Computers taking over driving in some cars

[Still_Small_Voice]

Ever hear of Dynamic Radar Cruise Control (abbreviated DRCC)? This technology maintains a pre-set distance between the Dynamic Radar Cruise Control (DRCC) equipped car and the car driving ahead of that car. If the system detects that the vehicle ahead is getting a little too close, the speed is automatically lowered and the vehicle’s brakes are applied. If the distance between the cars is increased (or if the road ahead is clear) the vehicle will return to its pre-set speed.

I never want a car with this technology in it. I don't need a computer taking over my driving. I was reading about one situation of someone who was driving 65 miles per hour in a vehicle with this technology in the car. They said the car suddenly braked for no reason at all dropping the speed to about 5 miles per hour while they were on the highway. That is real safe on a high speed road.

If you are foolish to follow close on the highway you will have to deal with the consequences of that. I don't want a computer taking over the controls of my car because some people do not know how to drive.

[Anddenex]

I actually saw a commercial regarding this DRCC. I actually think this is pretty cool. In the beginning their will always be some major hiccups, however in the long run, I think this might help to avoid accidents -- while possibly causing some while the tech is new.

This is where we are heading, while knowing they are already working on cars right now that a person doesn't even drive, the car does everything.

I like it personally.

[Guest]

Let's take this technology to Utah first.

[Still_Small_Voice]

This is along the lines in my opinion of giving police officers a system where they push a button and your car shuts off. No thank you. My life is controlled and manipulated enough already.

[Dravin]

The funny thing is if it is set to maintain the distance that is considered safe for a given speed you'll probably find a lot of people not using it*, at least at first. In my experience people aren't the biggest fans of maintaining a safe distance.

*Well, it's probably an option at this point, so those who opt for it will most likely use it. If it rolled out all the sudden as a standard feature though...

Edited August 15, 2013 by Dravin

[jerome1232]

I remember people theorizing this kind of tech would actually allow more cars on the road, since the computer could, in theory, follow other cars closer than a human could since the computer would have quicker response times.

Really though this is old news, Google tested a completely automated car, they allowed them to drive through San Francisco with a person inside to step in if need be. They are street legal in a few states.

Edited August 15, 2013 by jerome1232

[slamjet]

Those of us who work with computers don't trust them. Main reason: when they fail, they fail spectacularly.

[Still_Small_Voice]

Those of us who work with computers don't trust them. Main reason: when they fail, they fail spectacularly.

I work in the Information Technology industry. I completely agree with what you have just said.

[LittleWyvern]

I think the key with electronic systems in safety-critical applications is redundancy. There must be another system to fall back to, and switching from main to fallback must be easy to do manually. In this case, I think I would feel safe if DRCC was as easy to turn off as regular cruise control.

[jerome1232]

I'd trust a well tested task specific system that runs on one set of hardware and can fallback to manual mode over the people currently driving cars any day. So far the only accident these cars have been in was because a human driver ran into the back of one. Time and maturity will tell, so far it's on the side of the system Google has built.

[Quin]

Wanna know something scary?

My mom's friend (engineer) was working on that waaaaaay back in the 80s.

Like 1985.

They were hoping to be functioning by 1990 in SoCal.

30 years later....

Q

[NightSG]

Do you have any idea how many of the broken things I've worked on were the product of decades or even centuries of research, development, trial and error, and innovation? Yet they all still broke.

The solution to those people who have no business being behind the wheel is not any high tech electronic gadget, it's a simple innovation carried over from the earliest wagons; the passenger seat.

[mnn727]

I work in the tech field and unfortunately this is where technology is leading - to driver-less cars. Thankfully I'm old enough that I will no doubt be dead before the takeover is complete.

I was leery of a rental we got a year ago when I saw the Microsoft logo on the button you pressed to start the car, that's all we need - technology by Microsoft controlling our cars

Edited August 18, 2013 by mnn727

[NightSG]

I work in the tech field and unfortunately this is where technology is leading - to driver-less cars. Thankfully I'm old enough that I will no doubt be dead before the takeover is complete.

I agree; I suspect most of us will be killed by it before it makes its way out of beta testing.

Yet another reason to like my 1997 Saturn.

Last weekend, on the way home from a Church dance that ended at midnight, I was 30 miles from home, 10 miles from the nearest town (of about 200 people) at 1AM on a Sunday morning, when the "coolant level/overheat" light came on. I pulled over and checked the coolant. It was fine. The float in the balance tank was stuck. (Fairly common when people mix up coolant using hard water over the course of a decade or more.) I drove on home, noting that it was nearly 7 miles before I got a steady cell signal. Would the "robocar" allow me to override a sensor giving a serious but incorrect fault indication and get home, or would I be stuck in the middle of nowhere, having to walk several miles to call for help and then pay for a tow truck because the car thinks it knows better than I do?

