Slashdot Mirror


GM Claims Advanced Cruise Control By 2008

pavelvp writes "Economist is reporting that General Motors is working on the prototype of the self-driving car. From the article, "The car uses updated technology combined with several existing innovations and, according to the manufacturer, could be in production by 2008. But, while the technology takes some of the boring bits out of driving, it falls far short of an automatic taxi service and, anyway, various legal, technical and social barriers to its introduction remain.""

32 of 425 comments (clear)

  1. Good idea by Catamaran · · Score: 5, Funny

    I look forward to the day when we relinquish all control of our cars once we enter the freeway. Scientific papers have found that traffic throughput could be increased up to 918.49% while reducing fatalities by a factor of 17.5!

    --
    Test 1 2 3 4
    1. Re:Good idea by ZeroGee · · Score: 5, Interesting

      relinquish all control of our cars once we enter the freeway

      Although your numbers are probably a joke, the actual theory merits discussion. Still, it won't happen for quite a while. People enjoy driving far too much. Movies like I, Robot and others involving "manual overrides" are actually fairly close to the truth. You think all the owners who buy sports cars, whether it's a base-model ford mustang or a top-end ferrari, are going to be satisfied "turning over all control" of their car and just reading the newspaper or watching a movie on the way to work? The only way this highway works is if every single car participates, otherwise the stupid human will be bumping into the super-fast computer-driven cars all day. Good luck getting buy-in from 100% of drivers. Not during my lifetime.

    2. Re:Good idea by william_w_bush · · Score: 5, Interesting

      or computer only lanes/sections ala car-pooling?
      they can have a much higher density, along with less braking idiocy, or the "look at that crash" which stops traffic for miles. the govt can make that an incentive to have auto-cars.

      --
      The first rule of USENET is you do not talk about USENET.
    3. Re:Good idea by ZeroGee · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It would not be unreasonable to make it legally required to use such a system on some highways. You don't like it, take the side streets.

      Nice thought experiment. In reality? Good luck getting your congressmen and senators to vote for this. First the auto-lobby will scream bloody-murder because it would require extra systems in every car, which raises their costs. They sure as heck aren't going to eat into their own profits, so that means the price increases are passed along to the consumers, who want to know why their honda accords now cost $35,000 for a feature they don't want anyhow.

      This doesn't even take into consideration the ACLU who will claim this is a movement to make cars inaccessible to poor people, as well as the far right who doesn't want no stinkin' computer driving when they can do it perfectly well themselves.

      In summary, you have a system that is popular with about 18% of the population. Yep, I bet that one races through the legislature.

    4. Re:Good idea by ZeroGee · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Today's teens are starting to seriously think hybrids, electrics and hydrogen-powered cars are cool.

      Today's teens also think aston martins, ferraris, and lotus elises are cool as well. Granted, hybrids have taken on a "hip" status, but they haven't replaced sports cars. Many teenagers still think that '69 Charger is pretty darn cool too.

      If you haven't noticed, auto manufacturers are in the midst of a huge horsepower war that hasn't been seen in decades. 400 bhp is now becoming standard on upper-end luxury vehicles, with the 500hp threshold being crossed by vehicles still south of 100k. It also so happens that this is being done with engines that aren't just "bigger" as in the mid-20th century, but rather with exciting new efficient technology.

      Cars have been status symbols since they were invented a hundred years ago, and that hasn't changed at all. High gas prices don't matter. I live in California and pay $2.99/gallon these days. If I was paying $2.00/gallon, I'd save $600 a year. Whoopee. My sports car gets 23 mpg, and a "fuel-efficient" non-hybrid gets 35 mpg. Is my car worth the price delta? You bet it is.

    5. Re:Good idea by soft_guy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't know. I could see this happening. At first, maybe someone creates one experimental road with this technology. If GM and Ford could use it as differentiation, they might have the clout to get some assistance from congress. GM and Ford really need to do something serious to shake things up very soon.

      If it worked, the fact that it would work would be a compelling reason. Think about cities like Seattle, Houston, etc. where the freeways are very crowded and the costs of new freeways are too high to be practical.

      The ACLU is not some all powerful "spoiler" out to hold back innovation.

      Plus, if your argument would hold, then people wouldn't have catalytic converters, airbags, or seatbelts. These are all features which make cars cost a lot of money and most people don't want.

      --
      Avoid Missing Ball for High Score
    6. Re:Good idea by moreati · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Without quoted statistics this reply is of course conjecture, as is yours.

