Slashdot Mirror


EyeDriver Lets Drivers Steer Car With Their Eyes

Hugh Pickens writes "NPR reports that German researchers have tested a new technology called eyeDriver that tracks a driver's eye movement and, in turn, steers the car in whatever direction they're looking at speeds up to 31 mph. 'The next step will be to get it to drive 60 miles per hour,' says Raul Rojas, an artificial intelligence researcher at Berlin's Free University. A Dodge Caravan fitted with eyeDriver has been tested on the tarmac at an abandoned airport at Tempelhof Airport. However, it remains unclear when — or if — the technology will be commercialized, as questions about safety and practicability abound: What about looking at a cute girl next to the road for a few seconds? Not to mention taking phone calls or typing a text while driving. But the researchers have an answer to distracted drivers: 'The Spirit of Berlin' is also an autonomous car equipped with GPS navigation, scores of cameras, lasers, and scanners that enable it to drive by itself. And should the technology-packed vehicle have a major bug, there's still an old fashioned way of stopping it. Two big external emergency buttons at the rear of the car allow people outside to shut down all systems."

166 comments

  1. Boobies by gront · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So we want cars to steer towards what we are looking at? Seriously? You want to have all the cute women in the world run over?

    1. Re:Boobies by gerf · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Of course abnormal distractions would be bad. But just think of the normal ones like "road signs" or "checking blind spots" or "looking out for unexpected traffic." Yeah, this is neat, but with the inherent risks involved in driving as it is, probably a bad idea.

    2. Re:Boobies by shogun · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Pretty much what I came here to say.

      This will rapidly drive natural selection towards unattractiveness being a survival trait..

    3. Re:Boobies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      So we want cars to steer towards what we are looking at? Seriously? You want to have all the cute women in the world run over?

      The infamous Homosexual Agenda(TM) reveals its master plan at last...

    4. Re:Boobies by Quantumplation · · Score: 5, Funny

      Passenger: "I'd hit that!"
      Driver: "Yea, so would I!"

    5. Re:Boobies by Starteck81 · · Score: 1

      I think it's time to invest in a clothing company that sells burkas.

      --
      "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed H
    6. Re:Boobies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      More like:

      Driver: "I'd hit that"
      Passenger: "Dude, I think you already did."

    7. Re:Boobies by ciaohound · · Score: 1

      You want to have all the cute women in the world run over?

      Well, this is slashdot, after all. Cute women, bullying jocks, idiotic high school teachers, Bill Gates. It could make for a long list.

      --
      Oh, yeah, it's not easy to pad these out to 120 characters.
    8. Re:Boobies by SpeedyDX · · Score: 1

      No kidding.

      Distractions are one thing, and a good, focused driver MAY be able to avoid many of them. But good, focused drivers also need to look around the road to check for drivers who aren't that good, or for pedestrians who are jay-walking, or for children who run out on the street. Good drivers will (and should) check all around themselves for any potential dangers and not just stare straight at where they want to go.

      Whoever thought of this idea was probably a poor driver who never looked around his car. What a horrible and dangerous idea.

    9. Re:Boobies by tibit · · Score: 3, Informative

      It's not even that "abnormal distractions would be bad" -- it would be completely, absolutely crazy to drive like that.

      Landing a plane, on the other hand -- that I could potentially agree on. Some studies show pilots staring at the far end of the runway say from 200ft down to ground contact, so that could potenitally work. It's sort of a reflex thing they do in visual conditions.

      Driving on a long stretch of straight road sometimes looks like that too, when you analyze the eye movements.

      But in "normal" driving, not only the instantaneous eye position is uncorrelated with desired steering wheel input, but also long-term averages are generally uncorrelated.

      Basically, to drive with eye position as the control input is to become blind, to a large extent. I have played a little bit with using eye movement in various control input scenarios, and the only conclusion I came to (in an informal study) was that you can obviously learn rather well to use eye position as the control input. Heck, with audio feedback you can learn even faster, but you become progressively more oblivious to what's going on around you. This may, perhaps, be thought to be "OK" at first sight, as you'd think it rather keeps you focused on a particular area of the surroundings -- just that on curves it usually ends up being anywhere but on the road. So you literally feel like driving in a tunnel. Forget looking at street signs, or navigating in unfamiliar environment. And you better never had to change lanes.

      Remember that the raison d'être of our visual system is exploration of our environment. This also happens when we drive. Eye position will depend on what interesting stuff is out there, not on which way you are driving.

      There's a lot of "eye movments to control this or that" type of studies. Unfortunately, the idea came from science fiction, and belongs on the same shelf with "cleaning up" SD interlaced surveillance video full of compression artifacts to "clearly" see a face that's six pixels across. Such studies certainly have a lot of appeal to the general public, and to anyone who doesn't quite think it through or understand the basic conflicts of purpose involved in using eye movments for something they just can't do while simultaneously maintaining visual awareness. This is the same fantasy as using eye movments for interacting with machine user interfaces: all fine and dandy, as long as you don't need to see/explore the damn interface. If you have the UI all memorized, and ideally are provided with audible cues to help you navigate, you can use eye movments. But the moment you want to look around, it becomes all screwed up.

      Now, in situations where you don't give a damn about maintaining visual input -- you can use eye movements for whatever control inputs you please, and they are quite good for that. Heck, the input is at least 3-dimensional: you can choose not only the direction vector, but to some extent the amplitude of the initial saccade.

