On the road to self-driving cars
I wrote earlier about driverless cars, and now I have come across an item in Smartmoney that charts progress to fully autonomous vehicles, including the Volvo XC60’s queue-assist adaptive cruise control function. Smartmoney writer Missy Sullivan quotes an owner of a XC60 as saying, “It’s like being a backseat driver, only in the driver’s seat.”
As Sullivan puts it, “Memo to US drivers: Get used to it. As car buying once again accelerates…chances are good that consumers will be driving off dealer lots with an increasing number of robo-car features.”
As Sullivan notes, adaptive cruise control has been around for years, but she cites many other and newer robo-car features: health monitors that aim to reduce driver stress, self-slamming brakes that protect pedestrians, collision warning systems, and automated parking systems.
Such features, Sullivan says, are changing consumers’ car-buying habits. She quotes Thilo Koslowski, lead automotive analyst for Gartner, as saying, “Horsepower fascination is being replaced with bits and bytes.”
A key enabler of autonomous vehicles will be smart-road technology. Roads, Sullivan writes, “…won’t just lie there sprouting potholes but will beam data about traffic, construction and driving conditions to passing motorists.”
This concept raised some red flags among the commenters to my earlier post. Writes Watashi, “Let’s be practical for a moment dreamers. State DOTs have their hands full just keeping infinitely reliable traffic control devices in place (road signs). How can you expect them to keep complex control schemes running on millions of miles of roadway?” Watashi adds, “DOTs would most likely morph into something resembling the FAA. The future is scary enough without that thought!”
Luck commented:
I didn't know where to find this info then kaobom it was here.
Latisha commented:
I was seroiusly at DefCon 5 until I saw this post.
Mitch commented:
I agree that there are hurdles to overcome. However, how many deaths a year do human drivers cause? I think I remember the number 40,000 being mentioned, just in the US. Is the potential for mistakes in computer judgement enough of a reason to completely dismiss this? There will be technical challanges to be sure, and ethical and legal issues to address. But if in the end, lives can potentially be saved, it is worth pursuing.
William Ketel commented:
I am inclined to agree with Hank. In addition, consider the problems caused when a foil-lined reflective thing like a cement bag suddenly is blown in front of your car at 40MPH, and your brake system slams on the brakes to prevent the "collision". The car behind would have no way of stopping in time, and no reason to anticipate the need to stop. All I got, when I didn't stop, were some very minor paint abrasions. Human judgement is usually better than the average machine, and always better than the lawyer designed machine.
What we urgently do need is a way to prevent drivers from being distracted from the task of driving. Or, possibly a means to slow the vehicle to a speed suitable for the un-distracted portion of the drivers attention. An interesting concept, but probably not practical.
Hammerin Hank commented:
Sounds great, but just wait until one of these puppies is involved in a cripling accident and every lawyer in the world jumps on it. Moving the driving responsibility from the driver to a manufacturers on-board computer will put the automotive industry out of business.


