      I believe very few people enjoy the act of day to day driving, sports cars are a minute proportion of road traffic. What I and many others enjoy is the comfort and convenience of using a private car to travel. Auto-drive cars can increase these benefits by the following:
        - Removing requirement for continuous, dedicated, concious control. Instead, read slashdot or watch I Robot as you travel to work.
        - Removing necessity for private vehicle ownership, instead rent use of a class of vehicle - no need to find parking, drive straight to your destination, get out and the car will route/drive itself to a holding area or pickup.
        - Safer my faith in computer control is greater then my faith in millions of bored, distracted humans. Provided the system is built up over time, slowly, a few features integrated to a trusted (proven) platform at each revision, as cars today are develop.
        - Faster, with many vehicles coordinating with one another, it should be possible to increase thoughput and aggregate speed. As you say these will be mitigated by human and other uncooperative (incompatible) drivers. But it shouldn't be all or nothing.

      Auto-drive cars won't appear overnight - enabling features will accrue over years - Sat Nav, cruise control, rangefinding sensors, lane drift alarms, drive by wire, braking assistance, ubiquitous wireless communication etc.

      Thats my optimistic view, anyway.

      Regards

      Alex

    7. Re:Good idea by mskfisher · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And beyond that, they could adjust for weather conditions. The speed limit is designed to incorporate reaction time for mmild-to-moderate inclement weather, as well. Automated cars could adjust automatically.

      However, this would also require more rigorous maintenence to be done on each vehicle... tires suddenly become much more important when you're taking a tight turn in the rain.
      Maintenence and inspection would have to be tied into the cost of the vehicle to prevent Billy Joe Bob's automated rustbucket from causing a pile-up at 200 MPH.

      --
      0x0D 0x0A
    8. Re:Good idea by glitch0 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yeah, I'm 17, and I can tell you that no teens actually care about hybrids because they're hybrids. I haven't seen them taking on a "hip" status at all, in fact most teenagers probably think that a hybrid is something their gay biology teacher would talk about.

      In the end, even the teens that have heard of a Prius or other hybrid only know that they get good mileage which is pretty damn important at $7 an hour. I think in my school of 1900 students, probably 50 could tell you that a hybrid uses a battery and a gasoline motor to get better gas mileage.

      --
      -Glitch "We all know Linux is great...it does infinite loops in 5 seconds." - Linus Torvalds
    9. Re:Good idea by Mr.+Maestro · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Not sure how we got on the topic of hybrids, but while we are, there was a fantastic article if one of the automobile monthly magazines.

      The author was talking about the fact that a hybrid needs to be driven for something like 66,000 miles per year to realize a savings of fuel costs versus price of the car.

      He also went in to the eventual disposal of the giant battery/batteries in these cars. Not a pretty picture.

      And perhaps most interesting was this. While the Toyota Prious (sp) is a hot seller, the other hybrids are not. The Toyota is a hot seller because it LOOKS like a hybrid an appeals to people wanting to make a statement. The Honda Accord hybrid looks like a regular Honda Accord so they are not selling nearly as well.

      Anyways, I did a ton of paraphrasing, but the author made some very interesting points. Don't expect hybrids in their current form to ever take off.

    10. Re:Good idea by dgatwood · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Nah. Traction control can detect slipping and indicate to the computer that the water stability specs for that vehicle need to be adjusted downwards. It moves itself over a lane to the right and slows down a little bit. Eventually, when it detects too much slippage, it will refuse to drive in inclement weather until you replace the tires. Upon replacing tires, the tire store resets the computer to the new tires' specs.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

  2. Doesn't work well in motorhomes by infonography · · Score: 3, Funny

    I know of one such event where a guy set the cruise control in his Winnebago and then got up and when back to the kitchen to make a sandwich. Truth, Fiction, Urban Legend, or Darwin Award. Your guess is as good as mine.

    --
    Sorry about the writing. Robot fingers, you know? Cliff Steele in DOOM PATROL #23
  3. Good job catching up GM by Critical_ · · Score: 3, Informative

    Mercedes has had their automatic cruise control now for over 5 years. It only applies about 10-15% of braking power and is available in all their upper end cars. With the new S-Class coming in December, the new version can fully stop the car and bring it back up to speed on its own. So where is the innovation? Mercedes has been a tech leader in cars for as far back as I can think. ABS, Stability control, Airbags, etc are all Mercedes innovations which they allow other car companies to use.

  4. No use. by thermal_noise · · Score: 5, Funny

    It's 2008. Give me my f*ing flying car instead.