      So -- eye movements are great for controlling a car, as long as you're in the passenger seat, and the driver makes sure you won't run over the old lady, and won't drive off the end of a closed bridge -- IOW, as long as you don't need to actually see most of what's outside the window.

      There are of course ways to devise some special patterns of eye movements that switch the modality of the controlled device/interface, so that you can work around the conflict between controlling and visual exploration. But those hardly feel natural. Those are very fine things to do if the alternative is even worse -- say, if you're paralyzed and all that's left is eye motion. But without training and adaptation the eye movement control has anything but "natural feel" to it.

      --
      A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
    10. Re:Boobies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I already almost got into an accident last time the high school girls' track team was out running. This would not help.

    11. Re:Boobies by dotgain · · Score: 1

      Thanks for setting a world record at the fastest inaccurate re-telling of a joke.

    12. Re:Boobies by MikeFM · · Score: 1

      One of the funniest things I ever saw was two very expensive convertibles do a head on crash into each other along Miami's South Beach as both drivers (male) did head swivels to check out the hot girl walking by in almost nothing.

      --
      At what price learning? At what cost wisdom? The price is a man's peace of mind, and the cost is his life.
    13. Re:Boobies by TheLink · · Score: 2, Informative

      > Landing a plane, on the other hand -- that I could potentially agree on.
      > Some studies show pilots staring at the far end of the runway say from 200ft down to ground contact,

      Nah, it's still a stupid idea. If the pilot just looks at something else the plane changes direction, during a _landing_? That'll kill lots of people.

      No thanks, I'd rather have the autopilot land the plane - that stuff can aim the plane at a fixed point.

      See: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fe_pEK_kRVw

      > Say, if you're paralyzed and all that's left is eye motion.

      Except for this case, but no you still shouldn't be allowed to drive a car or fly a plane (except in a simulator or game). You could use it to drive a motorized wheelchair I guess.

      --
    14. Re:Boobies by Spy+der+Mann · · Score: 1

      Wait a second. You could train the system to find boobies for you, recognize them and tell you to look back at the road!

      On the other hand, if the girl with boobies has a T-shirt with a "dangerous curves" road sign... it would be a self-fulfilling prophecy :D

    15. Re:Boobies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So now everybody is going to fuck their roadkill?

    16. Re:Boobies by X0563511 · · Score: 1

      Right. And to expand - they look at the end of the runway for a precise reason...

      If the end of the runway is "moving up" then they are going to lawndart before the runway. If the opposite is true, then they will miss the runway entirely.

      So, they watch the end of the runway because it's one of the critical things they need to monitor - approach angle.

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
    17. Re:Boobies by nurb432 · · Score: 1

      Or dogs.. or road signs.. kids at the bus stop... or that moron that keeps weaving back and forth 3 cars ahead..

      --
      ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    18. Re:Boobies by Jerinaw · · Score: 1

      That is exactly what I thought when I read this article.

    19. Re:Boobies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The first one was a joke? I thought it was some kind of semi-finished proto joke.

  2. Excellent by kyrio · · Score: 0

    This is exactly what we need!

  3. Dangerous by Manip · · Score: 1, Insightful

    So what happens when a long legged angel in a summer dress walks past? Is she going to get run over?

    1. Re:Dangerous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's certainly a problem all of us agree on.

      But when I read that the automatic mode would stop at intersections and wait for the driver to look in the direction it wanted to go before starting, I thought, "Hey, how about looking for cars coming from the opposite direction?" A few problems remain.

    2. Re:Dangerous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps you have a few hundred thousand accounts?

    3. Re:Dangerous by Snarf+You · · Score: 1

      I'm more concerned with what happens when you look in the rearview mirror.

      Or for that matter, any mirror. What happens if you look at your eyes in a mirror? Does it create some sort of feedback loop?

  4. Asleep at the wheel by JamesRing · · Score: 1

    Make sure you don't go into REM sleep at the wheel!

  5. I Thought It First by Asphalt · · Score: 2, Insightful

    just sayin

    1. Re:I Thought It First by masmullin · · Score: 1

      No. Men have been thinking about hawt chicks for a while now.

  6. What next? by Some.Net(Guy) · · Score: 4, Funny

    Once they figure out how to steer the car by thought, I'm going to be at Taco Bell a lot.

    1. Re:What next? by masmullin · · Score: 4, Funny

      I was thinking Arby's

    2. Re:What next? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ohh, a kitty! OMFG!! NOOOOO!!!

      This has seriously got to be the best misunderstanding of sensor systems. Eye: Observe large portions of surroundings. Feed data to brain to make decisions based on all of the observed surroundings...more surroundings observed, the better. Physical Extremities: Use evolutionarily optimized neural control to execute decisions based on observations and predictions.

      My driving teacher always told me to NOT fixate your eyes where you're going, but to look around and stay aware...

    3. Re:What next? by rdnetto · · Score: 1

      You must be American

      --
      Most human behaviour can be explained in terms of identity.
  7. groan by thenextstevejobs · · Score: 1

    why rehash a joke thats ALREADY IN TFS. 4/6 comments so far are redundant. you guys aren't even trying today.

    granted, neither are the editors.

    back on topic: WTF? this is a fucking terrible idea. i hate researchers.

    --
    Long live the BSD license
    1. Re:groan by cosm · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Possible use in fighter jets, video games, or controlled environments, perhaps say a UAV pilot locked in a room. An interesting idea, but a terrible initial application.

