Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

The Future of In-Car Computing

Soulskill posted more than 3 years ago | from the keeping-up-with-the-hasselhoffs dept.

Transportation 112

Barence writes "PC Pro is running a collection of articles looking at the future of in-car computing technology. They discuss how smartphones will become the primary means of in-car entertainment, how satnavs will be integrated into fighter-jet style heads-up displays, and how cars will create wireless mesh networks that warn each other of upcoming delays and collisions. The also explore the issue of integrating driverless cars onto the roads. 'It's one thing having smart cars that can talk to each other and react accordingly, but if half of the cars are dumb, it's another issue.'"

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Collision Detection? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35934420)

So they are building in a "collision detection system" that I can hack and get the car next to me to drive off the road. Cool.

Re:Collision Detection? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35934572)

It has come to my attention that the entire Linux community is a hotbed of so called 'alternative sexuality', which includes anything from hedonistic orgies to homosexuality to paedophilia.

What better way of demonstrating this than by looking at the hidden messages contained within the names of some of Linux's most outspoken advocates:

  • Linus Torvalds [] is an anagram of slit anus or VD 'L,' clearly referring to himself by the first initial.
  • Richard M. Stallman [] , spokespervert for the Gaysex's Not Unusual 'movement' is an anagram of mans cram thrill ad.
  • Alan Cox [] is barely an anagram of anal cox which is just so filthy and unchristian it unnerves me.

I'm sure that Eric S. Raymond, composer of the satanic homosexual [] propaganda diatribe The Cathedral and the Bizarre, is probably an anagram of something queer, but we don't need to look that far as we know he's always shoving a gun up some poor little boy's rectum. Update: Eric S. Raymond is actually an anagram for secondary rim and cord in my arse. It just goes to show you that he is indeed queer.

Update the Second: It is also documented that Evil Sicko Gaymond is responsible for a nauseating piece of code called Fetchmail [] , which is obviously sinister sodomite slang for 'Felch Male' -- a disgusting practise. For those not in the know, 'felching' is the act performed by two perverts wherein one sucks their own post-coital ejaculate out of the other's rectum. In fact, it appears that the dirty Linux faggots set out to undermine the good Republican institution of e-mail, turning it into 'e-male.'

As far as Richard 'Master' Stallman goes, that filthy fudge-packer was actually quoted [] on leftist commie propaganda site as saying the following: 'I've been resistant to the pressure to conform in any circumstance,' he says. 'It's about being able to question conventional wisdom,' he asserts. 'I believe in love, but not monogamy,' he says plainly.

And this isn't a made up troll bullshit either! He actually stated this tripe, which makes it obvious that he is trying to politely say that he's a flaming homo [] slut [] !

Speaking about 'flaming,' who better to point out as a filthy chutney ferret than Slashdot's very own self-confessed pederast Jon Katz. Although an obvious deviant anagram cannot be found from his name, he has already confessed, nay boasted of the homosexual [] perversion of corrupting the innocence of young children [] . To quote from the article linked:

'I've got a rare kidney disease,' I told her. 'I have to go to the bathroom a lot. You can come with me if you want, but it takes a while. Is that okay with you? Do you want a note from my doctor?'

Is this why you were touching your penis [] in the cinema, Jon? And letting the other boys touch it too?

We should also point out that Jon Katz refers to himself as 'Slashdot's resident Gasbag.' Is there any more doubt? For those fortunate few who aren't aware of the list of homosexual [] terminology found inside the Linux 'Sauce Code,' a 'Gasbag' is a pervert who gains sexual gratification from having a thin straw inserted into his urethra (or to use the common parlance, 'piss-pipe'), then his homosexual [] lover blows firmly down the straw to inflate his scrotum. This is, of course, when he's not busy violating the dignity and copyright of posters to Slashdot by gathering together their postings and publishing them en masse to further his twisted and manipulative journalistic agenda.

Sick, disgusting antichristian perverts, the lot of them.

In addition, many of the Linux distributions (a 'distribution' is the most common way to spread the faggots' wares) are run by faggot groups. The Slackware [] distro is named after the 'Slack-wear' fags wear to allow easy access to the anus for sexual purposes. Furthermore, Slackware is a close anagram of claw arse, a reference to the homosexual [] practise of anal fisting. The Mandrake [] product is run by a group of French faggot satanists, and is named after the faggot nickname for the vibrator. It was also chosen because it is an anagram for dark amen and ram naked, which is what they do.