    1. Re:No use. by agraupe · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If you had any idea of the complexity of flying anything, you'd take that comment back. I'm in the final stages of getting a private pilot license, and let me tell you, it's a lot harder than it looks (not to mention 1-2 hours of trip planning before any flight away from the airport a meaningful distance). I've just been doing my cross-country flights, and there are about 5 times per flight where I have no clue where I am (GPS notwithstanding, because you have to be able to find your way around in the event of an electrical failure). I know you merely meant this comment to be a witty, quick-way-to-+5-Funny one-liner, but the thought of the average person expecting to get into their flying car and be able to drive it without killing anyone scares me enough that I had to comment anyway.

  5. What is it they say about Fool Proof? by ackthpt · · Score: 3, Insightful
    "... General Motors is working on the prototype of the self-driving car. ... The car uses updated technology combined with several existing innovations and, ... while the technology takes some of the boring bits out of driving, it falls far short of an automatic taxi service and, anyway, various legal, technical and social barriers to its introduction remain.

    Make something Fool Proof and a better class of fool will come along and proove you wrong.

    Still, we can dream of jumping into the car for a relaxing nap on a 12 hour drive, eh?

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
  6. but.. by Enteebee · · Score: 4, Funny

    Will this car also drive itself to Alaska, drill for oil, refine the crude into gasoline, and then fill up?

    Otherwise, I'm holding out for a Mr. Fusion.

  7. In Soviet Russia... by X1011 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Car drives you!

  8. A hundred years... by HermanAB · · Score: 4, Funny

    since we last had self driving cars. Friggen amazing that it took this long to re-invent the horse.

    --
    Oh well, what the hell...
    1. Re:A hundred years... by mesmartyoudumb · · Score: 4, Funny

      That's funny, My friend was telling me that his grandpa refused to buy a car because it didn't know the way home if he got drunk and passed out like his good ole horse.

      --
      "Comedy's a dead art form. Now tragedy, that's funny."
  9. how about... by wtmcgee · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ...working on something more useful, such as making your entire consumer line hybrids by 2010 or something along those lines? Seems like we're adding all these frivolous things to cars nowadays but neglecting to do anything about the fuel issues in automobiles.

    --
    *** For a better tommorow, change your life today ***
  10. BMW already has this in their cars. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    And not only that, but what's holding the GM version up is that they're still trying to engineer it to fail as soon as the warranty runs out.

  11. Actually by Critical_ · · Score: 3, Informative

    Chrysler is OWNED BY Mercedes.

  12. The 'Fun' Factor by salvorHardin · · Score: 3, Interesting
    This will entirely remove the 'fun' element to driving. Taking that tight bend at 80 won't have the same appeal, as you'll know that you didn't have anything to do with it.

    Also, gone will be the 'sporty' designs in cars, especially the dash. There are already designs for cars with 'couplings', so they work like train carriages in built-up areas. Your car will resemble a small train compartment more than a Ferrari.

    On the other hand, at least it will rid the world of this lot.
  13. Well here's your problem right here by SuperKendall · · Score: 4, Interesting

    From the article:

    For example, self-steering cars are currently illegal in most European countries. Carmakers want the law changed to allow them, but they are also keen not to be held legally responsible for any accidents which result. Drafting legislation which would make it attractive for carmakers to introduce the technology, but still allow some recourse for those hurt if something goes wrong, could prove tricky.

    I see, they want to build self-steering cars but take no responsibility for what they have built going wrong.

    I think alerting systems are a great idea - if you think I'm shifting lanes or following too close or not noticing a braking driver in front of me, by all means help me out.

    But don't take away control based on incomplete sensor input. The distance that it is safe to follow another car depends on conditions. What if you reach a sharp bend and that other car can corner a lot better than you? What if you stop paying attention to the road ahead because the car is following another, and that other car fails to notice traffic stopping too quickly ahead? That car hitting anything else probably means you're going to hit it.

    The consider the whole business of automatically following lanes as the GM car does. Has no-one out there seen roads after construction is through that have remains of old lines? What happens when a car starts AUTOMATICALLY correcting your steering to follow the old lines instead of the new?

    To give auto makers a free Get-Out-Of-Jail card because they have the hubris to think they can build something that really drives better than a human is madness. Let them try but they must pay for failure so they are properly diligent as to issues that may arise.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  14. Re:Self-Driving = High Price by agraupe · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Comparing this with an auto-pilot is a bit stupid, if you don't mind me saying so. Apart from redundancy, which you mentioned, there is also the issue that auto-pilots are directly controlled by human beings, who are, in turn, directed by other humans with large radars. Also, one should notice that most flight plans are a great deal straighter than roads, meaning that precision offered by an autopilot far exceeds what a human could ever hope to do, thus increasing safety. Now, using an autopilot during VFR flight (i.e. light aircraft in good conditions in sight of the ground the whole time) is unsafe, because it is fully the pilot's responsibility for traffic separation, not to mention that more precise tracks from place to place mean that there's a greater likelihood of two aircraft being in the same spot at the same time.