      --
      'We are trying to prove ourselves wrong as quickly as possible, because only in that way can we find progress.' RPF
    2. Re:groan by linguizic · · Score: 2, Funny

      Dude, this is /. -- we don't READ the FTS, these jokes are all new to us ;)

      --
      Does this sig remind you of Agatha Christie?
    3. Re:groan by John+Marter · · Score: 1

      I admit I made the same class of comment to my wife before I got that far into the summary.

    4. Re:groan by michael_cain · · Score: 1

      Except for the odd moment here and there, good fighter pilots are looking at/for things in lots of places other than where they want the plane to go. There would seem to be few real-world situations where driving requires such a single-minded focus, with no checking to the sides (or up and down in a plane). Baja racer, perhaps? And then there's always the question of throttle and braking...

    5. Re:groan by Alien1024 · · Score: 1

      Yes, ./ is full of geeks, but Full Text Search is a task best left to computers for now.

  8. Buttons on the rear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Two big external emergency buttons at the rear of the car allow people outside to shut down all systems" Lotta good those buttons will do for someone who's about to be run over head on.

  9. So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "Two big external emergency buttons at the rear of the car allow people outside to shut down all systems"

    It can only be stopped if it is stopped...
    Or someone with a rock and extremely good aim!

    1. Re:So... by mysidia · · Score: 2, Funny

      They need to be on the front of the car and be automatically triggered just by a pedestrian looking at them.

      Also, they need to not shut down all systems, only acceleration systems -- braking needs to still work.

    2. Re:So... by Bill+Dog · · Score: 5, Funny

      Hmm, yes, I guess it's only fair that if a driver can aim their car at someone by staring at them, they should be able to thwart the reckless lecher by staring back.

      They should also add a blink detection system. To determine who wins. ;)

      --
      Attention zealots and haters: 00100 00100
    3. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If looks could kill :)

    4. Re:So... by noidentity · · Score: 1

      There's a very simple solution for dealing with absolutely idiotic things like EyeDriver with its emergency stop buttons on the back of the car: make the developers drive these around, more than one car at a time, on a closed test track for a few days. Oh, and buy a few coffins in advance. Problem solved.

    5. Re:So... by OolimPhon · · Score: 1

      So, you're stopped at a light and a kid slaps the button and runs off... good idea, not.

  10. Most bizzare... by sznupi · · Score: 1

    Why would they use Dodge Caravan (and call it...'The Spirit of Berlin' O_o ) when there's so many German minivans for the taking? (heck, VW popularised the concept)

    --
    One that hath name thou can not otter
    1. Re:Most bizzare... by Moofie · · Score: 2, Informative

      You know the new VW minivans are Dodge Caravans, right?

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    2. Re:Most bizzare... by sznupi · · Score: 1

      That's not even available outside of North America, which tells best how much of a VW that is.

      But there's Touran and Sharan, if limiting ourselfes to VW.

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    3. Re:Most bizzare... by Moofie · · Score: 1

      "which tells best how much of a VW that is."

      I'm not sure I know what that means. VW says it's a VW, but it's made by Chrysler.

      (I'm trying to figure out what either of those companies got out of the deal, but maybe I'm crazy...)

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    4. Re:Most bizzare... by sznupi · · Score: 1

      Yes, that's what I mean; it tells how much of a VW that (car) is = barely a VW at all.

      Chrysler more cars sold, effectively and VW quick entry into a market with a bit local needs?

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    5. Re:Most bizzare... by moosesocks · · Score: 1

      That's debatable. Minivans today more closely resemble the Renault Espace than the VW Van. Although the Dodge Caravan launched a few months before the Espace, and definitely had more of the VW Bus's 'pedigree' evident, its subsequent revisions made it resemble the Espace more and more closely.

      --
      -- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
    6. Re:Most bizzare... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      It's a mis-translation from the German. "Dodge caravan" being the instructions to the pedestrians, not the type of car.

    7. Re:Most bizzare... by sznupi · · Score: 1

      I don't think that invalides VW popularising the concept. For another example - Model T is a large part of kickstarting the whole car craze...yet you won't really find similar cars on the road these days. Or VW Beetle, which in a way picked up where Model T left; also not many cars very like it today (even New Beetle is only superficially similar)

      Plus, there are compact MPV (Touran) cars which don't really descend from Espace. Well, to be fair they do from Renault Scenic ;>

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    8. Re:Most bizzare... by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Well why not ... the older ones used to be Fords: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SEAT_Alhambra

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  11. AntiReusedJoke by cosm · · Score: 1

    In other other new, bad looking women don't seem to notice the change.

    --
    'We are trying to prove ourselves wrong as quickly as possible, because only in that way can we find progress.' RPF
    1. Re:AntiReusedJoke by Asphalt · · Score: 1

      In other other new, bad looking women don't seem to notice the change.

      Leave your mother out of this.

  12. What... by sophomoric · · Score: 1

    What could possibly go wrong?

  13. 360 Awareness by jepaton · · Score: 2, Informative

    Driving in the direction you are looking is a terrible idea.

    Here in the UK you don't pass a driving test without using your rear view mirror, your side mirrors; and looking when appropriate through the side or rear windows. Just because you are looking for potential dangers doesn't mean you want to steer into them (e.g. a car overtaking you). Applying makeup etc. or tuning the radio would be unusually lethal.

    Jonathan Paton

  14. Stop buttons OUTSIDE??? by Psychotic_Wrath · · Score: 1
    Ok so you have emergency stop buttons on the back of the car outside? This brings roadrage to a whole new level, don't like the guy in front of you, give em a nudge and wave goodbye.