Another 'distro,' (abbrieviated as such because it sounds a bit like 'Disco,' which is where homosexuals [] preyed on young boys in the 1970s), is Debian, [] an anagram of in a bed, which could be considered innocent enough (after all, a bed is both where we sleep and pray), until we realise what other names Debian uses to describe their foul wares. 'Woody' is obvious enough, being a term for the erect male penis [] , glistening with pre-cum. But far sicker is the phrase 'Frozen Potato' that they use. This filthy term, again found in the secret homosexual [] 'Sauce Code,' refers to the solo homosexual [] practice of defecating into a clear polythene bag, shaping the turd into a crude approximation of the male phallus, then leaving it in the freezer overnight until it becomes solid. The practitioner then proceeds to push the frozen 'potato' up his own rectum, squeezing it in and out until his tight young balls erupt in a screaming orgasm.

And Red Hat [] is secret homo [] slang for the tip of a penis [] that is soaked in blood from a freshly violated underage ringpiece.

The fags have even invented special tools to aid their faggotry! For example, the 'supermount' tool was devised to allow deeper penetration, which is good for fags because it gives more pressure on the prostate gland. 'Automount' is used, on the other hand, because Linux users are all fat and gay, and need to mount each other [] automatically.

The depths of their depravity can be seen in their use of 'mount points.' These are, plainly speaking, the different points of penetration. The main one is obviously/anus, but there are others. Militant fags even say 'there is no/opt mount point' because for these dirty perverts faggotry is not optional but a way of life.

More evidence is in the fact that Linux users say how much they love `man`, even going so far as to say that all new Linux users (who are in fact just innocent heterosexuals indoctrinated by the gay propaganda) should try out `man`. In no other system do users boast of their frequent recourse to a man.

Other areas of the system also show Linux's inherent gayness. For example, people are often told of the 'FAQ,' but how many innocent heterosexual Windows [] users know what this actually means. The answer is shocking: Faggot Anal Quest: the voyage of discovery for newly converted fags!

Even the title 'Slashdot [] ' originally referred to a homosexual [] practice. Slashdot [] of course refers to the popular gay practice of blood-letting. The Slashbots, of course are those super-zealous homosexuals [] who take this perversion to its extreme by ripping open their anuses, as seen on the site most popular with Slashdot users, the depraved work of Satan, [] .

The editors of Slashdot [] also have homosexual [] names: 'Hemos' is obvious in itself, being one vowel away from 'Homos.' But even more sickening is 'Commander Taco' which sounds a bit like 'Commode in Taco,' filthy gay slang for a pair of spreadeagled buttocks that are caked with excrement [] . (The best form of lubrication, they insist.) Sometimes, these 'Taco Commodes' have special 'Salsa Sauce' (blood from a ruptured rectum) and 'Cheese' (rancid flakes of penis [] discharge) toppings. And to make it even worse, Slashdot [] runs on Apache!

The Apache [] server, whose use among fags is as prevalent as AIDS, is named after homosexual [] activity -- as everyone knows, popular faggot band, the Village People, featured an Apache Indian, and it is for him that this gay program is named.

And that's not forgetting the use of patches in the Linux fag world -- patches are used to make the anus accessible for repeated anal sex even after its rupture by a session of fisting.

To summarise: Linux is gay. 'Slash -- Dot' is the graphical description of the space between a young boy's scrotum and anus. And BeOS [] is for hermaphrodites and disabled 'stumpers.'


What worries me is how much you know about what gay people do. I'm scared I actually read this whole thing. I think this post is a good example of the negative effects of Internet usage on people. This person obviously has no social life anymore and had to result to writing something as stupid as this. And actually take the time to do it too. Although... I think it was satire.. blah.. it's early. -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

Well, the only reason I know all about this is because I had the misfortune to read the Linux 'Sauce code' once. Although publicised as the computer code needed to get Linux up and running on a computer (and haven't you always been worried about the phrase 'Monolithic Kernel'?), this foul document is actually a detailed and graphic description of every conceivable degrading perversion known to the human race, as well as a few of the major animal species. It has shocked and disturbed me, to the point of needing to shock and disturb the common man to warn them of the impending homo [] -calypse which threatens to engulf our planet.

