Slashdot Mirror
Your Car Will Tell You How To Hit the Next Green Light
cartechboy (2660665) writes "Hitting that red light sucks. We've all been there, and you know what I'm talking about. But what if your car could tell you the ideal speed to maintain to hit the next green light? That's exactly what's going to happen in the near future thanks to car-to-car technology. Many automakers are already working on this new tech, and Honda's the latest to trial such systems. This is all part of what's known as Universal Traffic Management System which will eventually provide feedback on car-to-car and infrastructure systems before they go into practical use. The system will also be able to tell the driver if a red light is likely to show before reaching an intersection so the driver can slow down, or notify the driver when that red light will turn green. All of this may seem like something that's supposed to benefit the driver's temper, but in reality it's to help save fuel and lower emissions without any physical changes to the car. This is the future, and your vehicle will talk to other vehicles whether you like it or not."
the only adventure left is to destroy society.
Isn't this why they put those countdown timers on the crosswalks?
"Oh, you hate your job? There's a support group for that, it's called everyone, they meet at the bar."
Until that ambulance, fire truck, or police cruiser comes by, spontaneously changing the light.
"Love heals scars love left." -- Henry Rollins
The problem is all the people behind you that will speed up and tailgate you so you can they can have the pleasure of sitting at a red light faster. Your car, in a 35 mph zone - tells you to go 20mph to avoid the red - the person behind you tailgates you and honks their horn.
I'm fairly sure in parts of the UK they implemented staggered green lights along busy stretches of road. If you accelerated modestly to the speed limit, or just below, the lights were timed to turn green as you got to them. Those with lead feet would be accelerating hard, then waiting at the lights as you cruised by.
http://www.frenchgeek.com/
Even in India there are count down clocks on many signals, telling you how many seconds of red is remaining or how many seconds of green is remaining. Just simple feedback like this would reduce accidents and save fuel for the drivers. This technology is easier to implement in a phased manner all over the country rather than fancy-nancy technology involving "the cloud" and such stuff.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
This communication from car to car will never be hacked or spoofed I am sure. In no way will someone be able to craft a message telling cars around it a red light is coming up and so they should all slow down, when there is a green light, thus causing congestion. Certainly no one will try to use it to slow/ stop a car so that it can be 'acquired' by a party other than the driver. No one would ever consider sending stop data to a set of cars in front and go data to cars behind increasing the odds of a collision. No government would mandate such technology, forcing the elimination of generations of otherwise working vehicles.
...because there's several disconnected lights in my town that are a few hundred yards away from each other that end up having completely different cycles. An autopilot drag racing to exploit a 3-second "green" window would be fun, but the cops might not see it that way. "Honest, it was the autopilot doing it, not me! I can't shift that good!"
That, or the whiplash would open the maker up to personal injury lawsuits.
If you can't run a red light, how can the red-light camera not be rigged to issue you a ticket. And other thing, red lights in some instances will *only* turn red when you arrive. It's called speed control. Oh, and Austin, TX loves to do this around 2am so that the green starts on an UP HILL! Fine, I'll burn more gas and contribute to global warming...with fucking glee!!!
Did I mention that I really hate the traffic in Austin and the bullshit timing of the lights there?
Life is not for the lazy.
The system will also be able to tell the driver if a red light is likely to show before reaching an intersection so the driver can slow down.
Ok all you slashdotters under the age of 75. Do any of you actually think anyone would slow down if there's a chance of hitting an upcoming red light?
Based on what I see on the roads on a daily basis some people don't even slow down when they know the red light is imminent. Instead they try to turn it green again through a lame 150hp attempt at changing its colour via doppler effect.
And I doubt most of us have. Submitter is an idiot.
Cars, people, and "automation" is a great recipe for more problems. As with the red light cameras, there will be bias in reporting the effectiveness of the solution. wrt the cameras, the number of red lights NOT run and tickets issued are listed as benefits. What is missing from the glowing reports is the number of accidents CAUSED . The deletion is allowed because the accidents happen before the light. "Oh, this is a separate issue," does not cut it when I cautiously stop and then get rear-ended by someone trying to make the light.