    I would hate to have this on my car.

    --

    Doctors do Massage in Longview WA now, who knew?
    1. Re:Stop buttons OUTSIDE??? by dangitman · · Score: 1

      Not to mention that it would be a boon for carjackers. This whole thing is about the worst idea for technology that I've ever heard. How do people get paid to come up with this shit?

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
  15. bad idea by treebeard77 · · Score: 0, Redundant

    How many attractive women are going to be plowed down by idiots who can't take their off them?

    1. Re:bad idea by houghi · · Score: 1
      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    2. Re:bad idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your post made me stair, and I was tought not to, it is defntly a problem of are's.

      Im worryed that the next time I cruse I might loose

      controle of my godamn SPELLING alrudy!

  16. Wow!!!!! by frank_adrian314159 · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Look at that... CRASH!!!!... babe.

    --
    That is all.
  17. This will only work in muslim countries... by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

    This scheme can only work in muslim countries with strict requirements for women to cover themselves.
    Anywhere else and all the pretty women will soon be run over and killed.

    --
    When information is power, privacy is freedom.
  18. Re:Good Looking Women by slick7 · · Score: 0, Redundant

    So are hookers.

    --
    The mind conceives, the body achieves, the spirit manifests.
  19. Cue the Toyota jokes in by sconeu · · Score: 1

    3... 2... 1...

    --
    General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
  20. ...and where do our eyes wander to? by moxley · · Score: 0, Redundant

    You know, the first thought I had when I read this was: as soon as this goes live there will be a rash of hot women mowed down on the street...

  21. I'll wait for the iDriver by LodCrappo · · Score: 4, Funny

    Kind of like the EyeDriver, but Steve Jobs drives your car with his own eyes. This ensures a consistent driving experience, so long as you only want to go where he sends you.

    --
    -Lod
    1. Re:I'll wait for the iDriver by CODiNE · · Score: 1

      LodCrappo? Like the frog? Are you Guyanese?

      --
      Cwm, fjord-bank glyphs vext quiz
    2. Re:I'll wait for the iDriver by ipquickly · · Score: 3, Funny

      Of course with the iDriver, your route will have to be approved by apple 3 weeks in advance.
      It will not contain any nudity, or bikinis.
      And if you wanna get there in a flash. Forget it!

    3. Re:I'll wait for the iDriver by gront · · Score: 1

      Just don't leave your iDriver parked where Gizmodo can buy it from some guy who "finds" it.

    4. Re:I'll wait for the iDriver by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Kind of like the EyeDriver, but Steve Jobs drives your car with his own eyes. This ensures a consistent driving experience, so long as you only want to go where he sends you.

      Perhaps this explains what has been happening to Steve Wozniak's Prius?

    5. Re:I'll wait for the iDriver by ascari · · Score: 1

      You don't have to wait. It exists. http://robotics.mi.fu-berlin.de/pmwiki/pmwiki.php

  22. Attention by venicebeach · · Score: 1

    This is a terrible idea because it unnecessarily links control of the car together with attention. Even covert attention (moving your attention around without moving your eyes) is coupled to the eye movement system in the brain (covertly shifting attention to a different part of the visual field really involves planning eye movements towards that spot). You need to have control of your vehicle uncoupled from this process, since driving requires you to pay attention to many things at once. There's no reason to hijack this system for control when we have a very effective one already.

    We should be trying to free up our effectors, not shift around responsibilities among them. What we really want to do is to hook into ventral premotor cortex directly with a wireless connection so we can control the car with thought and still have our hands free.

  23. wasted objective by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Taking a systems primary input mechanism (human sight) and limiting it to basic directional management in a vehicle is the stupidest idea I have heard in a long time. The car would need to have dynamic braille readers on the steering wheel just to convey the rest of the information usually conveyed through the visual cortex. Speed, revs, mirrors. Just plain dumb objective.

    1. Re:wasted objective by arekq · · Score: 1

      Pretty much everyone here recognize the stupidity of this idea, yet the researchers don't. Are they aliens?

  24. Don't Blink by EdgeyEdgey · · Score: 1

    Blink and you're dead. Don't turn your back. Don't look away. And don't Blink. Good Luck.

    --
    [Intentionally left blank]
    1. Re:Don't Blink by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you blink, are you going to run over a weeping angel?

  25. So. by Runefox · · Score: 1

    One of the first things you learn in any driver's education class is to constantly scan the road ahead of you and pay attention to your surroundings while driving, which involves a lot of eye movement (generally in the direction of forward, but eye movement nonetheless). What happens to this system when your eyes are looking a few cars ahead? What happens to the system when you're trying to make a lane change? What happens when reversing?

    It's an interesting concept, but... Well, tracking eye movement for vehicular control is probably one of the worst applications I can think of. Unless they know something I don't?

    But thankfully, should anything go awry at 31~60MPH, you can always run up and hit the big emergency shut-off buttons on the rear exterior of the vehicle.

    --
    Screw the rules, I have green hair!
    1. Re:So. by NEDHead · · Score: 0

      Actually, when you think about it, if paying attention to the entire environment is dangerous with this system, women drivers may end up with fewer accidents...not to speak of the shrunken 90 year olds peering over the steering wheel.

    2. Re:So. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It scares me how far down the page I had to scroll to find this comment. Mod parent up.

  26. As my old driving teacher used to say... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    aim for the space ahead, never look at what you're trying to avoid (because you'll veer towards it). I believe another word for this phenomenon is target fixation.