You must work for the government. Trying to post the most obscene stuff in hopes that slashdot won't be able to continue or something, due to legal woes. If i ever see your ugly face, i'm going to stick my fireplace poker up your ass, after it's nice and hot, to weld shut that nasty gaping hole of yours. -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

Doesn't it give you a hard-on to imagine your thick strong poker ramming it's way up my most sacred of sphincters? You're beyond help, my friend, as the only thing you can imagine is the foul penetrative violation of another man. Are you sure you're not Eric Raymond? The government, being populated by limp-wristed liberals, could never stem the sickening tide of homosexual [] child molesting Linux advocacy. Hell, they've given NAMBLA free reign for years!

you really should post this logged in. i wish i could remember jebus's password, cuz i'd give it to you. -- mighty jebus [] , Slashdot

Thank you for your kind words of support. However, this document shall only ever be posted anonymously. This is because the 'Open Sauce' movement is a sham, proposing homoerotic cults of hero worshipping in the name of freedom. I speak for the common man. For any man who prefers the warm, enveloping velvet folds of a woman's vagina [] to the tight puckered ringpiece of a child. These men, being common, decent folk, don't have a say in the political hypocrisy that is Slashdot culture. I am the unknown liberator [] .

ROLF LAMO i hate linux FAGGOTS -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

We shouldn't hate them, we should pity them for the misguided fools they are... Fanatical Linux zeal-outs need to be herded into camps for re-education and subsequent rehabilitation into normal heterosexual society. This re-education shall be achieved by forcing them to watch repeats of Baywatch until the very mention of Pamela Anderson [] causes them to fill their pants with healthy heterosexual jism [] .

Actually, that's not at all how scrotal inflation works. I understand it involves injecting sterile saline solution into the scrotum. I've never tried this, but you can read how to do it safely in case you're interested. (Before you moderate this down, ask yourself honestly -- who are the real crazies -- people who do scrotal inflation, or people who pay $1000+ for a game console?) -- double_h [] , Slashdot

Well, it just goes to show that even the holy Linux 'sauce code' is riddled with bugs that need fixing. (The irony of Jon Katz not even being able to inflate his scrotum correctly has not been lost on me.) The Linux pervert elite already acknowledge this, with their queer slogan: 'Given enough arms, all rectums are shallow.' And anyway, the PS2 [] sucks major cock and isn't worth the money. Intellivision forever!

dude did u used to post on msnbc's nt bulletin board now that u are doing anti-gay posts u also need to start in with anti-black stuff too c u in church -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

For one thing, whilst Linux is a cavalcade of queer propaganda masquerading as the future of computing, NT [] is used by people who think nothing better of encasing their genitals in quick setting plaster then going to see a really dirty porno film, enjoying the restriction enforced onto them. Remember, a wasted arousal is a sin in the eyes of the Catholic church [] . Clearly, the only god-fearing Christian operating system in existence is CP/M -- The Christian Program Monitor. All computer users should immediately ask their local pastor to install this fine OS onto their systems. It is the only route to salvation.

Secondly, this message is for every man. Computers know no colour. Not only that, but one of the finest websites in the world is maintained by a Black Man [] . Now fuck off you racist donkey felcher.

And don't forget that slashdot was written in Perl, which is just too close to 'Pearl Necklace' for comfort.... oh wait; that's something all you heterosexuals do.... I can't help but wonder how much faster the trolls could do First-Posts on this site if it were redone in PHP... I could hand-type dynamic HTML pages faster than Perl can do them. -- phee [] , Slashdot

Although there is nothing unholy about the fine heterosexual act of ejaculating between a woman's breasts, squirting one's load up towards her neck and chin area, it should be noted that Perl [] (standing for Pansies Entering Rectums Locally) is also close to 'Pearl Monocle,' 'Pearl Nosering,' and the ubiquitous 'Pearl Enema.'

One scary thing about Perl [] is that it contains hidden homosexual [] messages. Take the following code: LWP::Simple -- It looks innocuous enough, doesn't it? But look at the line closely: There are two colons next to each other! As Larry 'Balls to the' Wall would openly admit in the Perl Documentation, Perl was designed from the ground up to indoctrinate it's programmers into performing unnatural sexual acts -- having two colons so closely together is clearly a reference to the perverse sickening act of 'colon kissing,' whereby two homosexual [] queers spread their buttocks wide, pressing their filthy torn sphincters together. They then share small round objects like marbles or golfballs by passing them from one rectum to another using muscle contraction alone. This is also referred to in programming 'circles' as 'Parameter Passing.'

And PHP [] stands for Perverted Homosexual Penetration. Didn't you know?

