Slashdot Mirror
Building the Zero-Fatality Car
CWmike writes "In the future, new cars might include an appealing sticker: 'This car is rated for zero fatalities.' John Brandon reports that Volvo, for instance, has launched a program called Vision 2020, which states, 'By 2020, nobody shall be seriously injured or killed in a new Volvo.' It includes not just new protective measures in the car, but technology for communicating dangers to and from the car. Other car companies have similar, less formalized programs. As ambitious as it seems, Ed Kim, an analyst at automotive research firm AutoPacific, says the zero-fatality goal is achievable. In the next 10 years, there will be a confluence of safety technologies — such as road-sign recognition, pedestrian detection and autonomous car controls — that lead to safer cars, says Kim. Will your next car look something like this?"
I need a car metaphor.
Zero is a figment of your imagination. You can only ever approach it, more and more expensively.
They can use some of the same technology as was utilized on this motorcycle:
http://biertijd.com/mediaplayer/?itemid=21816
I'm really interested in the promise of an automated car that you don't have to get a license for or actually drive. They would be inherently safer, even taking failures into consideration. Of course, this will never fly (in America, at least) because we have this mentality that we need to be actively behind the wheel of a six ton three-story tall truck with twelve wheels, wider than two lanes of traffic, with a pair of truck-nuts dangling off the back. To pick our snot-nosed kids up from the grade school.
The zero-fatality car is stationary and has no passenger or pilot space.
WARNING: You are exceeding the speed-limit by 5 mph, we will alert the authorities...
WARNING: Your car is overdue for it's monthly maintenance check and will not start after august 1.
WARNING: You took that corner too fast for current conditions, we have alerted the authorities.
WARNING: Your car has exceeded it's 5 year life span and has been terminated. Please contact your dealer for a great deal on a new one.
The way to achieve perfect security for a computer is unplug it from the network, and never turn it on. I guess the only way to prevent anyone from ever dying in a new Volvo is to prevent them from entering it...
SIGSEGV caught, terminating
wait... not that kind of sig.
"The goal is unique in that Volvo Cars has designated a year and is showing a social responsibility that also extends to people in other vehicles and pedestrians," says Anders Eugensson, safety expert at Volvo Cars. "We are very clear about the fact that our cars should not negatively affect other people at the moment of an accident. In addition, no unprotected roadusers should be seriously injured or killed."
...a semi truck falls off of an overpass and lands on top of one?
...a semi truck going 200mph the other direction crosses the median?
...a semi truck going 200mph on the other road runs a red light?
...that logging truck in front of you loses its cargo?
...that banana truck in front of you loses its cargo, and sends you through the guardrail?
...you run out of gas while crossing the train tracks?
...some idiot leaves their kids in one with windows up for "just a couple minutes" during the middle of summer?
...someone decides to carjack you?
Exactly. I got an '86 Cutlass Supreme with a V8, shoddy tires, worn out brakes, a missing front bumper, and a case of PBR in a cooler in the passenger seat. I'll take them odds vs. any Volvo in the world...
Is that something like the unsinkable Titanic?
Car: Your ex-husband has a gun. He seems agitated. ...Solution calculated. Please exit the vehicle.
Car: His blood pressure is rising, and his pupils are dilated.
Car: Considering prime directive of zero fatalities in a new Volvo...
Car:
Stop-Prism.org: Opt Out of Surveillance
Well your old car might look like it comes off better than the volvo. But likely your V8 engine will end up up crushing you while the volvo will crumble everywhere but the passenger compartment.
...a semi truck falls off of an overpass and lands on top of one? - car won't drive under bridges
...a semi truck going 200mph the other direction crosses the median? - car accelerates to 201MPH, in reverse
...a semi truck going 200mph on the other road runs a red light? - see above
...that logging truck in front of you loses its cargo? - car grows wings, flies over obstruction
...that banana truck in front of you loses its cargo, and sends you through the guardrail? - ejector seat, you're no longer in the car if you die
...you run out of gas while crossing the train tracks? - ejector seat again
...some idiot leaves their kids in one with windows up for "just a couple minutes" during the middle of summer? - warranty only applies to owner
...someone decides to carjack you? - car only comes with pink paintwork, no-one would want to steal that.
politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
A world in which only the idiots die...The idea has promise.
