Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

BlackBerry Unveils Autonomous Vehicle Hub In Canada (venturebeat.com)

Posted by EditorDavid on from the BlackBerry-mobiles dept.

BlackBerry's Unix-like OS, QNX, is already in millions of cars. But today they're expanding their facility in Ottawa "to focus on developing advanced driver assistance and autonomous vehicle technology," according to Reuters. And one analyst says "If they can prove that they have the whole package and the security, they could absolutely dominate the market." After a detour where QNX's industrial-focused software was used to reinvent the now-discarded BlackBerry phone operating system, BlackBerry is focused on how its embedded software interacts with the explosion of sensors, cameras and other components required for a car to drive itself... "What QNX is doing is providing the infrastructure that allows you to build higher-level algorithms and to also acquire data from the sensors in a reliable manner," said Sebastian Fischmeister, a University of Waterloo associate professor who has worked with QNX since 2009.
Instead of focussing on AI, BlackBerry wants "a niche role as a trusty sidekick," Reuters reports, adding that besides a recent deal with Ford, BlackBerry is also holding advanced discussions with "more than one or two" major automakers, according to the head of the company.

37 comments

  1. Ford by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    Found on road dead.

    1. Re:Ford by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      To be honest, I thought RIM was roadkill ages ago. Hard believe they are still lingering around tormenting us. Unlike Nokia, who's business is booming, RIM never was able to reinvent their business model.

    2. Re:Ford by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 2

      They bought QNX a while back, to use as a foundation for their modernization of the OS that runs on Blackberries('Blackberry 10' is QNX-based, 'Blackberry OS', v. 1-7.x are something much heavier on java).

      Unless I'm missing something, they've announced an, um, bold and inspiring plan to attempt to continue selling QNX for basically the same applications that QNX was sold for before they bought it.

      Beats letting it just rot in a back catalog somewhere; but "We plan to sell the product of a company we bought for the same sorts of things it was good for when we bought them, and that's pretty much it." isn't exactly the behavior of a company that has any idea what to do with itself.

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

      They will just cannibalize all their assets and rot away... I wonder what the stakeholders think of their inability to think bold and truly renew their business.

  2. Not sure that their present brand is the right one by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    I'm not sure that their present branding is right for the "high-tech sidekick" role in the automotive industry. They should rebrand from Blackberry to something that says "cars" and "snazzy technology", like "TechnoZoom" or "Research in Motion".

  3. Do you know who is funding laws mandating V2V? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    I honestly don't know. However I am 100% confident in my educated guess being accurate. We have new laws and "rules" as a result of lobbying by certain companies wishing to maximise profit. It's not good enough for the majority of cars to ship with the technology. It has to be 100%. Cause you know, "safety", and all that.

    I want to be less safe. I don't want to live in a nanny state that makes me and my family dependant on government hand outs. I want zero government. I want to keep 100% of my wealth. It becomes easier to afford to send my kids to the best schools when that money isn't stolen from me. It becomes much more affordable to pay for security security patrols and monitoring systems. I don't need to worry about whether or not the government is going to give me my social security money back when I retire cause I'll have made my own investments and taken my own risks and been rewarded or not accordingly. I don't need government permission slips. i don't need any of that crap. I will accept the risk inherent to driving and not worry about whether or not other people have insurance. I have taken the appropriate measures to protect myself- and my government (New Hampshire) didn't even mandate it (so have the majority of drivers here and NH leads the way in insured drivers despite being odd and not having mandatory insurance).

    Help me, by migrating to New Hampshire, and the thousands of others who have already migrated to New Hampshire work toward a free society:

    http://www.freestateproject.org/
    http://www.freekeene.com/

    1. Re:Do you know who is funding laws mandating V2V? by Kiuas · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I don't want to live in a nanny state that makes me and my family dependant on government hand outs. I want zero government.

      Yes, the evil government mandating and enforcing food and safety regulations, running the justice system, and doing all these evil things. Corporations should be free to add addicting substances to their products to hook consumers to their products, and if you go ahead and buy them (obviously there'll be no mention of the opiates added because that'd be EVIL GOVERNMENT intervening again) then it's your own personal choice and you should have funded your own laboratory to make sure what you're buying hasn't been messed around with.

      It becomes easier to afford to send my kids to the best schools when that money isn't stolen from me.

      'Stolen' implies you don't use publicly funded utilities and services to be able to work and thus make your money. The infrastructure provided for by taxes is the basis for most commercial operations in most economies, so to say that the money used for its upkeep allowing you to continue working iss 'stolen' from you is just asinine.

      Property rights are not natural rights. The whole concept of "your property" and "my property" only exists because societies have come together and drafted a set of rules (=laws) which define ownership of goods and how they may be transferred or not. If the government stops existing you no longer have any property, you just have stuff which I can take away at any minute if I have enough muscle to do so. I cannot be prosecuted for it as that would require a court-system, also itself an extension of government and society that you oppose. Therefore claiming that you have some magical right to be entitled to 100 % of your salary and that any form of taxation is 'theft', when 'theft' itself is a concept defined by the society that you oppose is just idiotic.