Thank you for your valuable input on this. I am sure you will be never forgotten. BTW: Did I mention that this could be useful in terraforming Mars? Mars rulaa. -- Eimernase [] , Slashdot

Well, I don't know about terraforming Mars, but I do know that homosexual [] Linux Advocates have been probing Uranus for years.

That's inspiring. Keep up the good work, AC. May God in his wisdom grant you the strength to bring the plain honest truth to this community, and make it pure again. Yours, Cerberus. -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

*sniff* That brings a tear to my eye. Thank you once more for your kind support. I have taken faith in the knowledge that I am doing the Good Lord [] 's work, but it is encouraging to know that I am helping out the common man here.

However, I should be cautious about revealing your name 'Cerberus' on such a filthy den of depravity as Slashdot. It is a well known fact that the 'Kerberos' documentation from Microsoft is a detailed manual describing, in intimate, exacting detail, how to sexually penetrate a variety of unwilling canine animals; be they domesticated, wild, or mythical. Slashdot posters have taken great pleasure in illegally spreading this documentation far and wide, treating it as an 'extension' to the Linux 'Sauce Code,' for the sake of 'interoperability.' (The slang term they use for nonconsensual intercourse -- their favourite kind.)

In fact, sick twisted Linux deviants are known to have LAN parties, (Love of Anal Naughtiness, needless to say.), wherein they entice a stray dog, known as the 'Samba Mount,' into their homes. Up to four of these filth-sodden blasphemers against nature take turns to plunge their erect, throbbing, uncircumcised members, conkers-deep, into the rectum, mouth, and other fleshy orifices of the poor animal. Eventually, the 'Samba Mount' collapses due to 'overload,' and needs to be 'rebooted.' (i.e., kicked out into the street, and left to fend for itself.) Many Linux users boast about their 'uptime' in such situations.

Inspiring stuff! If only all trolls were this quality! -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

If only indeed. You can help our brave cause by moderating this message up as often as possible. I recommend '+1, Underrated,' as that will protect your precious Karma in Metamoderation [] . Only then can we break through the glass ceiling of Homosexual Slashdot Culture. Is it any wonder that the new version of Slashcode has been christened 'Bender'???

If we can get just one of these postings up to at least '+1,' then it will be archived forever! Others will learn of our struggle, and join with us in our battle for freedom!

It's pathetic you've spent so much time writing this. -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

I am compelled to document the foulness and carnal depravity [] that is Linux, in order that we may prepare ourselves for the great holy war that is to follow. It is my solemn duty to peel back the foreskin of ignorance and apply the wire brush of enlightenment.

As with any great open-source project, you need someone asking this question, so I'll do it. When the hell is version 2.0 going to be ready?!?! -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

I could make an arrogant, childish comment along the lines of 'Every time someone asks for 2.0, I won't release it for another 24 hours,' but the truth of the matter is that I'm quite nervous of releasing a 'number two,' as I can guarantee some filthy shit-slurping Linux pervert would want to suck it straight out of my anus before I've even had chance to wipe.

I desperately want to suck your monolithic kernel, you sexy hunk, you. -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

I sincerely hope you're Natalie Portman [] .

Dude, nothing on slashdot larger than 3 paragraphs is worth reading. Try to distill the message, whatever it was, and maybe I'll read it. As it is, I have to much open source software to write to waste even 10 seconds of precious time. 10 seconds is all its gonna take M$ to whoop Linux's ass. Vigilence is the price of Free (as in libre -- from the fine, frou frou French language) Software. Hack on fellow geeks, and remember: Friday is Bouillabaisse day except for heathens who do not believe that Jesus died for their sins. Those godless, oil drench, bearded sexist clowns can pull grits from their pantaloons (another fine, fine French word) and eat that. Anyway, try to keep your message focused and concise. For concision is the soul of derision. Way. -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

What the fuck?

I've read your gay conspiracy post version 1.3.0 and I must say I'm impressed. In particular, I appreciate how you have managed to squeeze in a healthy dose of the latent homosexuality you gay-bashing homos [] tend to be full of. Thank you again. -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

Well bugger me!

ooooh honey. how insecure are you!!! wann a little massage from deare bruci. love you -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

Fuck right off!

IMPORTANT: This message needs to be heard (Not HURD [] , which is an acronym for 'Huge Unclean Rectal Dilator') across the whole community, so it has been released into the Public Domain [] . You know, that licence that we all had before those homoerotic crypto-fascists came out with the GPL [] (Gay Penetration License) that is no more than an excuse to see who's got the biggest feces-encrusted [] cock. I would have put this up on Freshmeat [] , but that name is known to be a euphemism for the tight rump of a young boy.

