visibilty drop down to five feet or less, either due to rain or morning fog?
I think the mythical "computer controlled" highway is just that... a myth. Maybe this will happen after we're all so old that we have to have computer controlled cars to drive, but in the next fifty years... Forget it.
At least in America... I don't know anything about Europe so I can't comment, but here in the USI see lots old cars on the road, ones that are 20 to 30 years old. These cars will ruin the "networked highway" for everyone else. Not to mention, America's driving ethic will keep resistance to this idea high. I remeber a scene in a movie, I believe "Singles" where the main character is extolling the virtues of public transportation to his girlfriend and she says something like: "Yeah, you're right... But I love my car. I love to drive."
This is the average, non technical, non geek American. They love their cars. They bitch about how cars used to be better and how they "watched their Dad fix his car when they were kids and why do they have to make things so damn complicated these days." This is what will delay the networked highway. And I'm one of them... It's about a 30-40 minute drive to my work. And I love it, It like meditation to me. I would buy an networkable car for the cool factor, but turn it off.
Josh Sisk
No, not yet. (99 minutes to go.)
This is actually real but rarely news: There was an article in c't 5/2000. The current issue (and the one which contains the April fool's jokes) is 07/2000.
Claus
- Jeremy Fuller
Will the move to automated driving systems make our journeys out on the highways any better though? Well, this depends. For some folks who don't really enjoy the "driving task", then yes, it might. But besides the time factor, why do people drive, rather than taking public transit? For the thrill of the open road, the feeling of power when you are behind the wheel. Robot drivers take that away! Are we as a society willing to give up that gift that Ford gave us over 80 years ago? Since the Ford produced the first car for the people, our culture, socity, and lives have been transformed by them. What this means is good news for the enviorment (Computer Cars would probally drive in the most fuel efficent way), but less personal pleasure. As big a fan of the enviroment as I am (I'd rather see NO cars...), people will never give up that personal love afair with the car. All that said, I'd still love to sit in one, but only if it ran linux. Knowing MS, the car would have brakes v 1.23, and tires v 1.02, and there'd be a conflict, and you coulnd't stop.
Driven by 100% sarcasm - fueled by the need to be heard.
What they really should do is make a human look alike robot and see if they can pass him throough the DMV's driving test. No more waiting in lines at the DMV send your robot instead.
If you liked this thought maybe you would find my blog nice too:
Alack! why do the denizens of Slashdot
Insist on the spelling of "Beowulf"
With an O as its final vowel?
Truly it pains me; those who doubt
My authority should consult
This Wednesday's New York Times.
Does my Nobel Prize naught signify?
What would happen with car insurance? ...I can see it now... Me dialing Nationwide Insurance... Nationwide: Hello? Me: Hi I would like to get a quote. Nationwide: Okay, on what kind of car? Me: A 2001 Mazda 626. Nationwide: Okay, and what automated driver do you have? Me: Microsoft Driver 2001. Nationwide: I'm sorry, we don't insure Microsoft automated drivers. Me: Well, it CAME with the car! Nationwide: You will either have to upgrade to Microsoft Driver 2005 or switch to another system. Me: What about Linux? Nationwide: We don't support Linux. Sorry. Me: Damn Bill Gates! ...It could happen...
Moon Macrosystems. Sun's biggest competitor.
Didn't you learn anything from the Futurama episode with the crazed robot Santa?
I guess not everybody watches Futurama but they had an episode with a robot Santa that went out of control a long time before and ever since then, everybody ran inside before night on Christmas so they wouldn't be killed by the robot. It was a pretty funny episode if I remember correctly.
Accully I would want him to tailgate the driver in front of him. However the car in front should also be controlled by Klaus. The car right in front will see a slight drop in gas milage, but that is more then made up for by the next car behind savings. Remember, these are all computer controlled cars. Their reaction time to the next drive slaming on the breaks due to a deer crossing the road is nil.
