Slashdot Mirror
GM To Introduce Hands-Free Driving In Cadillac Model
cold fjord notes that drivers will be able to switch a new Cadillac model to partial auto-pilot. General Motors Co. (GM), the largest U.S. automaker, will introduce a Cadillac model in two years that can travel on the highway without the driver holding the steering wheel or putting a foot on a pedal. The 2017 Cadillac model will feature "Super Cruise" technology that takes control of steering, acceleration and braking at highway speeds of 70 miles per hour or in stop-and-go congested traffic, Chief Executive Officer Mary Barra said yesterday in a speech at the Intelligent Transport System World Congress in Detroit. GM declined to release the name of the model that will carry the feature. Barra also said GM in two years will become the first automaker to equip a model with so-called vehicle-to-vehicle technology that enables the car to communicate with other autos with similar abilities to warn of traffic hazards and improve road safety. GM will make the V2V feature standard on its 2017 Cadillac CTS sedan, debuting in the second half of 2016, she said. The Super Cruise feature will be on a different Cadillac model and goes beyond similar technology available on some Mercedes-Benz models that operates only at low speeds.
It seems all the new models have some bugs to work out.
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
given that GM has had to recall more cars in 2014 than they sold globally in 2011,2012, and 2013 combined, it strikes me as almost surreal that they are floating the idea that consumers should 'trust them' in their ability to produce this technology safely and bug-free.
then again, people do have pretty short memories, and are easily distracted by shiny things . either way though, i think this can safely be called either chutzpah, or some kind of weird statement regarding what they think consumer's attention span is.
I can't even begin to imagine the ridiculous agreement they'll expect you to sign when purchasing the car. That sound you can hear is every single lawyer in GM's legal department getting an instant erection whilst simultaneously browsing the internet for super-expensive toys to order.
I just love how we're taking the incremental steps to fully autonomous vehicles.
And I'd LOVE to see the specs for the car to car communication. Because I'll lay even money that security was one of the last thoughts of the engineers and that the C2C interface will have direct access to the cars CAN bus or whatever it is GM uses these days. Fun times!
GM To Introduce Hands-Free Driving In Cadillac Model
Genetic Modification has definitely gone too far.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
I don't doubt GM and others can make this work. But we'll never know how many of the "sudden acceleration" Toyota accidents were actually user errors blamed via "Oh yeah, me too. That's the ticket!" excuse. Toyota eventually just settled with everyone rather than go through the cases all trial-by-trial. In other words, even if it works perfectly, how many drivers will blame the technology irregardless? And if it doesn't work perfectly, how many juries will err on the side of the victim?
Gently reply
Why is this new? I see people driving Cadillacs with no hands on the wheel all the time.
Yes. However waking up is not guaranteed.
I hope a V2V API is released, I would love to create an app that hops ahead from car to car and reports back the average speed and brake usage of 10 cars 3 miles ahead of me. Real time traffic congestion avoidance would actually be possible. It would also be cool to know that a car 3 ahead of me has just slammed on their breaks (animal/obstacle in the road etc). All kinds of things come to mind.
I came to the datacenter drunk with a fake ID, don't you want to be just like me?
What scares me (and I just traded in a 2011 Cadillac CTS Coupe that I've owned for several years) is the way GM often decides to rectify the problems they find!
For example? Have you seen the correction they gave Cadillac owners for the ignition switch recall?! Instead of anything you'd assume GM would do (like replacing the lock cylinder with a newer revision that can't accidentally get twisted out of the "run" position while the gear selector is in "Drive"?), the recall involves issuing owners a new set of keyfobs! That's right! GM decided that by changing the way the physical key attaches to the rectangular fob, they'd give you a setup where it's less likely to put as much leverage on the ignition switch with keys hanging from it! Anyone can do this "recall" themselves with 50 cents worth of keyring parts from the local hardware store!
Thankfully, my CTS had electronic push button start, so that recall didn't even apply to me. But only a week after I traded the car in, I received a different recall notice about a problem where vibrations in the driveline (that apparently worsen as some of the lubricating grease disappears) can trick a side airbag sensor into thinking there was a crash and accidentally going off). BTW, *that* recall notice also informed me not to take my car in right away for it, as GM didn't even have the replacement parts in stock yet for that one!
Now *there's* a phrase to fill you with confidence. "Works right up to the point where you need to be paying attention, except you won't be because the car is driving itself."
Naw, this is GM's top of the line model. It will have a number of features for the hands-free control to match the exclusive habits of the drivers of said vehicle:
1: It will safe gas by pulse/glide on highways, zooming to 75, dropping to 55.
2: It will randomly slam brakes, or flash brake lights.
3: When someone passes, it will automatically pop a turn signal in that car's direction and lurch towards that car.
4: On roads with one lane, it will go 20 miles under the speed limit until someone attempts to overtake, then will stay the same speed as the overtaking car.
5: It will not use turn signals when a turn is actually performed.
6: On highways, it will automatically find its way into the left lane and repeat behavior #1.
7: If in the lane near an exit lane, it will match exactly the speed of cars attempting to come onto the road.
It isn't about bug free on first compile, it is about a) failure-tolerant design b) multiple redundancies. We generally trust airplane auto-pilot systems, there is no reason why similar approach could not be used here.
I deal in my day job with both automotive and aerospace clients. They couldn't be more different when it comes to reliability and safety in product design and assembly.
For example, when I start a job for an automotive company they typically require what is called a PPAP which is supposed to establish that the part and the manufacturing systems to build it have been adequately reviewed. Sounds great and in theory is a very good idea. In practice however it is a check-the-box document that is generally required to go into production, produced once, generally never looked at and filed somewhere never to be seen again. It is a waste of everyone's time because no one really actually checks this stuff because doing so is too expensive. Audits are rare and formal quality processes are frequently ignored until something breaks.
Aviation is different. They will seriously crawl up your hind end and regularly audit you. I haven't had an automotive company come in to audit a product in over a decade and I won't unless there is some huge screw up. Aviation has gotten things so reliable that even physicians are taking notes on how to improve their quality in the operating rooms. Automotive isn't even close.
The beauty of automated driving systems is that they will notice when they have to make the car steer 1% more to attain the same heading, or brake 1% more in order to stop in the same distance, etc. The sheer amount of feedback they get from the car's performance means they can alert the driver to a potential mechanical problem before it causes an accident. Humans are generally terrible at doing that - computers are made for it.
You forgot that the turn signal will default to on at all times, except in the case of number 5.
I'm with the parent. If I can't fall asleep, or read a book, or watch a movie, then I'm not interested. Unless they can do it for the same price, or minimal price difference than a similar car without the feature. It would be nice to have my car drive down the road for me. But if I still have to pay attention to traffic and have my hands on the wheel, then it's not really giving me much of and advantage over traditional driving. Personally, I think it would be more dangerous because if the system works well enough, I may be lulled into false sense of security, causing me to not pay attention. When the car inevitably has a problem, I'm not going to be watching, and I'm not going to be prepared to take over in sufficient time to correct the problem.
Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
Not to mention that the best option for surprise wildlife is 'drive straight'. Many will reflexively attempt to turn to avoid the animal and end up rolling.
Although I mostly agree with this in theory and also, in theory, people should never be on the interstate if you go this direction then
you better make sure your "is this an animal or a person" algorithm is rock solid.