Come to think of it, the whole concept of 'Source Control' unnerves me, because it sounds a bit like 'Sauce Control,' which is a description of the homosexual [] practice of holding the base of the cock shaft tightly upon the point of ejaculation, thus causing a build up of semenal fluid that is only released upon entry into an incision made into the base of the receiver's scrotum. And 'Open Sauce' is the act of ejaculating into another mans face or perhaps a biscuit to be shared later. Obviously, 'Closed Sauce' is the only Christian thing to do, as evidenced by the fact that it is what Cathedrals are all about.

Contributors: (although not to the eternal game of 'soggy biscuit' that open 'sauce' development has become) Anonymous Coward, Anonymous Coward, phee, Anonymous Coward, mighty jebus, Anonymous Coward, Anonymous Coward, double_h, Anonymous Coward, Eimernase, Anonymous Coward, Anonymous Coward, Anonymous Coward, Anonymous Coward, Anonymous Coward, Anonymous Coward, Anonymous Coward, Anonymous Coward. Further contributions are welcome.

Current changes: This version sent to FreeWIPO [] by 'Bring BackATV' as plain text. Reformatted everything, added all links back in (that we could match from the previous version), many new ones (Slashbot bait links). Even more spelling fixed. Who wrote this thing, CmdrTaco himself?

Previous changes: Yet more changes added. Spelling fixed. Feedback added. Explanation of 'distro' system. 'Mount Point' syntax described. More filth regarding `man` and Slashdot. Yet more fucking spelling fixed. 'Fetchmail' uncovered further. More Slashbot baiting. Apache exposed. Distribution licence at foot of document.

ANUX -- A full Linux distribution... Up your ass!

Re:Collision Detection? (2)

0123456 (636235) | more than 3 years ago | (#35934586)

So they are building in a "collision detection system" that I can hack and get the car next to me to drive off the road. Cool.

Indeed. Anything that relies on other cars telling your 'smart car' where they are is a disaster waiting to happen. Not to mention those little details like bikes, pedestrians and moose in the roads, none of which are likely to be part of the glorious 'mesh'.

The collision and delay reporting mechanism will be cool too, because we'll be able to feed fake reports into the system and ensure we get to work on empty roads.

Re:Collision Detection? (1)

lymond01 (314120) | more than 3 years ago | (#35934894)

Not to mention those little details like bikes, pedestrians and moose in the roads

In a world of automated cars, do you think any of those things would exist?

Re:Collision Detection? (1)

davester666 (731373) | more than 3 years ago | (#35935106)

Yes. Because it's cheaper to buy a moose than an automated car.

Re:Collision Detection? (1)

Anne Thwacks (531696) | more than 3 years ago | (#35938996)

Where can I buy a smart moose with GPS and bluetooth?

Re:Collision Detection? (1)

davester666 (731373) | more than 3 years ago | (#35939136)

Well, here in Canada, you just go to the corner moose lot.

Re:Collision Detection? (1)

larppaxyz (1333319) | more than 2 years ago | (#35940444)

Here in Finland we have mooses with GPS, but they usually don't have bluetooth connections. They communicate via EDGE/3G and some mooses still like to use obsolete technology like SMS.

Re:Collision Detection? (1)

dredwerker (757816) | more than 2 years ago | (#35940496)

Here in Finland we have mooses with GPS, but they usually don't have bluetooth connections. They communicate via EDGE/3G and some mooses still like to use obsolete technology like SMS.

Have you got an optical moose?

Re:Collision Detection? (1)

0123456 (636235) | more than 3 years ago | (#35935110)

In a world of automated cars, do you think any of those things would exist?

No. Because the automated cars would run them all over within a week.

Re:Collision Detection? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35935170)

Not to mention those little details like bikes, pedestrians and moose in the roads

In a world of automated cars, do you think any of those things would exist?

As a cyclist in Seattle, I would stay off the roads until I and my fellow cyclists successfully lobbied our local government to make automated cars illegal. We already have some pretty strong support from our fellow cyclist mayor.

Re:Collision Detection? (1)

Belial6 (794905) | more than 3 years ago | (#35936214)

That is crazy. Automated cars would be WAY safer for cyclists than human driven cars. What you should be doing is lobbying for bicycle transmitters so the automated cars know exactly where you are even more reliably than by detecting your bodies presence.