  15. Er.. that's nifty, but... by EvilCabbage · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ...shouldn't we be taking a heavy focus on more fuel efficient, cost efficient forms of transport and increasing passive safety over gizmos like this?

    I honestly can't say I'd trust a vehicle to do my driving for me.

  16. Overall by Council · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Very good idea, as far as the actual driving goes -- that is, I would use it.

    Problem: It will crash when presented with some situations. You can watch for those situations, but since you don't normally /have/ to watch the road anymore, attention will drift for longer and longer, and you won't see something, and it will crash.

    The few problems will be directly blamed on the car makers. They will not be able to keep this cruise control on the market.

    I've often wished that my car would automatically stay between the lines. The roads are already tilted so that you can drive (with good alignment) quite a ways without touching the wheel. But if I had that option, it's only a matter of time before I fell asleep on a long freeway, and then the computer makes a mistake, and I crash.

    The technology is not new. I saw a video on it quite a while ago. But you can't introduce it because some people will die as a viscerally direct result, even if it saves other lives in the process.

    They mentioned that it would probably first be introduced as a "you're going off the road" warning system, and verrrry slowly work its way in from there. That's the only feasible option I see.

    I really don't feel alarmist about this at all. They're gonna need to be very, very careful in introducing this, because when cars crash -- as they inevitably will at least once -- due to unexpected circumstances that arise quickly -- they will look very bad.

    --
    xkcd.com - a webcomic of mathematics, love, and language.
  17. Re:In southern california cruise control is worthl by milimetric · · Score: 3, Funny

    wow. You should Never talk again. Ever. Ask your friends to join you in on that too. Thanks.

    Someone with mod points, break this person's karma.

  18. No officer i was not driving. by davro · · Score: 3, Funny

    Now you and your friends can get drunk smoke crack while cruising along the high street.
    Should it have a "Drive it like you stole it" option for the car thiefs.

  19. Automatic driving is coming, but not this way by Animats · · Score: 3, Informative
    This "adaptive cruise control" stuff is scary. The basic idea is to have a lateral control system that keeps in lane, and a longitudinal control system that prevents tailgating. This is good enough for the driver to fall asleep, but not good enough to handle even minor emergency situations.

    Experience with ABS systems is instructive. ABS systems definitely improve braking, but don't reduce accidents. Drivers with ABS use their shorter stopping distance to follow more closely, cancelling out the safety benefits.

    I run one of the DARPA Grand Challenge teams, which requires somewhat better technology. The current Grand Challenge technology is clunky (everybody has huge, mechanically scanned LIDAR devices or weak vision systems), but true solid state eye-safe outdoor 3D LIDAR imaging devices are just becoming available. With that technology, doing this right is within reach.

  20. Re:Ultimate destination? by jemenake · · Score: 3, Interesting
    It seems as if the ultimate (admittedly, far off) goal of such developments is to establish a virtually automated mass transit system using today's road networks. When cars automatically take the correct routes, make correct lane changes, and communicate with each other to ensure safe distances and traffic queues the joy of driving, for those who value it, will be essentially lost. I can't help but wonder if the joy of driving will be entirely lost in 20-50 years.
    I have two things to say about this.

    First, I think that the trade-off will be more than worth it. Consider these things: Cars won't need adults to drive them; you can let your kids take the car to their soccer practice while you stay home and do something more productive. Furthermore, the cars won't need *anyone* to drive them. Send your car to your kid's school to pick them up or drop them off. Send your car to the appliance-mart a half-hour away to have it loaded with the washing machine you just bought online. Go to the mall and hop out at the front door and have your car go park itself. It doesn't matter how far away it parks because it's going to come pick you up at the door anyway.

    The second point is this: The type of driving that they're looking to automate and the type of driving that most people enjoy aren't the same thing. I don't enjoy driving 7 hours to my mom's mountain cabin. I *do* enjoy taking my truck out onto the beach and cruising along the surf... or driving along a curvy road in the hills. It's a lot like flying. As I pilot, when I need to cover some *distance*, I want a plane that goes fast, has autopilot, good navigation instruments, etc. However, when I want to just tool around over the dunes, I want a piddly little two-seater that goes slower than the cars on the road under me. So, in other words, the *joy* in driving doesn't come (for me, anyway) from the kind of driving that they're looking to automate.