  27. Why??? by Curate · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What problem is this actually trying to solve? Are people really finding it too difficult use their arms to drive? Or is this aimed at people who can't drive right now, because they have no arms?

    1. Re:Why??? by AthleteMusicianNerd · · Score: 1

      There ARE people with no arms.

    2. Re:Why??? by AnonymousClown · · Score: 4, Funny

      What problem is this actually trying to solve? Are people really finding it too difficult use their arms to drive? Or is this aimed at people who can't drive right now, because they have no arms?

      Well, one arm to hold a cell phone, another to hold your: sandwich, doughnut, coffee, burger, fries, or coke.

      So yes, most people don't have arms to spare.

      --
      RIP America

      July 4, 1776 - September 11, 2001

    3. Re:Why??? by PRMan · · Score: 1

      Well, one arm to hold a cell phone, another to hold your: sandwich, doughnut, coffee, burger, fries, or coke.

      That's what knees are for!

      --
      Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
    4. Re:Why??? by Minupla · · Score: 1

      I suspect this was in jest, but I knew a quadriplegic (depending on the vertebra where the cord is damaged, you may get some use of hands. In his case, he had gross muscle control of his left hand, but fine muscle control was nonexistent) once, who had to use an incredibly complex hand control to operate a vehicle.

      This sounds like it would be a huge win in simplicating the life for someone like him. You reduce the number of controls he needs from "left, right, acel, brake" to "acel, break, go where I'm looking, don't follow my eyes".

      Min
       

      --
      On the whole, I find that I prefer Slashdot posts to twitter ones because I don't get limited to 140 chars before
    5. Re:Why??? by ShakaUVM · · Score: 1

      >>What problem is this actually trying to solve?

      I don't know what the problem was, but the "solution" will be people driving into women with large breasts.

    6. Re:Why??? by dr.g · · Score: 1

      Amen.

      That was the third thing I thought of. (first, the "running over hot women" thing, then the "That comment will be -1, redundant in about 5 minutes".)

      What the fuck is the market for this?? I mean, I have as much empathy for paraplegics as anyone but I wouldn't think the potential sales would justify the development cost.

      I had a '59, '58 Ford 3/4 ton once long ago (yes, it was already old), no power nothin'. Manual steering, brakes and a long stick floor shifter. That thing was a job to drive, like actual work (still easier than walking, especially with a dozen bags of sand). So I can understand the move to Hydraguide (look it up) and automatic transmissions and power brakes...it was to make driving more practical for bluehairs, girls, stick-armed wimps and lazy people. Now THAT'S a market share.

      But apparently the momentum of "making things easier" has swept automotive engineers past the point of rational analysis of what they are actually trying to accomplish.

      Unless I'm missing something...

      --
      "To be fair, I was left completely unsupervised." ~Anon
    7. Re:Why??? by tibit · · Score: 1

      Ahh, you're in the "let's kill all quadriplegics to shorten their suffering" camp.

      Get in the car, get an eye tracker, and have your eye movements recorded and superimposed over the head camera. Then come back.

      --
      A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
    8. Re:Why??? by Trip6 · · Score: 1

      45k highway deaths a year is why. These technologies when perfected will save countless lives, maybe yours one day.

      --
      I hate being bipolar; it's awesome!
    9. Re:Why??? by Aeiri · · Score: 1

      That's what the feed bag is for!

    10. Re:Why??? by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      What problem is this actually trying to solve? Are people really finding it too difficult use their arms to drive?

      Yes, in California you need your hand free for communicative critique gestures indicative of others' driving skill.
         

    11. Re:Why??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So wait, you want your friend to go from a four-input control system (controls Up, Down, Left and Right) to a four input control system (controls W, A, S, and D), where two of the controls don't actually control the vehicle, they control another input device.

      Please explain to me how this would simplificate him?

    12. Re:Why??? by marciot · · Score: 1

      What happens when you spill hot coffee into your lap and look down at the mess you made? Does the car somehow drive itself into your crotch?

    13. Re:Why??? by Rakishi · · Score: 1

      If you think eye tracking makes the road safer than you know how you can save lives on highways? Never ever drive a car again since you evidently are a disaster waiting to happen.

      See, anyone who knows how to drive spends a lot of time not looking directly in front of them. You usually know what's in front of you. The danger comes from the sides or from behind. If you want to avoid it you better keep an eye out for it.

    14. Re:Why??? by arekq · · Score: 1

      And soon, people will be driving naked, if you know what I mean.

  28. Keep your eyes on the road. by mysidia · · Score: 1

    An old saying that suddenly starts to seem a lot more important.

    Unforunately now, you can't look both ways at a 4-way stop anymore, because you'll wind up turning.

  29. Scanning, Defensive driving and CEVO by aukset · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Advanced driving courses always teach scanning techniques for driving that include looking not only where you are going, but constantly scanning for pedestrians on either side of the road, cars that may or may not see you about to turn in front of you, cars in your left and right side mirrors, and cars in your rear view mirror. They also teach to always have an escape route: if the unexpected happens, always have a place you can steer to to avoid a hazard without crashing into another car or a pedestrian. You can't do these things if you always have to look only where you want the car to go. Peripheral vision is not acute enough to pick up, for example, the shadow of a person's feet beneath a huge SUV parked on the side of a road, where that person may suddenly step out in front of you without looking since the SUV is blocking both your and their line of sight. Unless entirely autonomous, the vehicle's control surfaces HAVE to be independent of eye movement, because situational awareness depends on it (even in some cases the ability to turn your head to check a blind spot, or to see if your kid in the back seat isn't choking on his or her toys).