Your comment shows exactly how people that THINK they are making things safer are a danger to themselves and others.

Re:Collision Detection? (1)

The End Of Days (1243248) | more than 3 years ago | (#35936372)

On the other hand, let the luddite hippies have their enclave. They get to feel superior AND leave the rest of us alone. Can you say win-win? I knew that you could.

Re:Collision Detection? (1)

berashith (222128) | more than 2 years ago | (#35940934)

The first act by this intelligent car network will be to eradicate all forms of life that may interfere with the efficient operation of the roads. Who knew skynet really only started as a means to get to work on time?

Re:Collision Detection? (2)

fudoniten (918077) | more than 3 years ago | (#35935012)

Indeed, any car autopilot that only took into account other smart cars would be a horrible disaster waiting to happen. Obviously.

The only way cars could use this sort of communication is as mistrusted advice, which it could use to strengthen it's own observations. The same way you treat another car's turn signals, basically.

Re:Collision Detection? (1)

Dr Max (1696200) | more than 3 years ago | (#35939366)

I'm sure the cops would like to interrogate it when ever they went past check if you ever went over the speed limit, and if you have been to any suspicious areas lately. Personally i think active radar and sensors are the way to go. If your worried about legal claims for the inevitable errors (even if its a hundred times safer than humans accidents will still happen), build any litigation costs into the cost of the product. No reason the robots can't have insurance too.

Re:Collision Detection? (1)

dev.null.matt (2020578) | more than 3 years ago | (#35935078)

The collision and delay reporting mechanism will be cool too, because we'll be able to feed fake reports into the system and ensure we get to work on empty roads.

This was the first thing I thought when I read the summary as well.

Re:Collision Detection? (1)

Penguinshit (591885) | more than 3 years ago | (#35935426)

i suppose you would also enjoy rigging traffic lights, you sociopath.

Re:Collision Detection? (0)

93 Escort Wagon (326346) | more than 3 years ago | (#35936990)

Not to mention those little details like bikes, pedestrians and moose in the roads, none of which are likely to be part of the glorious 'mesh'.

A Møøse once bit my sister ...

Re:Collision Detection? (1)

TheGratefulNet (143330) | more than 3 years ago | (#35934752)

if they can make the collision detection multiple access I think this may be the start of something big.

Re:Collision Detection? (3, Insightful)

fudoniten (918077) | more than 3 years ago | (#35934968)

They have that now. The collision detection system is the human who's driving. You can hack it by driving up beside them, and then pulling abruptly towards them. They're very likely to swerve right off the road!

The implicit question here is: you can already be a vicious asshole and try to kill people, but you don't. Why would you do so if their car happened to be computer-driven?

Also, frankly, give the computer driver a few generations, and it's responses will probably be much safer and more reasonable than a panicky human driver.

Remote hacking and viruses are a potential problem; preferably the car's autopilot will be entirely isolated from any network connection. You could still walk up, stick an ethernet plug in, bypass the security system, and upload malicious code. Or, you could cut the breaks.

Re:Collision Detection? (1)

Anne Thwacks (531696) | more than 3 years ago | (#35939018)

You can hack it by driving up beside them, and then lifting up your skirt

Thats fixed it for you!

Re:Collision Detection? (2)

AK Marc (707885) | more than 3 years ago | (#35935000)

For one, I'd imagine that if these made it in cars, they'd be sealed boxes with felonies for modifying them. Additionally, as "cute" as you might be in hiding your identity for your illegal mods, I'm guess that they'd still be trackable. And, you are presuming that a single signal from a single car will result in a crash in another car. That's not the operational mode I've seen described. My sister drive head-on into a solid concrete wall to avoid getting sideswiped. I've pointed out that such a decision was likely not the best choice for overall safety. However, my family thought me callous for pointing out basic risk analysis. I'd imagine that these cars would be programmed with basic risk analysis in mind. That is, a touch of cars traveling the same speed in the same direction has a near-zero chance of causing a secondary collision and would not harm anyone involved. But on car saying "I'm swerving" and all other cars driving head-first into trees to get out of the way seems absurd.

You might as well assert that you'd just hack the whole system to shut down all other cars remotely and program yours to drive on the sidewalk. That's probably more likely than the scenario you present.

Re:Collision Detection? (1)

vlm (69642) | more than 3 years ago | (#35935254)

Rather than modifying the one in the car, it would be way the heck more fun to create your own out of junkyard parts plus "some other things".