Rational behavior in software will not necessarily result in rational behavior in driving.
In some parts of the world they have dynamic speed signs that tells what speed you need to drive to hit each traffic light when they are green, aka. a green wave. Works like a charm no matter what kind of vehicle you are driving.
--- Reality doesn't care about your opinions, it happens anyway and if you are in the way you'll get squished.
Stop putting stop signs/lights every 50 feet. Build more roundabouts.
Why the hell do I have to stop at a stop sign at 3 in the morning with no one in site and waste gas. Make it a mini-roundabout. Teach people how to drive.
This article presumes people give a rat's ass about saving fuel or driving safely. As those of us who drive on a regular basis can attest, more and more people seem to be of the mindset that no matter what, they will accelerate as hard as possible just so they can slam on the brakes as hard as possible at every opportunity.
This morning I had a guy literally on my rear bumper (less than 1 meter) and when it looked like there might be an opportunity for him to jump into the lane next to get around around me, he tried to take it. Unfortunately for him he misjudged the line of cars in that lane and had to swerve back behind me.
He wasn't going to get anywhere faster as there was a red light for us (a left turn), and he would have only gotten one car ahead, but by golly he was going to use every drop of fuel he possibly could just to try and do it.
I, and others, can relate story after story about people like this, and the only thing this proposal will do is add costs to vehicles (and those driving them when the system breaks down), cause more people to try and beat the red light which means more accidents, as well as people slamming on their brakes when they misjudge the timing, also causing more accidents.
Once again, we are trying to find a technical solution to a human problem rather than fixing the human problem.
We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
I've been timing my lights for decades. When you arrive at that "next green light" you'll find that the cars that left the last green light with you are already parked there ahead of you, so you have to stop anyway while they jackrabbit out to beat everyone to the next red light.
Lacking <sarcasm> tags,
Some places, like Corpus Christie Texas, actively timed lights to minimize the flow of traffic. Officials used the term "traffic calming". You can't get to green when the intent is to stop you with red. It's been a while, so maybe that horrific policy is no longer in place.
it lies a lot and has no clue on traffic :p
Never antropomorphize computers, they do not like that
This is frickin retarded. If cars can talk to each other and send speed, direction/route, etc., then there should be no need for stoplights at all. Should a pedestrian wish to cross, they can provide them with a device that tells the cars they are handicap and need to cross. Morons.
No, those are for pedestrians so they don't get stuck in the middle of the street when the light changes on their side. Where do you live that you can see those from your side of the intersection?
Except that the massive pickup behind me who is driving 3 inches from my bumper revving his engine and cussing has no idea why I'm driving as slow as I am. I drive a VW clean diesel and my fuel economy (on average over three years) is already over 50mpg from driving like this as often as possible. Trust me, this initiative will go absolutely nowhere until the cars are driving themselves. You can't change human behaviour like you are hoping to. Even when they can see the red light in front of them people MUST get there as quickly as possible so they can stop and wait.
I am not interested in articles about life extension advancements.
We need this "tech" only because the average driver is a complete and utter moron. we need lane assist because looking out the front window is hard, we need Light timing assist, because paying attention and thinking is hard, we need backup cameras because actually looking behind us is hard.
As a motorcyclist of 30 years, I have watched how the average car driver has turned into complete drooling morons every year. And the auto companies are catering to them.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Gosh, I just put an IR emitter on my dash flashing at 14.025hz and the lights are always green for me.... what's so new in TFA?
I don't want to be able to time lights. I want traffic lights to go away. I want cars that can either drive themselves and time their interactions with other cars or assist the driver with maneuvering between cars at an intersection. If I have to slow down, that means that everybody behind me has to slow down. No thank you. I hate spending my days in traffic and waiting at lights (ESPECIALLY when there's nobody coming from the side with a green light!). This is 2014. Let's make our cars smarter because humans sure as hell aren't getting any smarter.
no more need to track license plates with cameras, all the tracking data they ever wanted will be easily available
So correct me if I'm wrong, but if all drivers adopted this, wouldn't it result in traffic in a lane approaching a light from converging together into "clumps" or "waves"?