    --
    No sig now
  30. People do this already by elchulopadre · · Score: 2, Interesting

    People do this already. To learn to drive a car, ride a bike, ski, or control any other type of vehicle, you go through a learning process where you commit the control procedures to muscle memory. Once you have that covered, you pretty much go where you want to go, without necessarily thinking 'ok, now I need to turn the steering wheel'.

    By and large, barring any significant equipment failure, you pretty much go towards whatever has your attention - for better or worse. Target fixation is alive and well in pretty much all of us. If you're on your bike and you keep staring at it, you'll most likely hit it. If you look at the path around it, most likely you won't. It has nothing to do with your ability to control the bike, and everything with the ability to control your attention.

  31. This may help clear up traffic on the 5 and 405 by AthleteMusicianNerd · · Score: 2, Funny

    I feel really bad for the poor guy changing the flat tire, or getting the traffic ticket...but as a Darwinist it's a sacrifice I'm willing to make.

  32. You're not doing it right by Adrian+Lopez · · Score: 1

    If your car's design requires a pair of "big external emergency buttons at the rear", there's definitely something wrong with your design.

    --
    "In prison you just have to shut your eyes and take it. Here you have to shut your eyes and give it."
  33. Blink by condition-label-red · · Score: 1

    What happens when you blink? Or sneeze?

    --
    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit.
    1. Re:Blink by masmullin · · Score: 3, Funny

      death!

    2. Re:Blink by quacking+duck · · Score: 1

      What happens when you blink? Or sneeze?

      Listen, your life could depend on this.

      Don't blink. Don't even blink. Blink and you're dead. They are fast, faster than you can believe. Don't turn your back, don't look away, and don't blink!

      Good luck...

    3. Re:Blink by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Weeping Angels get you.

  34. April Fools! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    April Fools! Oh wha!?! Really? That day, it already passed?

  35. Stupid idea ever by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm sure the large emergency buttons in the back of the vehicle will come in very handy when speeding uncontrollably down the freeway.

  36. Don't look now... by Neanderthal+Ninny · · Score: 2, Insightful

    With most people that drive while texting or looking cellphone, the car should see that idiot is not looking at road and pull over to the side of the road safely so that the idiot knows that person is no looking at the road.

    1. Re:Don't look now... by pydev · · Score: 1

      Trouble with that is that you can't pull over on many highways, to text or do anything else.

  37. "Now driving to...woman on sidewalk." by DamnStupidElf · · Score: 3, Funny

    "You have chosen to look at an accident. Would you like to join the accident?"

  38. This'll be great. by thePowerOfGrayskull · · Score: 2, Informative

    Especially given how many people find it necessary to constantly make eye contact with their passengers when talking. Ah, well. At least it would cull the herd. It's too bad it'll take out so many innocents in the process though; surely there's a more efficient way.

    Alright, that aside... it looks like it won't be that sensitive after RTFA:

    "The car stops at intersections and asks the driver for guidance on which road to take," the researchers say. A few seconds of attention with the driver looking in his desired direction get the car flowing again.

    Heh. That'll be even better. Could you imagine stopping at every intersection... "Please indicate direction..." ... roll forward a block ... "please indicate direction..." ... roll forward...

  39. OH LOOK! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh look, she has some very big br-OOH SHHHHH- *CRASH*

  40. HAHAHA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    LOOK! AN EAGLE!

  41. bad driver=bad design by Todd+Palin · · Score: 1

    Why would anyone take the time to design a device like this without having any understanding of what a normal driver does with their eyes in the course of operating a motor vehicle? Could the designer possibly be such a bad driver that they only look ahead where they are going? Why would anyone fund a design program run by someone that doesn't even know how to drive? That would be like hiring Sarah Palin to be president.

  42. Never understood eye control by LoudMusic · · Score: 1

    I've never understood this desire for eye controlled devices. With the exception of targeting a personal firearm, my eyes bounce around to so many objects so fast that I can barely type a sentence without getting completely distracted. If the cursor was controlled by my eyes while I was typing this paragraph would be nothing but a jumble of text, and half the letters would be strewn about my office.

    --
    No sig for you. YOU GET NO SIG!
    1. Re:Never understood eye control by leppi · · Score: 1

      I've always wanted focus-follows-eyes as an option in X. Sort of like focus-follows-mouse, but without me having to move the mouse.

      Of course, having never used it (cuz it doesn't exist), I can't say if I'd like it or not.

    2. Re:Never understood eye control by panda · · Score: 1

      I'd prefer focus-follows-brain, but I'll settle for focus-follows-eyes.

      --
      Just be sure to wear the gold uniform when you beam down -- you know what happens when you wear the red one.
  43. Bad idea by dandart · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Heheheh. Look at that-AAAARGH!

    What if you're trying not to hit a pedestrian but in concentrating do so? Not good.

  44. Alcohol? by Mr.+Freeman · · Score: 1

    There's a lot of problems, but no one has mentioned drunk drivers yet. The problem with drunk drivers is that they'll fixate on something in front of them and follow it. That's why you have to pay attention at night if you are parked on the side of the road with your lights on. Drunk drivers will hone in on your lights and hit you. Seems like this eye-drive would only make that easier. Then again I guess a drunk driver is pretty deadly even without this.