Bicyclists use the drafting principal to ride 25 mph all day in a race, where the average lone biker is doing well to maintain 15 mph.
have to be the red screen of death . . .
There's something too that. We can't even teach lots of people.
After being at a school with several thousand foreign students, I'm inclined to believe that some of them can *never* be taught to drive.
It's not that they're foreign; it's that they've rarely been in a car before arriving in the U.S. Here (and in other developed countries) we've been in cars from birth, and flowing through traffic. That very flow is missing from these folks; it's entirely an artificial environment. There's some amount of instinct we pick up along the way. Maybe it's like language; far more easily and naturally learned while young.
As a group, those learning to drive here aren't merely worse than more experienced drivers. As a group, they seem to be worse than new drivers (as a group).
If we can't teach this to people, it's going to be really hard to teach it to a machine.
hawk, pondering
DNA just wants to be free...
-jwb
Great, now when his Aibo gets sick, he can drive it to the vet. Or is that the electrician?
-=Bob
But hey, YKIOK.
I wonder if they're aiming this thing to be capable of driving around a city scene (e.g. Manhattan). A very hard problem, no doubt.
But heck, likely the benefit of most value to the majority of drivers out there would be automatic highway driving. And that wouldn't be nearly as difficult to implement. All you'd really need are two electric eyes to watch the road lines (keeping the car centered in its lane), and a distance sensor to keep the car a safe distance from the one in front. Making it safe to, say, read a book while you're cruising along.
Such a system has much room for refinement, of course (automatic passing?) but it would make highway driving less of a bore/chore, and would likely reduce a great number of accidents caused by falling asleep at the wheel.
iSKUNK!
It is also extremely dangerous. What if the car in front blows a tire, throws a rod, breaks a driveshaft, has a wheel come off? They are mechanical things and mechanical things break.
There is a show on the Discovery Channel called "Future Cars" or something like that which deals with robocars. I suggest you check it out. It is a great show.
Actually, back in 86 our team had a poster up with a picture of a pilot punching out of an F16, and the caption, "Fly-by-wire gives a whole new meaning to 'system crash.'"
Lacking <sarcasm> tags,
On the dots - I forgot about snow country (I live in Phoenix, Arizona - maybe that's part of the problem - though I have seen it snow here). You are correct in stating the snowplow would "eat" them.
A solution to this would be to use "magnetic" paint (I don't even know if such a thing can be created, but it seem feasible) - ie, the paint would have magnetized particles suspended in it, so that when it is put down, it would have a weak magnetic field that could be detected by the sensors on the car (in fact, the car should have both the smart dot sensors and mag dot sensors, and smart dots should have a magnet buried in them as well, in the event of failure of the dot's electronics). This is one solution. Another solution would be to bury the dots flush with the road surface, though this might be expensive.
I don't think you would have to put down as many dots as you have on the roads today, only a smart/mag dot every 10-20 feet, with regular dots placed between them. Maybe with the mag-paint striping as well.
I agree that it is fun driving, but my solution is more for the interstate driving/commuter driving crowds (I tend to like doing "fun" driving on back country freeways/roads/dirt roads - off the map stuff), and it doesn't remove choice from the driving, it merely acts as a safer form of cruise control.
Reason is the Path to God - Anon
I like driving. I take long car trips just for the sheer pleasure of it. If this freedom is taken away from me I will be very very unhappy.
Oh, I'm sure that, at least for a while, there will be plenty of space for everyone who likes to drive to do so. Of course, it may not be on the public interstates, where it may be mandated to use autosteering. Of course, that would really help traffic problems, and we could end up getting there twice as fast without any congestion much more easily... but if you want to stick to your driving, I'm sure they'll allow you to at least on the side roads.
---
"You know your god is man-made when he hates all the same people you do."
I can't see the purpose in robot cars.... except maybe for people who CAN NOT drive themselves. Whish is what public transport is for.