Cars near the front of any given clump would be slowing down in order to arrive at the light after it has stopped being red and become green. (Close) Behind those cars would cars which would have passed through during the green interval regardless of this system. At the back of a clump would be cars who are speeding up to attempt to "get in" on that same green signal.
Ultimately it would result in cars travelling very close together, with huge spaces between "convoys". It might even be more efficient, so sure - but while there are still humans behind the wheel, this seems dangerous as everyone will always be "tailgating". Once CPUs are behind all the wheels, it will be trivial to implement using the "Internet of Things".
"This is the future, and your vehicle will talk to other vehicles whether you like it or not."
*This is the future, and your car will have a backup camera whether you like it or not.
*This is the future, and we've "proven" eating beef is evil and you will have to eat plants, whether you like it or not.
*This is the future, and your privacy is a luxury which you will be forced to give up for the "greater good", whether you like it or not.
*This is the future, and "evil" money doesn't exist so you will live by an advanced, centrally controlled credit system which is "fair and equitable" whether you like it or not.
*This is the future, and the government will have its hands in all aspects of your life whether you like it or not.
Nazi eugenics were the future too, until people realized that its practical implementation boiled down to genocide. Now they're an ugly part of the past that should remind us we can't fix human. But doesn't stop "the enlightened ones" from trying because it makes us feel good. Now I'm not against the future. I have more LED bulbs in my house than most people, and I'm going to get a Tesla as soon as I can afford one. I hate red lights as much as anyone, but how much of our humanity will we give up for the sake of "the future". Let's just be careful with this line of thought where we must sacrifice everything for a Utopian future that will never exist.
"Now, I doubt any of you would prefer a rolled up newspaper as a weapon against a dictator or a criminal intruder."
Oh what is this garbage, now we have articles that can only be viewed in Beta? If I click for classic mode it sends me back to the main page, then when I try to view this article it takes me back to this beta view crap? To hell with this, I guess I don't need to read this one.
Instead of going the speed limit until the last second and braking at a red light, I take my foot off the gas and coast up to it. Frequently I never have to use the brake at all. :p
Unfortunately it drives the type-A drivers behind me crazy.
On the flip side, I was sitting at a light the other day (in Florida, which has the longest lights in the world) thinking how great it would be if all cars sitting at a red light were somehow forced to start moving at once when the light turns green. It seems I'm the only person who understands that eventually the red light will turn green. This would allow many more cars to make it through each cycle.
Eaves dropping on these systems would be great. You could set your system up so it could tell you whether to change your pace to catch a green and not hit red, or to catch a red and get your wind.
The "fogey blue" sedan is never in the right lane. It stays to the left, blocking all who wish to pass it legally.
If my car had missiles behind the headlights (like the cars in James Bond movies), the "fogey blue" sedan doing 20-under in the fast lane would be the first one to burn.
I like a system I saw in Mexico and I've heard exists elsewhere, where the green light flashes for a few seconds before turning yellow.
But then the police department can't raise money by issuing tickets for running red lights. Oh Noes! We might not even be able to justify those fancy red-light cameras. Isn't it the 'Murican Way (tm) to profit from punishment?
[/sarcasm]
... will not appreciate this. You'll be lucky if you don't end up getting rear ended while driving with this technology. Yeah, it saves gas (and hence money) but the person who is 3 inches off your bumper is not concerned about your MPG, they just want to get to wherever they are going. You'll be lucky if you only get the finger from them.
And don't tell me about "no fault insurance". That is a giant load of crap. "No fault" is just a way for insurance companies to make even more money off accidents, by raising rates for both the person who caused the accident and the victim.
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
My car isn't a black box.
It has fuses and antennas and relays and switches.
If I want to disable a "feature," I can.
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
Even in India there are count down clocks on many signals, telling you how many seconds of red is remaining or how many seconds of green is remaining.
That might be useful if drivers in India paid even the slightest bit of attention to traffic laws. Seriously, driving there you take your life into your hands.