An important change for education.
Actually 4 wheels aren't necessary; 2 will suffice.
However studies show that 4 wheels do tend to degrade operator attentiveness much more than 2 wheels do. Motorcyclists usually focus better on the task at hand (i.e. operating the motorcycle) than automobilists do, because they have fewer things such as passengers, radios/CD/MP3 players, heating/cooling systems, phones, computers, etc. to distract them from it. They also get direct feedback (in terms of wind, seeing the pavement rush past their feet, etc.) of how fast they're going, which helps in making judgments about (for example) how much to brake before making a turn. The more that vehicles mask the vehicle's speed from the operator (smoother ride, better soundproofing, etc), the more dangerous they become.
http://alternatives.rzero.com/
Actually, I'm under the impression that some of the bleeding obvious warning have little to do with "nature designing a bigger idiot" as with basically a law system where people can pretend to be idiots to sue for millions. And where juries of disgruntled anti-corporatist can actually decide to award an idiot that a company pays his medical bill, even when essentially ruling that the idiot is to blame for his own misfortune. Just because, you know, it would be somehow mean to tell a little old lady to pay for her own skin graft, when you can just take some money from a corporation to cover those costs.
E.g., "Wanda Hudson, 44, of Mobile, Ala. After Hudson lost her home to foreclosure, she moved her belongings to a storage unit. She says she was inside her unit one night "looking for some papers" when the storage yard manager found the door to her unit ajar -- and locked it. She denies that she was sleeping inside, but incredibly did not call for help or bang on the door to be let out! She was not found for 63 days and barely survived; the formerly "plump" 150-pound woman lived on food she just happened to have in the unit, and was a mere 83 pounds when she was found. She sued the storage yard for $10 million claiming negligence. Even though the jury was not allowed to learn that Hudson had previously diagnosed mental problems, it found Hudson was nearly 100 percent responsible for her own predicament -- but still awarded her $100,000."
Source: http://www.stellaawards.com/2003.html
Roll that around in your head. Even after ruling her responsible, they _still_ awarded her $100,000. God knows what for. Apparently just because it would be heartless _not_ to rob a company to pay for a trespasser's misfortune.
More worryingly, even warning signs really don't matter any more.
E.g., "Hornbeck volunteered for the Army and served a stint in Iraq. After getting home, he got drunk, wandered into a hotel's service area (passing "DANGER" warning signs), crawled into an air conditioning unit, and was severely cut when the machinery activated. Unable to care for himself due to his drunkenness, he bled to death. A tragedy, to be sure, but one solely caused by a supposedly responsible adult with military training. Despite his irresponsible behavior -- and his perhaps criminal trespassing -- Hornbeck's family sued the hotel for $10 million, as if it's reasonably foreseeable that some drunk fool would ignore warning signs and climb into its heavy duty machinery to sleep off his bender."
Source: http://www.stellaawards.com/2007.html
E.g., a woman sued Burger King after spilling the coffee onto her own lap, because, get this, although the cup did warn that the coffee is hot, the employee didn't also warn her verbally that it's dangerously hot. Because, you know, apparently otherwise it doesn't matter.
Source: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/806345/posts
Worse yet, in some parts you can even get to pay big bucks for something you didn't personally cause or had any way to cause or prevent.
E.g., when a hare-brained pyrotechnics stunt went wrong in a bar and resulted in a deadly blaze, it wasn't just the owners that had to pay. The list of those who were made to pay millions or had to reach a settlement (again in the millions), included the radio channel which aired an ad for the event, and the manufacturer of the beer they served there (and literally had no other involvement with the event, and likely only heard of it when they got sued), and the importer of that beer, and Home Depot who sold the material they used as insulation and which was ignited by their hare-brained pyrotechnics. (Although Home Depot never sold it as fire-proof or anything.)
Source, for example: http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2008-02-13-540
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.