You're saying that not once have you had to go somewhere, such as a long trip, and not wanted to drive the entire way?
I personally would love to be able to enter my destination and not have to drive the vehicle. And if everyone else was using automated vehicles also, imagine how much safer the road would be - I wonder what percentage of accidents are due to driver error? 99%? I'd stop having to worry about all the idiots on the road.
---
"You know your god is man-made when he hates all the same people you do."
That's why the future of software is massive regulation. And the Open Source movement won't be allowed to play in Real Life.
First, make it work, then make it right, then make it fast, then, make it bloated!
If the only thing a robot car had to deal with was other robot cars and the road, I would agree. But robot cars will still have to deal with tire blowouts, deer, fallen trees, ice patches, snow plows, salt on the camera lens, low-visibility conditions, flooding, legacy systems (unauthorized human drivers breaking the law), etc. After taking all these things into account, robot cars will probably be able to drive faster and closer together than good human drivers, but not quite as extreme as you indicate.
First, make it work, then make it right, then make it fast, then, make it bloated!
does he ride the clutch? does he burn out? does he squeal the tires? does he tailgate old ladies? does he race those stickered-up-chromed-out 89 civic hatchbacks?
:)
He's not a real driver yet
Dan
Not to mention BSOD!
Work for Change & GET PAID!
With due respect, the situations you describe are very controlled environments, and while the consequences of error are obviously much higher than smacking into a lamp post, nearly all the variables of interest are within the control of the software. Please note that when--for example--there are high, gusty cross winds at a given landing site, Shuttle Control postpones or relocates the landing, because they know this is a situation outside the software's capabilities. On the road, there are an astonishing number of things outside one's control. Sooner or later the car's software will come across a situation it can't handle, but whose solution would be blindingly obvious to a human.
--
This is not my sandwich.
Cars closer together means that you can fit many more on the freeway, which means that you have less traffic.
The cake is a pie
The cake is a pie
Actually, I usually don't move. Hurst independant brake lockers, with momentary safety toggles bolted to the shifter. There's a small bit of intentional air in the front circuit, so I can optionally grind the car forward. The only one in danger is the fellow behind me, and even then only from the smoke off the tires. Ruining a pair of cheap Thompson and intentionally smacking into some geriatric in a LeSabre are very different things!
Oh, yeah. My last ticket was in March of 1997. The exhaust on my F-150 was a little loud.
.sig: Now legally binding!
Actually, knowing MS, you'd have Microsoft Brakes 2000 and Microsoft Tires 2000 but if you didn't buy Microsoft Axle 2000, Microsoft Hubcaps 2000, and Microsoft Timing Belts 2000 but rather went for Corel Hubcaps 2000, Netscape Timing Belts 2000, and Ford Hubcaps, your car wouldn't be able to start, but if you did manage to get it to start, your hazard lights would go off, the horn would start to blow inconcessantly, and the only way to turn them off would be to hold the accelerator pedal down while holding down the Microsoft Power Windows button, and at the same time holding down the cruise control button. Then it would shut down so you could replace the offending parts.
I think I'd have to buy an Apple Macintosh car. They'd come in five flavors and have one button in the entire car, which depending on what the car thought you wanted to do, would do it. The hood of the car would be a translucent color, so you can peer through there and go WOW but never open it to touch anything. My "blueberry" car would have the "new car" smell of artificial blueberries...
A Robot Car. A perfect digital map. A network flow optimization algorithm that gets you to where you want to go, taking into account current and historical traffic patterns.
Yup, some people are able to do already in their heads but read on:
No traffic lights, no stop signs, no speed limits. Your car will be able to avoid other traffic without these things designed to make driving safe for imperfect human drivers.
Except during rush hour in the biggest most congested cities, most roads are >50% unused. Huh? you say... traffic is everywhere? No, most places, people tend to leave at least 1 car length, and cars tend to travel in "packs" because some slow clod won't let others pass.