(I joke but only a little)
Why have the car tell, when it is better to have the lightcross itself tell? The low tech solution is to simply show the countdown for when the light will change on the lightcross itself. You see a large counter sign the size of the traffic light triplet stating it will change in 37 seconds. You know it inmediately if you will reach it in time so no need to stress - you know it if you need to slightly increase the speed too, as well as you would know if you cannot make it.
I have already seen this system used extensively and it seem like a great success! The only reason you might not have heard is that the place it has been used for several years already is Havana, Cuba... I do not think they have the method patented, so go see and learn ;)
If anyone gets to within 1m of me at any kind of speed I'll slow down, to a crawl if necessary, until they get the hint*.
I do that too. I LOVE watching the steam come out their ears. I don't drive like a grandmother so anyone who is riding my bumper that closely is really driving recklessly.
I don't want my car to be talking to other cars, or servers, or anyone else. Thanks, but no thanks. Omit all of that electronics and lower the price.
In the city where I live, the lights are timed in such a way that once you get one red light, without aggressive acceleration and speeding, you will be stopped at the next light. Unless the system and help you time when you leave, it seems like it wouldn't work without either driving well above the speed limit or well below it.
{begin soapbox}
And of course, this is just fodder for police departments. As we all know, red light running and speeding is the gateway crime into bigger badder behaviors. And, the we all know the police are not motivated by revenue or promotions for catching the most. {end soapbox}
I've always said English was my second language. Had Romeo and Juliet been written in C, I might have understood it.
I could see this type of thing helping on blind corners with lights and in relatively light traffic. It would also help people who don't pay attention to the lights or where the lights are too high to see.
One issue that no one has brought up yet, though, is that people will rely on using the system to the point where they will go through new or existing traffic lights simply because they not in the system...
In our state stoplights with those timers only work when there is a pedestrian waiting to cross. They do not work any other time
At this point I just want automated cars.
There are too many crappy drivers on the roads and automation could go a long way to reducing congestion caused by morons that simply can't figure out right of way and merging. Also, it removes the distracted human element, i.e. talking/texting/tired/drunk/etc.
I enjoy driving (at least when I'm away from DC) but I'm at the point where I think we'd be better off with less human control.
You just have to travel at 0.3 c. Thanks to the Doppler effect, the red light appears green. You can safely ignore the blue ones.
I wish they would make the yellow blink a cadence so I can know when it will turn red.
This used to be impractical be cause it would burn out incandecant bulbs.
We have LED's now, so maybe three blinks to dark and on the fourth it turns red.
The timing of the blinks should be chosen to provide the most useful information for the speed approaching the intersection.
(As in, do I have enough time to make the light.)
The result would be safer, with no excuse to run the red by 'accident'.
Sadly, this would cut a major revenue source with folks putting in stop light cameras and then squeezing the orange to make tickets more likely.
So I'm not holding my breath.
What most people don't know is that you can improve your fuel economy rather dramatically using a variety of techniques commonly referred as "Hyper-miling".
People are well aware that hypermiling improves fuel economy. What they care a LOT more about is actually getting where they are going in a timely manner. Driving behind someone who is hypermiling is enough to drive even Mother Teresa to want to bust a cap in the asshat in front of them. If you really want to improve fuel economy, drive a motorcycle. You'll get FAR better gas mileage than any car you can buy and you won't have to drive slower than my grandmother while doing it.
In any event, you *can* get a rather sharp increase in fuel economy by paying attention to the forces of momentum, timing and friction.
At the cost of driving very slowly, getting in the way of others and annoying everyone around you who have zero interest in driving like that because they have things they care a lot more about than maximizing fuel economy. Even at 50mpg your car still is incredibly wasteful. It's like trying to put out a forest fire by urinating on it.
It's called "Hypermiling"
And it's difficult to do when everyone around you is hell bent on getting to that next red light before it turns green.
XKCD:Xeric Knowledge Comically Dispen
Interesting. I'd like to hear how you use your tires less. Does driving like you permit your car to bend gravity to your whim?
Here in Alabama, it seems some drivers have to check the color chart on their dashboard to be sure to accelerate.
