Ford Showcases Self-Parking Car Technology

MojoKid writes "Although the dream of roads full of driverless cars is a ways off, several companies such as Tesla and Google are taking steps toward that goal by developing self-driving car technology. Ford is now also demonstrating self-parking technology called Fully Assisted Parking Aid that will actually help a driver locate a spot and then make the car automatically park itself--without the driver inside. Indeed, you'll be able to hop out of the car and use a smartphone app to tell your car to park itself. This is ideal for both parking in tight spaces (i.e., you don't have to squeeze your way out of your vehicle while trying not to bang the next car's door) and for those who are just terrible at parking to begin with."

Comments

Dumber and dumber

[Anonymous Coward]

Aren't we just encouraging people to become less skilled and overall less intelligent when we remove the necessity to actually learn skills like driving? How long will it be before you can skate through life without having to learn anything at all?

Re:Dumber and dumber

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, it all started downhill when we let others figure out what plants were edible, dispatch animals to provide our meat, and where to shit w/o contaminating the water we drink....

Then they invented the syncro-mesh so we didn't have to learn how to double clutch to avoid crashing the gears...

Did I miss anything else?

Re:Dumber and dumber

[stenvar]

And obvious response, but not quite right. Arguably, if you lack the skills to park, you shouldn't be driving in the first place. In different words, self-parking is fine when it goes with self-driving cars, but it isn't fine when it goes with drivers that are expected to be able to drive in complex and tight situations.

Re:Dumber and dumber

[profplump]

While I agree that more driver skill is generally desirable it's a question of balance -- there are all sorts of potentially useful driving skills that we don't even teach let alone require for the typical driver, instead relying on vehicle, roadway, and traffic engineering to provide the desired outcomes. We try pretty hard to design public roads to not require complex or tight maneuvering specifically because many drivers lack those skills (and more generally because it improves safety even among drivers who have those skills, as accidents *do* happen even among highly skilled drivers).

I also object to the idea that there's an externally-relevant distinction between a driver using technology in place of manual skill. We only really care about the effective skill of the combined vehicle-driver system; I couldn't care less if a bus doesn't crush me because the driver has super-human skills or because the computer stopped on behalf of a sub-par driver -- in both cases I avoided potential injury. If you want recognition for your driving skills enter a race; the rest of us only care that your vehicle doesn't do something harmful.

Re:Dumber and dumber

[Anonymous Coward]

>> in every aspects of the machine

how technically competent are you? can you change your oil? how about pulling the transmission? when was the last time you personally made sure that the emergency hood-latch on your car is functioning?

you might think I'm trolling, but talk to a mechanic -- they have a really good understanding of what will happen to you and your car if, say, a tie-rod fails.

Quick -- if you've been driving for a long time and have a great feel for your car -- how will your car behave if a tie-rod breaks? If your immediate answer wasn't "one of my front wheels will not be under my control" then you don't know "how it will behave in every moment".

what's the proper way to steer out of a potential sideways roll down a hill? Have you practiced lately?

You're ascribing a lot of competence to Everyone, and you are going to be disappointed every day of your life.

Re:Except...

[mjwx]

(i.e., you don't have to squeeze your way out of your vehicle while trying not to bang the next car's door)

That brilliant plan has two massive shortcomings:
1) You still need to squeeze back into the car when you're ready to leave (assuming there is no "unpark" feature)
2) What are the odds that the driver of the car parked NEXT to your in your overly narrow space will ding your passenger side door trying to get into HIS car?

I'm more worreid that the technology does not work as advertised and will end up crashing into my parked non-autonomous car because it didn't detect it and through the space was empty (If you believe the advertising, I have a bridge to sell you... It comes with several cars). Seeing as I almost always reverse park, a bump is enough to kick start the dash cam. A driverless car should make for some interesting footage.

However who's responsible for a self driving car? Do I (or more accurately, my insurer) sue the owner (who was not in control of the vehicle at the time) or the car company (who has no doubt waived responsibility for this with a ream of paperwork when they sold it).

Beyond this, does the vehicle have the capacity to deal with arsehole parkers. People who are across multiple bays or cut in and steal parking spaces. I can see the first law suit now when Andy Arsehole cuts off an autonomous car to steal the parking bay and gets T-boned by it. However, knowing Ford the system is probably designed to be an arsehole parker.