None of that. Cars are *right* upto one another. Nearly no space. They already have this in a special highway in San Diego. And no attitutes, no slow people to block your way... everyone is going really really fast.
And that's not it. Stick in an entertainment center, a reclining chair... man you're set. Get a good book, maybe pop a movie into the DVD drive.
And since speed limits are a thing of the past, you'll get there in 3 hours going at 200km/h. And it'll be safer.
3 hands, 3 legs, satellite navigation systems,
lasers, stereocameras, powerful computers, hughe
research org/university to back it up.
And the damn thing still cant play criss cross
in traffic and drive in and out of NYC the way
any teenager with a license around here can.
It's moments like these that make me laugh at
matrixes of all kinds and feel safe from any sort
of "computer takeover" doomsday scenario:)
So when's the robot sleigh coming?
----
Don't underestimate the power of peanut brittle
ADVENTURERS! - ANTIHERO FOR HIRE - CARDMASTER CONFLICT
*BZZZT*
I know numerous engineering examples, from the Space Shuttle to chemical plants, where the "dumb" computer, uttlerly lacking intuition, outperforms the human.
All that cognition isn't always a benefit: it also makes more mistakes possible. A "dumb" driving algorithm might actually be safer because (1) it doesn't get tired, (2) it doesn't make erroneous assumption, (3) it's performance won't be degraded by emotional state.....
"one treats others with courtesy not because they are gentlemen or gentlewomen, but because you are" --G. Henrichs
3 legs huh... are we SURE the third on is really a leg? It IS a guy, after all... aardWolf64
"Observers said the test was going quite smoothly up until seconds before the fiery spectacle when the robot began the 'Talking on the cell phone and putting on make-up in the rear-view mirror' portion of the test."
I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.
Imagine the look on the face of the state trooper. Klaus is driving, holding a Lowenbrau in his fourth arm. Youre curled up in the back seat taking a nap, and your AIBO is sticking his head out the window.
I really dont see robotic chauffers as the future of automated driving. It seems like it would be better to mount all of this stuff in the car itself. Granted they do take things up a notch on the cool factor. Personally I am pushing for these auto-drive systems to be implemented like bumper cars. Get a big ass grid, metal freeways, and put bumpers all around. See Mr Gore, you can have your electric cars now...
-BW
I think automated highway driving will become a reality long before fully automated robotic cars can handle city driving. On car trips I often enjoy the scenery and the conversation, but I have no problem handing the driving over to a computer. Imagine taking a nap during the mindless drive between Chicago and St. Louis. Anyway, I would much rather have the computer drive than my girlfriend.
-B
Does not blare horn 2 seconds after light turns green
I usually wait to the count of one and start turning the tires after that. If seeing a huge chunk of Detroit steel launching itself at your back end, coiled in the dense fumes of burning rubber and redline screaming at the tune of 6000 RPM doesn't get you off the line, you deserve to be roadkill.
.sig: Now legally binding!
Actually, yes. It's been done. A number of car manufacturers have been working with active suspension systems that take this into consideration.
Notice a small child at the side of the road and slow down or and be ready to stop immediately?
Through the use of infrared, no problem.
Notice a basketball being shot at a hoop above a hedge that obscures a driveway and assume that children might be playing behind the hedge and slow down?
Subtle difference than the little girl, but yes again.
Notice a driver late at night that's weaving slightly, pick him out for a drunk and take appropriate action to avoid him?
Yes again.
See the reflection of the eyes of a deer in the bushes and be prepared for it to jump in the road?
Same deal again....
Other obsticles considered....
Yes, I think that a computer system could do much of the above. In fact, I don't think most humans do most of the above.
More importantly, here are some things that it can do much better than a human:
+ Not fall sleep behind the wheel
+ Not drink and drive
+ Much faster reflexes, and imagine the ability to be wired into the ABS and traction control mechanisms of the car, so that you KNEW where the limits really were.