Then there's the ones who go 30 in a 50 because their turn lane is just a couple of blocks away.
And those who tailgate because the speed limit is too slow...
That is assuming that all lights are on the same timing system and are calibrated to be in perfect timing at the posted speed limit (forget that changes mile by mile sometimes). Also, many lights have triggers so they dont change until a car stops at the light.
After all that, you have to hope for everyone else on the road to play nice..
Yeah, sure.
"I watch you very carefully. Green mean go. Red mean stop. Yellow mean go very fast."
Seriously, assuming that this isn't an April Fool's joke posting, this tech now effectively gives more control to the big brother folks running the traffic control centers. They could retard the timing of the lights to slow people down. Some irritating bureaucrat wants his limousine to get across town faster? One phone call and the lights all favor his route. How long will it be before self-driving cars have to check in with the traffic control center to get a speed request approved?
There is a reason lights already don't alert you to how long until they turn green. If you know when a light is going to turn green, you'll be ready to immediately speed through. But the guy crossing the other way is trying to beat the red light. Suddenly your chances of getting into an accident go way up. Without knowing when the light turns green, it will probably take you a bit longer to get going.
Or as it has happened IRL... they mash the gas peddle, swerve around you to get in front, flip you the bird, scream at you with the window rolled down, only to have to stop four seconds later, as you slowly drive up right behind them at the light :P
I'm surprised that no one has mentioned the security nightmare that is likely to ensue from this. Car-to-car network? Just how is this network going to authenticate information? Imagine the fun that some people would have with this. Imagine the danger at blind curves. Sure drivers would be told not to depend on the information, but you know they will anyway.
This all seems a bit short sighted.
One car does the exact speed limit, and just barely makes it through a green light.
They saved a tiny bit of gas.
Good for them, the shelfish jerks.
If they had of gone a little bit faster, the three cars stuck behind them could have also gone through the green light.
Instead they had to stop, and now have to accelerate from 0 burning way more fuel then the shelfish guy "saved".
I don't think this is going to average out as a win for anyone except maybe law enforcement and car makers.
What this IS going to make people further dissengage from the act of driving. Why bother to look ahead and see what the next stop light is doing?
My car will tell me anyways.
Suddenly people are much freerer to do non driving tasks such as texting, or surfing the web on their phones.
Of course, this will cause more "distracted driving" tickets, and help fuel the "need" for automated cars.
The other thing it's going to do is severly agravate people who are stuck behind these people slowly coasting through a stale green light causing them to "loose" their green light that their car said they were entitled to.
I bredict a lot more road rage and aggressive driving problems, further proving the "need" for automated cars.
I think this has absolutely nothing to do with fuel economy, and more about somebody trying to push for automated cars.
You're just seeing the ground work to force the issue at a later date.
We'd be one step closer to utopia if parked cars could re-align the space between them as cars enter and leave, rather than leave those infuriating gaps between them that are too small for a car, but way more than needed to pull the car out.
And yes, with all the needed safety and security precautions this would entail.
AND YES, angled street parking would be a solution, but you'd have to go full Robert Moses in some neighborhoods to make that happen, and we'd rather not.
.
Prisencolinensinainciusol. Ol Rait!
I've seen something like this on main roads in and around Amsterdam. It was pretty old technology actually. Just a column of illuminated speeds which told you how fast you have to be going to catch the next green light. No countdown, guessing speeds or gauging distances needed.
Have gnu, will travel.
Braking and accelerating increases the friction and therefore the wear on the tires, you god damn faggoty moronic fuckwad.
Some cities in cahoots with the Colorado red-light revenue camera people that dial their yellow light times down to increase autoticketing are going to fight this.
If you're hitting the lights perhaps you should steer a little to the left or right to avoid them.
Nullius in verba
Lights that are timed for 30mph are also timed for 60.
Why is your desire to put your foot down, and your misapprehension that you'll save much journey time by doing so a hyper-miler's problem?
Even if it is 1 second I save, it is one second of MY LIFE. I don't have any interest in trading my time for someone else's pointless pursuit of a few extra MPG. My time is the most valuable thing I have and I resent anyone who interferes needlessly with my ability to spend it on the things that matter to me.