Personally, I'd give my car a virtual, invisible police car escort...

I'm curious how this thing would handle road hazards... water puddles on the road vs 6 foot deep water...

Who will be the first bleeding heart to sue the manufacturer when the car decides to run over a squirrel instead of (theoretically possibly) headon a concrete truck?

Re:Collision Detection? (1)

u38cg (607297) | more than 3 years ago | (#35938950)

Actually, the safest kind of accident to have in a car is a head on collision. A sideswipe can be followed by a catastrophic loss of control, which can mean almost anything at speed.

Re:Collision Detection? (1)

AK Marc (707885) | more than 3 years ago | (#35939318)

Are you trolling? A sideswipe will not hurt anyone, so long as you don't purposefully drive off the road afterward. Just like a rear end bump when both are near the same speed. I'd much prefer a sideswipe than a head-on. I've been sideswiped twice (both times the other driver was cited by an officer), and it was a complete non-event. So I'm curious how incompetent of a driver you are that you think that a tap from the side will leave you catastrophically out of control.

Re:Collision Detection? (1)

berashith (222128) | more than 2 years ago | (#35941042)

This brings up an interesting point. My sister was in a wreck where someone drove head on into her. She knew that she had no place to swerve off of the road to do the design of the road. She was thankfully in a much larger vehicle, and one of her worst injuries was a broken heel from hitting the brakes so hard ( go go adrenalin ). I told her that her best option would have been hitting the gas, that creating more inertia would have been the safest option for her ( the other drivers car folded like an accordian anyhow, there was no way he was going to survive this wreck ).

Now to my point... any corporation that is responsible for the safest type of response algorithm here is going to get sued into oblivion. If the car takes the choice that is most likely to kill me ( driving into the ditch) instead of one that will possibly seriously injure, or in this case kill, the other driver, then I dont want it. If the car is going to make the correct choice for me, then the manufacturers are out of business.

That'll probably be easily fixed. (1)

Cyberax (705495) | more than 3 years ago | (#35935008)

Such hacks are easily defeated by proper architecture. Most likely, automatic cars will have several levels of functions with firewalls between them. For example:
1) Low level - engine control.
2) Situational awareness - do not accelerate into pedestrians.
3) Global awareness - traffic patterns and navigation.

So hackers will only be able to influence the last level of the hierarchy. So they can route your car into an incorrect location, but they won't be able to drive it off the road.

Re:Collision Detection? (2)

izomiac (815208) | more than 3 years ago | (#35935340)

You could also carry a gun and shoot the driver of the other vehicle, which would presumably cause it to drive off the road. Why would any non-sociopath wish to do so?

IOW, in using the common road system you place yourself at the mercy of your fellow man, and making this system 100% impenetrable to external attack is kind of a waste of time. There are a great many easier ways to inflict harm upon another driver, and many of them are equally clandestine.

Re:Collision Detection? (1)

cyberfin (1454265) | more than 3 years ago | (#35939212)

You just gave someone in Hollywood an idea for their next craptastic movie... Nice going...

Dumb cars (1)

PFI_Optix (936301) | more than 3 years ago | (#35934504)

I rather like the idea of "dumb cars" being a factor now, because it means that when the "smart cars" or their users fail to be quite so smart, the cars around them can react without being able to communicate with them. It would be quite dangerous if they all operated on the assumption that every vehicle on the road was talking to them.

upgrades not always good (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35934548)

Some parts of india have a similar but lower tech problem - cars with disc brakes are unusual and can stop faster than cars, with the more common but less efficient, drum brakes. This tends to cause accidents

Re:upgrades not always good (4, Insightful)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 3 years ago | (#35934640)

That is not a tech problem, that is a driving problem. STOP FUCKING TAILGATING.

Re:upgrades not always good (1)

AmiMoJo (196126) | more than 2 years ago | (#35940452)

Some manufacturers already provide a collision-prevention system that slams on the breaks if it detects you are about to rear-end someone. All they need to do is modify it so that you can't get any closer than the safe stopping distance at your current speed.

Re:upgrades not always good (1)

ethanms (319039) | more than 3 years ago | (#35934702)

We had this same problem in the 1950s and 60s... of course back then not EVERYONE drove like an idiot, so it wasn't so bad.

Not to mention the dynamic obstacles: i.e. cows... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35934800)

...that seem to cause busloads to plunge off roads into canyons.