+ See things ahead in the roadway that we can't with normal vision. Yes, I'm aware of the IR feature in one of the new cars coming out.
+ Not slam on it's brakes and hit a tree, schoolbus, or whatever if a squirrel runs across the street in front of it.
+ Connect via network to other robo-cars in the fast lane, close together, so that they may all use drafting to reduce energy costs. Because each knows what the other is doing, no pileups.
+ No road rage.
The list really goes on, but the point is, that there are many things that a computer can do well in place of a human.
Certainly, there is a lot of intuition and experience that it will be very hard and even impossible to duplicate. I'm not saying that it will be a technology that will eliminate the need for human intervention, but I can see the day, when I can put my car on auto-pilot on the freeway and take a nap. Sure would make those 5-hour trips to Vegas a lot nicer....
WWJD -- What Would Jimi Do?
(Smash amp, burn guitar, take home the groupies)
I'd rather drive thanks!
I can't see the purpose in robot cars.... except maybe for people who CAN NOT drive themselves. Whish is what public transport is for.
--chuck goolsbee
This page describes a car driven by a Linux computer. It's called the ARGO project, and it's in Italy. It's driven a long distance around Italy in what they called the "MilleMiglia in Automatico Tour".
If tits were wings it'd be flying around.
I guess VW will have to change their slogan.
Douglas Hofstadter (AI researcher and author of the wonderful Godel, Escher, Bach) comments on this very problem in his latest book, Le Ton Beau De Marot. He says the problem is as difficult as good machine translation, and that it's extremely unlikely a machine will ever do a good job.
Driving a car is actually one of the most complex things we do. An incredible amount of awareness and thought goes into it. Can a computer:
Realize that it's foggy, or likely to be icy and what patches of the road are likely to be icy and adjust appropriately?
Notice a small child at the side of the road and slow down or and be ready to stop immediately?
Notice a basketball being shot at a hoop above a hedge that obscures a driveway and assume that children might be playing behind the hedge and slow down?
Notice a driver late at night that's weaving slightly, pick him out for a drunk and take appropriate action to avoid him?
See the reflection of the eyes of a deer in the bushes and be prepared for it to jump in the road?
See a driver with lots of dents in his car and give him a bit more space?
Judge from the way the wind just blew that big box into the middle of the road that it's empty and safe to hit if stopping suddenly might cause an accident?
See the canoe on the roof of the car ahead of you isn't very securely tied down and pull back or change lanes in case it falls?
These are just a few of the thousands of situations that come up routinely in driving and which try the intuition of even the smartest human drivers every second we're on the road. As much of an accomplishment as this is, it's mostly empty PR. A computer will not be able to safely navigate a car on public streets for a LONG time, if ever.
The problems with creating a computer guided vehicle are enormous. Just getting the computer to recognize the lines, etc of a road without veering and such, and doing it in realtime - that is a huge problem. Doing the same on a normal road when you have four or five (or more) cars around you, with normal humans (and the woman in the Expedition putting on makeup and chatting on the cell phone - yikes!) is near impossible. Then comes avoiding the small stuff (kids, balls, cats - well, maybe not cats - just kidding)...
I think we shouldn't be concentrating on a complete computer guided car concept, but more on an advanced cruise control for vehicles. Front and rear looking radar (maybe side radar too), combined with a simple vision system (a single B/W low-res cam should do OK here), and smart dots - these things could be done in such a way to make an easy an affordable "smart" cruise control for the freeway commute or interstate drive.
The radar portion would be for speed and avoidance control - this portion is already in limited use in luxury vehicles, as well as some commercial vehicles. The cam system would be forward looking, and would be a system to do edge detection - to help keep the car centered going down a lane. The processing power to do the real-time edge detection and centering should be able to be accomplished with current cpu's, at max maybe a small Beowulf style cluster parallel computer (to process in sections of the image - kinda like the 8x8 processing of jpegs). The final portion would be the smart dots...