Can't happen in our town. The traffic department has made such a balls-up of the traffic lights that nothing is synchronized. You will not even find two adjacent lights synchronized to the speed limit. Besides, when you see the light half-a-mile ahead turn red you know how fast to go to hit the green. Do people adjust? No,. they just keep going at 5 to 10 mph above the limit, hit the red and sit there.
Drive 5mph over the speed limit. That's what the lights are timed to around here. Drive the speed limit and get stopped at 2/3 of the lights. I fear these cars will tell people to slow down to catch a green light, resulting in traffic build up.
You can also see the timers if you are on the sidewalk, but those pedestrians get in the way. But once their bodies do the 'bounce and roll' to a dead stop on the side, it is clear sailing.
All those lights are more recommendations than actual rules, or so I have told myself.
Just because someone adds a pot plant to the road, doesn't make it bad. Pot plants want the best for us.
Which they aren't, unless they have some sort of communication or progression system. NONE of the traffic signals in my town are interconnected or timed for progression - all are fully actuated, meaning that they will blow red in your face with no warning, or sit there forever on red if you're on a side street and it's set to allow 5 minutes of main street traffic to flow (even with big holes between the platoons). Unless your car can tell the signal you're coming (as some emergency vehicles can), this is worthless in most US suburbs. Was amusing when I lived in a town where the main streets crossed on a 1/2-mile grid. Until they started adding left-turn phases and in-between signals, all the signals in town (theoretically) changed at the same time, resulting in a 30 mph setting. Or some integer multiple thereof, which was exploited (or the attempt made) by numerous idiots with large pickup trucks and heavy feet. Speed limit was 40 mph. Cops were revenue agents. And the timing usually only worked over short segments (2-3 signals) due to clock drift and general perversity.
MY car better shut the fuck up and let me drive.
Sacred cows make the best burgers.
Stop
Go
Go To 20
20 Go Faster!
Seems like a Google Glass app could identify traffic lights and changes in their status way down the road while you're paying attention to the car in front of you. Then maybe project a little count down for when the app thinks the next light should turn green/red based on the one prior and the next one. Maybe you could give it feed back like "countdown off by +3 seconds" then the app could log that info along with GPS coords and heading for the next time you're encounter the light.
I came to the datacenter drunk with a fake ID, don't you want to be just like me?
This is mature old technology that would actually achieve the stated goal at a reasonable cost with little to no opportunity for abuse, so of course no one in government is going to seriously consider the option.
Making all the cars talk to each other would cost far more (lots of opportunities for the well-connected to make their next billion here) and open up nearly endless opportunities for abuse, while most likely not actually solving the problem (so that next year we can make the well-connected even more money by attempting to solve it again.) From a government perspective, that plan is so superior the former no one will even think twice.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
and just run them all, or better yet stop at a green, wait for the red THEN run it.
In my city, every signal-controlled intersection has sensors, even though most intersections between heavily trafficked streets appear to work on timers. The side streets with signals, however, use the sensor to interrupt cross traffic - usually after some combination of delay and count of waiting cars.
Unfortunately this combination appears more often than not to waste fuel and create more pollution. This is because the algorithm doesn't coordinate between intersections, or use cross-street sensors to detect a break in the cross traffic that will allow the one or two side street cars cross. Instead, Murphy's law reigns, and one or two cars needing to cross the main boulevard will be forced to wait at a red light while gaps in the cross traffic go by, and then several dozen cars will be forced to stop while the one or two cars use the intersection, and then several dozen cars must accelerate from a stop again.
My city is home to JPL and Cal Tech. We can send robots to Mars and spacecraft into interstellar space. But we can't coordinate sensors across the city to prevent me (and 30 others) from having to stop at a red light so that one car can pass, and then watch the intersection go unused for another 90 seconds... again and again and again as I cross town. Even more frequently, I see people sit at lights on side streets waiting thru gaps in traffic clearly long enough for crossing.
We have the necessary high bandwidth wireless communication, mesh networking technology, and computing power to change this. But it isn't happening.