    (Bonus points if you can tell me whether I'll get sued by apple or BMW first for the iDrive pun)

    --
    -1 disagree is not a modifier for a reason. -1 troll, flaimbait, redundant, overrated are NOT acceptable substitutes.
  45. Driving by wisnoskij · · Score: 1

    Have the developers of this product never driven before?
    and never even bothered to read a book about recommended/required driving practices?

    It is impossible to drive while just looking at were you have to drive.
    you have to check gauges, mirrors, keep an eye all other traffic, etc.

    I suppose you could drive down the street with this and you might not get into an accident, but you would never be allowed to pass a drivers test.

    As far as I can tell this idea is fundamentally flawed and cannot ever possibly work.

    --
    Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
  46. OMG! by PPH · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Look at the tits on that ....Aieee! [Screech! Crash!]

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  47. omg look by uolamer · · Score: 1

    So when there is a car accident on the side of the road... everyone will just drive into it?..

    --
    s/©//g
  48. Spirit of Berlin by PSandusky · · Score: 1

    'The Spirit of Berlin' is also an autonomous car equipped with GPS navigation, scores of cameras, lasers and scanners that enable it to drive by itself. And should the technology-packed vehicle have a major bug, there's still an old fashioned way of stopping it. Two big external emergency buttons at the rear of the car allow people outside to shut down all systems.

    Else the Spirit of Berlin might start looking like the Spirit of Dresden fairly quickly... but if the thing ends up out of control, what the hell good will buttons outside the thing do? Are they expecting someone to chase it?

    --
    "What's the use in being grown up if you can't be childish sometimes?" --Fourth Doctor, "Robot"
  49. hmmm...an eye controlled firearm. by Todd+Palin · · Score: 1

    An eye controlled firearm might make more sense. It sights where you look. And it could fire every time you blink. Now we are talking. If you blinked every time a weapon fired it would be fully automatic fire. It would make a great hunting weapon.

  50. Dont Look by Bat+Dude · · Score: 1

    Just don't look at the oncoming Traffic. This is a late April fools joke, me thinks !

  51. blind spot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you turned around to check your blind spot would it reverse?

  52. in soviet russia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the car steers you!!!

  53. Blinking Yellow Lights. by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 4, Interesting

    So we want cars to steer towards what we are looking at? Seriously? You want to have all the cute women in the world run over?

    While the comment WAS funny there is a problem with something like that already.

    It's been known for decades that drunk drivers tend to fixate on flashing yellow lights and then steer toward them. This makes using flashing yellow lights as a warning counter-productive.

    Oregon, for instance, long ago switched away from blinky-yellow lights to the rear on police cars to use as warning lights when they have people pulled over - with a significant reduction in car-hits-cop-at-traffic-stop incidents.

    California, of course, has standardized on big yellow blinky-lights for cop car pullover warnings. (I recall a few years back when San Jose was lamenting how many of their new fleet of cruisers had been smashed by drunk drivers that year...)

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
    1. Re:Blinking Yellow Lights. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Any references for that? Like, scientific research? Bragging at parties is way funnier, when you NOT quote your source as "some guy at slashdot" ;-)

    2. Re:Blinking Yellow Lights. by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 1

      Since I heard it word-of-mouth I don't have any handy. But I'll see if I can trace it down.

      Meanwhile, if you're really interested, you might try doing that yourself. My day job involves herding packets, not cars. B-)

      --
      Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
  54. Re:Good Looking Women by scotch · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    It's redundant with the fucking article summary.

    --
    XML causes global warming.
  55. Obigatory... by Robin47 · · Score: 1

    Of course with the iDriver, your route will have to be approved by apple 3 weeks in advance.

    There's an App for that!

  56. Practicality by VocationalZero · · Score: 1

    IANAS, but couldn't they seriously cut these practicality issues in half if they just used head rotation instead of eye position?

    What if some people want some sort of "round lever" if you will, that we can use with our manipulators [hands] on to receive instant tactile feedback about the road?

  57. Motorcycles by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

    Anyone ride a motorcycle? They always teach you to "look through your turns" because the bike tends to go where your head is aimed. Regularly accidents happen in which a bike swerves into another vehicle because the rider panics and looks where they don't want to go instead of where they do. Now we can bring this great feature to cars?

  58. My first try: by uvajed_ekil · · Score: 1

    "Wow, can she really wear shorts that sh-" **CRASH**

    --
    This is a hacked account, for which the owner can not be held responsible.
  59. This isn't going to end well by WinstonWolfIT · · Score: 1

    Don't look directly at that car that's about to t-bone yours.

  60. Wow, incredibly stupid idea by 14erCleaner · · Score: 2, Insightful

    What happens when a deer runs onto the shoulder of the road in front of you? Most people would probably look at the deer, not away from it.

    --
    Have you read my blog lately?
  61. nothing good gonna come of this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And this is how Billy McGomper, age 6, of Tuscaloosa, AL, managed to drive his grandmother's SUV onto Highway 115 after he stole the keys, causing a 100 car pile-up and a gas truck explosion. However, his record was beat by Blind Lemon Schwartz of New Orleans, who not only lacked eyesight but was drunk as a skunk when he drove a borrowed car over 12 elderly ladies and a dog before careening off a pier onto the deck of a boat, sinking it.

  62. You insensitive clods! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What if Steve Buscemi, Marty Feldman and Jack Elam want to go for a drive in one of these things?