What I am calling a smart dot here would be the only infrastructure change needed - and if such a thing hasn't already been created and patented, well, it probably should've been. If not, then what follows I am placing under the GPL - the design, and implementation of anything remotely like it (I doubt this will hold up in court, though). Anyhow...
A smart dot would replace those dots that separate the lanes on the freeway. The new dots would be similar, except that they would have a small circuit in them that put out a very low power 900 Mhz signal, that can only be detected by being near to the dot. The lower edge of the dot would be 3M reflective white, the upper top curved portion would remain clear, to focus sunlight onto a small solar cell to recharge a small NiMH batttery that powers the thing. This "lens" would only be about the size of a quarter or so, maybe even a dime size hole would do it. At any rate, the rest of the dot would be the 3M white, so at night (the battery should be able to last through a night of use - this thing will be very low power) it will show up in the headlamps of the car as normal. This same style dot could be used for the frustum/rectangular style dots, with only a few simple mods.
All the dots emit the low power signal, so low you must be within a foot or less to pick the signal up. Sensors on either side of the car would pick the signal up, so that the car knows it is drifting, and can compensate left or right, and update what it is seeing in the camera vision system to account for the drift. These dots would be the last line of defense (well, not the last line - since this IS a cruise control, the driver is still behind the wheel, and can take over in an emergency). The dots could also emit information, such as a certain exit coming up, or cars need to slow down for road work ahead, or merge left/right (they could be programmable as well - maybe these things use a funky iPic, like that webserver). If they really wanted to be cheap, the dots could encase small rare-earth magnets, and hall effect sensors would be placed on the cars (with appropriate compensation for the earth's magnetic field). However, these kind of dots wouldn't be as flexible, though they would cost only fractions of a penny more than the current dots in use, and probably wouldn't take much to retool for manufacturing them, vs the smart dots.
This kind of system, while not as whiz-bang, would solve a LOT of problems (such as people not being able to merge properly, and vehicle density issues vs speed). It might make traffic move smoother during rush hour, and make it easier to get on and off freeways during these times.
It won't allow you to read a paper or take a nap and catch those few extra minutes of sleep while you go to work - but when it comes to cars, I wouldn't trust any system to allow me to do that!
Reason is the Path to God - Anon
That is the trouble with new technologies. The legal system often demands they not just be better, but that they be perfect.
The cake is a pie
Will the move to automated driving systems make our journeys out on the highways any better though? Will we end up leaning out of the window and yelling "Stupid MS Driver"? Will we have robots giving us the finger (arm, apendage, tentacle if bioengineering gets going) as they overtake us on the hard shoulder? Will people hack their robot driver to go faster, park on rear-bumper doing 100mph or cut more corners in an effort to avoid traffic lights/ pedestrians/ the police? Will we be attacked with a denial of driving attack by some script kiddie? Or worse, have a UCITA-like end-of-license removal where the originator of the driving OS produces a new version and wants us to upgrade? Stay tuned ... I like the look of the bicycle personally :-)
Cheers,
Toby Haynes
Anything I post is strictly my own thoughts and doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the opinions of IBM.
1) Does not properly extend middle finger at random times
2) Actually comes to complete stop at stop signs
3) Signals lane changes
4) Cannot operate a cell phone while driving
5) Does not blare horn 2 seconds after light turns green
6) Refuses to tailgate car in front of it
7) Does not drive 55 mph in school zone
8) Does not drive 15 mph in fast lane
9) Stops for pedestrians in crosswalk
10) Actually passed driving test
Wow, and people laughed when Kitt the talking car was driving Michael Knight around while he slept! We have arrived people!
Michael, I have some bad news.
What is it Klaus? Are we running behind?
No, but I did hit two pedestrians and drove through a corn field.
But we aren't running behind.
No.
Good then.
Bryan R.
Bryan R.
The price of freedom is eternal vigilance, or $12.50 as seen on eBay.....