      Moreover, do you understand that we're headed into an age where the vast majority of people will not be able to trade their labor into money because for most menial tasks the constantly improving machines will be so much more cost-effective that corporations will have no need to hire low-skill workers anymore. You're essentially arguing for a future in which the vast majority of folks will be left to starve or commit crimes for their own survival.

      The developed economies are in the grips of a fast change: people are being made obsolete as factors of production. To deny this is to deny the technological progress that can be plainly seen by anyone. Automation creates some new jobs but never at the same rate at which it is taking them away, as the upkeep of an automated system always takes less personel than running the entire operation with human labor (to use the example of self-driving cars here_ automating the taxi-serivces for example will require an X amount of people to oversee the system and do maintenance, but that number will be vastly smaller than the amount of cab-drivers it will make jobless).

      So with this in mind I'm amazed at the (mostly) american far-right mentality of "fuck the government, I wish to subject my life to the whims of corporations, because they truly care about me, as I'm a hard working man'. They don't. The corporations care about making money, they will throw you at and leave you to die the moment you no longer provide any value for them, and because of that civilized societies have come together and decided that since we're no longer living in the middle-ages, people should not be left out to starve and die if they cannot get employed or in fact cannot work at all because of an illness or disability or other factors.

      But for some reason you seem convinced that such principles are needless, either because you're unable to see the long term consequences of having instances around that care for stuff other than making more wealth for themselves, or because you do in fact see it but are enough of a sociopath to not give a shit about the well be

      --
      "It is the business of the future to be dangerous" -Alfred North Whitehead
    2. Re:Do you know who is funding laws mandating V2V? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      "What did you do this morning honey?"

      "I spent is writing a lengthy diatribe that nobody is going to read in response to an anonymous troll post that nobody was paying any attention to."

      "Oh, how wonderful. Do you think you take time to look for a job this afternoon?"

    3. Re:Do you know who is funding laws mandating V2V? by Kiuas · · Score: 1

      While I'm touched and moved that you care enough about my time to complain to me about how I choose to spend it I can honestly say I wouldn't have normally bothered responding to such bullshit, but as I have an hour or so to waste at work while I'm waiting for certain updates to be applied and so on I had nothing better to do.

      Besides of which, I've debunked this ancap-BS so many times at this point it's almost a routine, took me about 7 minutes, so even if nobody bothers to read it, it's not a massive loss.

      Seems to me you did, and failing to find anything to comment of actual substance you chose to whine. Whatever suits you, mr. Anonymous OP. ;)

      --
      "It is the business of the future to be dangerous" -Alfred North Whitehead
    4. Re:Do you know who is funding laws mandating V2V? by mlw4428 · · Score: 1

      I read it. So there's that.

    5. Re:Do you know who is funding laws mandating V2V? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I want zero government. I want to keep 100% of my wealth.

      Zero government means that heavily armed people will be able to keep 100% of your wealth, as well as sell you into slavery for additional profit.

  4. Sorry Blackberry, you're a dead brand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    They'd be better off completely rebranding themselves so no one knows they're RIM/Blackberry. If I knew a car I was about to buy had Blackberry software in it, I wouldnt buy it, because I know it'd be unsupported very soon.

    1. Re:Sorry Blackberry, you're a dead brand by MachineShedFred · · Score: 4, Informative

      Please realize that the QNX guys are very different from the idiots that managed to lose the entire smartphone market to upstarts. QNX runs some of the most dangerous computing environments out there, and has been in use in cars for over a decade, because it's something you can rely upon, unlike almost every other OS that just ships with a disclaimer saying not to use it for whatever you're looking to use it for.

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
    2. Re:Sorry Blackberry, you're a dead brand by jenningsthecat · · Score: 1

      They'd be better off completely rebranding themselves so no one knows they're RIM/Blackberry. If I knew a car I was about to buy had Blackberry software in it, I wouldnt buy it, because I know it'd be unsupported very soon.

      I'm sure that however it's branded, it will have the enthusiastic support of LEO's everywhere. Yes, governments would just love it if the software in self-driving vehicles came from a company with a proven track record of literally 'handing over the keys' to authorities.

      --
      'The Economy' is a giant Ponzi scheme whose most pitiable suckers are the youngest among us and the yet-unborn.
    3. Re:Sorry Blackberry, you're a dead brand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They'd be better off completely rebranding themselves so no one knows they're RIM/Blackberry. If I knew a car I was about to buy had Blackberry software in it, I wouldnt buy it, because I know it'd be unsupported very soon.

      The odds are high that you already own a car or some other device with their software, you fucking idiot.

    4. Re:Sorry Blackberry, you're a dead brand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In other words, lawful companies complying with the law....

      If you don't like the laws, get representatives who will fight to change those laws instead of blaming the companies or are just complying with them.

    5. Re: Sorry Blackberry, you're a dead brand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Such as....?

  5. Re:Not sure that their present brand is the right by davester666 · · Score: 2

    too many rim-job jokes to use "research in motion". It worked when they had co-ceo's that demanded rim-jobs, but it can't with a real corporate structure. It will collapse under the weight of all the jokes.