  63. bad idea by luther349 · · Score: 0

    people dont just stair where they wanna go. we are tought from the very start or driving to pay attention to everything. and its a important lesson. stuff you can do on a test track and real world driving are way different. we have to be constantly looking for stupid drivers who cut us off turn in front of us and otherwise make driving a challenge we do most of are lifes. auto driving systems might work on a freeway but defently not one that uses your eyes and no system will work in city driving. but lets face it when we are on cruse controle on a freeway all we are doing is keeping the car in its lane. and a driver with lack of sleep the task is aruldy to simple and people fall asleep driving. imagine you having to do no task with a full auto drive we will have far more sleeping driver realted accdents. if they ever do come up with a system that works they better still include manual control. maybe just use the same simple feature cruse controle does where tapping the brake disengages it so if you do have to make a quick stop thers no problem. i would be more worryed of people depending on it to much rather then preferring driving the car on there own.

  64. Research. Wise sounds fun otherwise totally useles by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why?
    Do the expression:
    Mom what's that - finger pointing to your right window seat

    rings a bell?

    Also let us remind one thing, most basic one, you move things with your hands, you see things with your eyes. Unless we move to a Jedi state where we can start messing up our surroundings by the power of the force.

    I sense a weak force among these guys :)

  65. Not as bad as it sounds by SuperKendall · · Score: 2, Funny

    This ensures a consistent driving experience, so long as you only want to go where he sends you.

    Yes, but on the other hand you are automatically re-routed around all of the upside-down Vista cars.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  66. Screeech by Bat+Dude · · Score: 0

    schreeeeech bugger looked in rear mirror again. seriously 1 step forward two steps back.

  67. EyeDriver Lets Drivers Steer Car With Their Eyes by adharma · · Score: 1

    right into their cellphone...

    --
    What word rhymes with buried alive?
  68. Happy Times!!! by dogzdik · · Score: 0

    Yeah and when a big angry wasp flies in through the window......

    --

    .

    Voting up, Voting down - If I really gave a fuck about your approval or not, I'd come and ask you.

  69. They shouldn't have used a Dodge Caravan by luxifr · · Score: 1

    They should have used a black Pontiac Firebird Trans Am.
    Oh and they should also implement a voice control and response system

  70. Rubbernecker Pileup, need I say more? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think that about sums it up :)

  71. What if.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What if the driver has no eyes???? Did they think of that?

    1. Re:What if.. by arekq · · Score: 1

      Funny.
      But a realistic case is when the driver wear sun glasses.
      This is basically a device that, instead of the driver giving it orders, it guesses what the driver want to do.
      I don't know how anyone can come up with idea as stupid as this.
      It's much worse than autopilot cars.
      Although the reliability of an autopilot car is doubtful, at the very least, it analyse road condition.
      What does this device do? It monitors the input device of the driver.

  72. I know Germany makes good stuff, but... by Nyder · · Score: 1

    ... is this about doing it because they can?

    while I can see some uses for this, I can't really see any reason to do it because of the dangers.

    First off, if it's for people with no arms, or handicapped arms, I think there's a better alternative then driving.

    the other thing that worries me is, at least when I was in driving school, that your supposed to be paying attention to whats around you. Glance at the review mirror, glance at the side mirrors, look at whats in front of you thru the front, not just the spot your trying to go to.

    In fact, they made it a point to tell us NOT to get fixated on where your driving, because you'll zone out whats around you.

    then again, we don't have the autobahn here in the USA.

    --
    Be seeing you...
  73. Any EXPERIENCED biker will tell you... by GuyFawkes · · Score: 2, Informative

    ... if you are riding down the road and see an object (such as a pothole or large stone or piece of exhaust pipe) that you wish to avoid, THE LAST THING YOU DO IS LOOK AT IT, because you do ride where you look.

    This is a lesson that bikers learn the hard way, you fall off and get hurt.

    Car drivers are different, so you will have car drivers who notice obstacles in the road as being more visually interesting than the blacktop itself, and promptly drive though / over / into all of them.

    "Rubbernecking" also means that every single accident suddenly becomes a gravitational black hole, and the possibility of any vehicle passing it without adding to it approaches zero.

    The steering wheel works perfectly well, just ask Michael Schumacher, if you are going to mess with that then go directly to fully automated, cut the human right out of the control system.

    --
    http://slashdot.org/~GuyFawkes/journal
  74. Gawker Singularity by tempest69 · · Score: 1

    Sure someone drives into a jogger at 60mph, but then a few people turn their heads at the gruesome sight.. they just cant look away.. Then the concerned people realize whats going to happen and cant look away.. before long you have smoking piles of cars in a mountain of carnage.

  75. Seems like a bad idea. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Aren't most of the accidents that happen at speeds under 30mph?

  76. Squirrel! by MacColossus · · Score: 2, Funny

    Squirrel!

  77. Tactile feeback by stewbacca · · Score: 1

    A driver benefits just as much from the tactile feedback they receive from the steering wheel as they do from looking where they are going. Why in the world would anyone want to steer a car and not be able to feel the road?

    Evidently LOTS of people like to be removed from the driving equation given how many American cars are engineered to NOT give drivers any feedback (SUVs, large sedans like the Crown Victoria and its ilk, random crappy car with the sponge suspension and numb steering, etc.).

    1. Re:Tactile feeback by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

      Indeed. I think most people would be happier if they could have self-driving cars. Americans neither want to wait for a bus/train, nor drive their own vehicle safely. Self driving cars are the only solution I can recommend.

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
  78. I don't know by JumpDrive · · Score: 2, Funny

    If I were Scarlett Johansen, I'd be afraid, very afraid.