Just glancing at a couple of rate cards, it looks like the tow would have been $150-200, and having a mechanic replace the tank would be at least another $150. As it is, I kept an eye on the level until yesterday, then pulled the tank, cleaned it with muriatic acid then dish soap, and put it back on. The float moves freely now, it took less than an hour, and it cost me maybe $1 in fresh coolant, acid (I keep a gallon around for household cleaning) and soap.

[Still_Small_Voice]

I work in the tech field and unfortunately this is where technology is leading - to driver-less cars. Thankfully I'm old enough that I will no doubt be dead before the takeover is complete.

I was leery of a rental we got a year ago when I saw the Microsoft logo on the button you pressed to start the car, that's all we need - technology by Microsoft controlling our cars

I can just imagine while you are driving down the road you hit a bump in your fancy new car. The brakes apply and the car begins to slows down to pull off on the side of the road. The operating system in the car says: "Please wait: rebooting."

[LittleWyvern]

I can just imagine while you are driving down the road you hit a bump in your fancy new car. The brakes apply and the car begins to slows down to pull off on the side of the road. The operating system in the car says: "Please wait: rebooting."

Ok... don't panic when I tell you this, but...

There are already computers (and operating systems!) inside cars.

[NightSG]

Ok... don't panic when I tell you this, but...

There are already computers (and operating systems!) inside cars.

And they do need to be rebooted from time to time. The only reason we don't see a lot more trouble from them is that they don't tend to run for more than a few hours at a time between reboots.

Frankly, the best $15 I've spent on car tools was the Bluetooth OBD2 interface and an app for my phone to work with it. As any Autozone employee can tell you, (they do free reads and resets) a lot of the check engine lights out there are triggered by a momentary sensor glitch.

[Still_Small_Voice]

Ok... don't panic when I tell you this, but...

There are already computers (and operating systems!) inside cars.

Yes I know this. I also know most cars presently don't have automatic braking and also will not steer the car for you.

My present worry is there won't be a way to disable the automatic braking feature in cars being released right now. I was reading about problems with the Nissan electric car called the "Leaf." I read accounts where drivers tapped the brakes and the car would then brake for about 0.5 seconds. Doesn't sound like much but there can be a substantial reduction in speed in half a second.

[jerome1232]

Errrr, ummmm, most cars these days do automatically apply the brakes under certain conditions. For example my Nissan will selectively apply individual brakes when it detects the car spinning out of control during a turn.

[Still_Small_Voice]

The more I do research on this the better it gets. It appears National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is thinking about making mandatory automatic braking in future cars.

NHTSA Considers Making Automatic Braking Mandatory - Motor Trend WOT

[Dravin]

Errrr, ummmm, most cars these days do automatically apply the brakes under certain conditions. For example my Nissan will selectively apply individual brakes when it detects the car spinning out of control during a turn.

Modern ABS is another example of computer controlled brake application (in this case overriding the driver input).

[LittleWyvern]

And they do need to be rebooted from time to time. The only reason we don't see a lot more trouble from them is that they don't tend to run for more than a few hours at a time between reboots.

Not to mention that these kind of operating systems are built completely differently. Operating systems that run safety-critical applications are called Real-Time Operating Systems, and have a completely different architecture than the operating system on your computer. These kind of operating systems run things like cars, medical devices, and spaceships. If you are using experiences with Windows or OS X when talking about computers in cars, you aren't comparing apples and oranges: you might as well be comparing apples with Abraham Lincoln.

[NightSG]

Modern ABS is another example of computer controlled brake application (in this case overriding the driver input).

Every ABS equipped car I've driven could also be easily overridden simply by pressing the pedal even harder. Handy to know on certain surfaces like sand, where the fastest way to stop can simply be to lock 'em hard and let them plow up a nice speed bump.

As for radar/IR/whatever based automatic braking, wait until an empty box blows across the road in heavy high-speed traffic. Lead car panic brakes automatically to avoid an obstacle that wouldn't even really scuff the paint, next 2-3 cars have slower reactions, more mass, more worn brakes, etc. End result is turning a non-event into a serious pileup.

[Quin]

The VW JettA had a reboot problem aout 10 years agp for NYC drivers... The computer was set to "sleep" if the car wasn't run more than once a day. So my city friends, who drive on the weekends IF that (monthly drivers more often) would try to start "sleeping" (dead) cars... And have to have them towed. After a few dozen tows (and increasingly vehement phonecalls to VW) the problem was fixed.

SUCH a suburban mentality.... If you own a car... You must drive it every day. Right? right???

Nope.

[Still_Small_Voice]

Here is a nice story about the automatic braking feature in Infiniti cars:

NHTSA Investigating 2013 Infiniti JX35 for Alleged Automatic Braking Issue - Motor Trend WOT