    --
    Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
  6. Self Driving Bathtub by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    Can I get a self driving bathtub that cleans me while I sleep. Bathing a such a chore.

  7. This is what QNX was built for by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    QNX was built from the ground up for this kind of application. Their microkernel came with a written guarantee (at least back in '99 when I did a co-op there).

  8. Self Driving Bed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    Can I get self driving bed that sleeps for me. Sleeping such a chore.

  9. An interesting move by Master5000 · · Score: 0

    This could actually be a good move. We'll have to wait and see. But QNX is a realtime OS so they are well positioned for this, unlike some other cough cough manufacturers.

  10. Self Driving Spoon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    Can I get a self driving spoon that shovels food into my mouth. Eating is such a chore.

  11. Wow... by dohzer · · Score: 1

    Wow... those companies you thought were one-trick ponies and were dead.

  12. Sorry but I don't trust QNX by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    exec("/bin/sh", 0, CLONE_PERM) is all that has to be said.

    1. Re:Sorry but I don't trust QNX by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We soon discovered that the QNX version of exec(3) had a major security flaw: it worked kind of like clone(2), and not only could you clone the calling process, but you could specify the PID of any arbitrary process on the system to clone — including PID 0. You could also set a flag to inherit all permissions from the parent! So a simple one-line C program like

      exec("/bin/sh", 0, CLONE_PERM)

      is all it would take to get you a root shell on the box.

      on hacking the Unisys ICON

    2. Re:Sorry but I don't trust QNX by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      So...a security flaw, in an early version of QNX from the 80's. That's all it takes, and all that needs to be said huh?

      Curious what operating system you are using now...how bullet proof it's history is.

  13. The Aircraft Industry by XB-70 · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Regardless of which O/S and what features prevail in the autonomous driving world, I have one very grave concern. Thousands of man-years of research have gone into aircraft safety. One of the major components of that safety is a triply redundant computer system. If one machine does not agree with the other two, the pilot is warned.

    Right now, we don't have standards for self-driving cars. This should be the baseline for any new standard.

    --
    *** Don't be dull.***
    1. Re:The Aircraft Industry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      Sure, for a 747 this is the standard. A 747 carries more people than any vehicle on the road.

      How about for a plane that is mostly intended for the pilot and perhaps a friend? You know, the equivalent to a Smart Fortwo?

      Ask a Cessna pilot if they have triple redundancy on anything. Answer: Not really.

      Expecting cars to have better technology than the equivalent in aircraft is a little excessive.

    2. Re:The Aircraft industry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ask a Cessna pilot if they have triple redundancy on anything. Answer: Not really.

      You should ask a Cessna 172 pilot if their safety critical avionics gear is expensive. Answer: YES!
      An ADS-B transponder is similar to V2V. The cheapest one I could find at Garmin comes in at $4k. I'm not saying V2V is going to raise the price of a car by this much because of economies of scale, but designing/testing safety critical equipment doesn't come cheap.

  14. Plot twist... by EmeraldBot · · Score: 2, Funny

    Plot twist: Blackberry renames itself to "Research in Motion", becomes a leading seller of autonomous cars to business executives everywhere.

    --
    "Set a man a fire, he'll be warm for the rest of the night. Set a man afire, he'll be warm for the rest of his life."
    1. Re:Plot twist... by null+etc. · · Score: 1

      Plot twist: Blackberry renames itself to "Research in Motion", becomes a leading seller of autonomous cars to business executives everywhere.

      Furthermore, business executives absolutely rave over the hardware-based steering wheel and pedals included in RIM's autonomous cars. "Real business executives need hardware steering on their cars," claims RIM CEO of the week. "Virtual steering interfaces, like those offered by Apple, just don't cut it in the business world."

    2. Re:Plot twist... by Baron_Yam · · Score: 1

      You mock, but the hardware keyboard was pretty much what kept me on team BB until the most recent, final fuckover.

      A full keyboard is just so much easier to use because of the tactile feedback that comes with it. It's worth losing some screen real estate. I will admit I can't recall the last time I used the optical track pad, but it's nice to know it's there if I ever need to make a precision click.

      You know, until I ditch the phone next year because everything ELSE BlackBerry sucks giant sweaty balls.

  15. should rename BlackBerry to QNX shortly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As BlackBerry is dead, and the QNX brand is the company now, the company will soon be renamed to QNX.

  16. 40 car brands you shouldn't buy; most cars use QNX by raymorris · · Score: 2

    > If I knew a car I was about to buy had Blackberry software in it, I wouldnt buy it,

    Most cars user QNX. It'll be a challenge to find one that doesn't, because 40 different car makers use it.

  17. good for them! by qQ7eBMsfM5gs · · Score: 1

    We're all cheering for QNX and RIM here in Ottawa, lots of smart folks work there, and they who make great software.

  18. Re:Not sure that their present brand is the right by tripleevenfall · · Score: 1

    GP is right, BlackBerry can't put themselves in cars branded as BlackBerry. It would make a brand new car seem dated.