I know that the only reason it's not already done is because it's not important to the people who manage this sort of thing, not important enough to spend the necessary money on R&D and implementation, anyway. But air quality and pollution are very important in Southern California. Isn't it important enough for something as solveable as this?
Surely someone in Pasadena or Cambridge or Santa Clara or Pasadena or Austin or Raleigh or Atlanta -- name your tech hub -- has an interest.
I can see the fnords!
This technology has been around for quite a while, but because it saves gas, the Republicans will not allow it to be used. They're against everything that helps the environment. Also, it reduces the cost to own a car so they hate it. They don't want the poor and minorities to own cars so that is why they do everything they can to increase the price of car ownership. Expect them to put someone in prison over trying to give this to us.
What a waste of technology. Back in the 70s, in many locales, signs were posted that told you for what speed the lights were timed for. If you drove those speeds, you made the lights, plain and simple. To use inter-vehicle communication just so one can make the lights is lame. There are a number of valid reasons for this technology that should be what is promoted, but if the main focus is on making the lights, well, what a waste. They were doing it decades ago before there was even the IBM PC.
"This is the future, and your vehicle will talk to other vehicles whether you like it or not.""
not if i encase my car in aluminum foil.
You mean... the speed limit?
This was trailed years ago in Melbourne Australia. As you approach the lights signs advise driving 60, 50, 40, etc. as appropriate but sometimes, show no speed. Drivers quickly learn that this means they need to speed to catch the lights ... so they do. Police don't like this so the trial is killed. There's no way to show legal speeds in a way that drivers can't figure out when it's best for them to speed. This can't work until we're all driving automated vehicles that set their own speed.
you need to maintain 200mph in order to make the green light... watch as people accelerate like mad and then slam on their brakes when they cant quite make it.
this already exists in many countries... i dont know why the US hasnt adopted it yet.
We had this in Victoria Australia about 20 years ago on signs next to the road. It was ripped out as a failure. You are driving along and the sign says "60kph" for the 2 cars in front of you. Then as you get close it says "40kph" - that means I'm going to miss the green light those 2 cars are going to get. I better speed up to 70 to make sure I get through. It was a real, deployed, expensive system, and now it's 100% removed. Not even a sign pole left.
"The system will also be able to tell the driver if a red light is likely to show before reaching an intersection so the driver can"... floor it.
...a smaller UID than mine?
ERE I AM, JH
That that is is that that that that is not is not.
It was red ahead of me, so I lifted off and let the car roll. The guy behind didn't like this, so he switched into the other lane and passed me. He then spotted the light, slammed on the brakes, then cut in front of me. I hit his back corner.
It probably wouldn't have been written off if it had been worth more - but wing, bonnet, radiator, aircon radiator, lights, bumper... it added up.
I'm now less likely to try to catch the green.
exactly: reduce speed to make their following distance correct (2sec headway)
It's a nice idea, and I imagine we will implement intelligent forecasting in cars. I can't wait to see it. But in reality you can't anticipate the actions of other drivers, bicyclists or pedestrians. So yes, you may get to the light when it's green alright, and that's great. If you're in the suburbs with low traffic, win. However in urban environments or in moderate to high traffic this won't be as useful as there are any number of reasons you couldn't cross an intersection on a green light; a line of cars already trying to get through slowing you down, grid lock, someone turning left against oncoming traffic, someone turning across a busy crosswalk, a bicycle coming out of nowhere, etc. Better intersection design, and improved intersection flow controls should accompany more intelligent cars in order to alleviate some of these gotchas. Nonetheless, a step towards efficiency is a positive step.
Since the car companies won't talk to us (yes, GM, I'm talking about your killer cars), maybe it's a good idea that the cars talk to each other. Of course, we'll never know what they'll dream at night when no one's driving....
So, now our cars will tell us how to it green lights.
I assume that it will take our safety into consideration and tell us to hit it with a brick or a club, because hitting it with are hands can get you injured.
Well, never mind, I have to go, my laptop just told me to set all gray dustbins on fire... have to go now.
-- 29A the number of the Beast