Behold! A glorious new future in road transport! (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35934576)

That was my sarcastic heading for the thought that immediately came to mind.
A Slashdot article on the first multi-lane triple-digit pileup involving emergency organ transplant couriers, a schoolbus full of nuns and orphaned AIDS children, an emergency response vehicle going in the opposite direction and a dozen container cargoes of inflatable Jesus sex dolls, all caused by a conflict between the rights infringement seeking subroutines of the vehicles' in-car computing technologies.

Then someone will try to be first to post a 'Crash' joke.

Mandates (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35934596)

It's all fantastic until someone has to pay for it.

Dumb humans (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35934610)

As good as cars are or could be, isn't it time to get rid of the worst part? ie, the human driver? Mass transit or whatnot is clearly superior to an infinite number of monkeys driving cars at the same time.

Re:Dumb humans (2)

ethanms (319039) | more than 3 years ago | (#35934692)

Mass transit or whatnot is clearly superior to an infinite number of monkeys driving cars at the same time.

On paper that seems correct... until you find yourself waiting in a queue with those monkey's to get onto a train/bus/subway which is already full of those monkeys and piloted by a monkey (or a computer programmed by monkeys)... suddenly you find yourself saying, I'd rather sit in traffic for an hour then next to these monkeys.

Re:Dumb humans (2)

0123456 (636235) | more than 3 years ago | (#35934766)

Mass transit or whatnot is clearly superior to an infinite number of monkeys driving cars at the same time.

Uh, no.

Mass transit sucks and always will so long as I have to go from where I don't want to start to where I don't want to get to at a time when I don't want to go and share it with people I don't want to sit next to.

The ideal would be a vehicle that would just carry me, and go from where I am at a time of my choosing to the destination of my choosing without stopping at numerous places along the way.

Oh, but we already have that. It's called a car.

Re:Dumb humans (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 3 years ago | (#35935004)

No we don't. That damn thing requires someone to pay attention, and not drink. Totally unacceptable.

Re:Dumb humans (1)

Belial6 (794905) | more than 3 years ago | (#35936310)

Or a vehicle that would go from where you are to a platform that will then transport you in the same vehicle close to where you want to go without you have to pay attention, and then letting you pay attention to get the same vehicle to where you want to go.

Re:Dumb humans (1)

AmiMoJo (196126) | more than 2 years ago | (#35940512)

Mass transit works brilliantly if you are willing to walk a little at either end. On a well run system you will arrive sooner (due to avoiding traffic or simply higher speeds) and you are free to relax or work during the journey. Read a book, answer some email on your phone...

Cars on the other hand cost a lot to buy, to maintain and to fuel. You then have to drive to where you want to go, concentrating the whole time and probably getting pissed off by other road users and sitting in traffic. When you arrive you have to pay to park, often about the same distance as the bus stop or train station from where you want to be anyway.

Both options have their merits. I wouldn't give up my car, but having lived in a place where public transport is excellent (Tokyo) I prefer it to driving.

Re:Dumb humans (2)

Gordonjcp (186804) | more than 3 years ago | (#35935386)

Mass transit or whatnot is clearly superior to an infinite number of monkeys driving cars at the same time.

Only in the subset of transport where you have a lot of people who all need to go from the same place, to the same place (or at least, places along the same route), and all at the same time.

I can't use public transport, because it doesn't go where I want, from where I want, when I want, and I can't carry a tonne of tools with me. If I can't do that, then your public transport systems stop working rather quickly.

I can see it (1)

MonsterTrimble (1205334) | more than 3 years ago | (#35934632)

They discuss how smartphones will become the primary means of in-car entertainment, how satnavs will be integrated into fighter-jet style heads-up displays, and how cars will create wireless mesh networks that warn each other of upcoming delays and collisions.

I think smartphones will be a stop-gap entertainment-wise. Really, if the new cars will have wifi anyway they will just talk to your home network (when parked) and just download the entertainment to the onboard HDD. The heads-up satnav will be pretty cool, although I suspect that the mesh networking will require multiple driver inputs of a collision and the like instead of relying on sensors alone.

Re:I can see it (1)

theeddie55 (982783) | more than 3 years ago | (#35935892)

Why would a collision require user input to sense? a number of cars saying that they're not moving in the same location without traffic lights would generally indicate a problem in the road.

Re:I can see it (1)

Majikk (60247) | more than 3 years ago | (#35938866)

Or a traffic jam.

iCar with iSurvilance included (1)

fluch (126140) | more than 3 years ago | (#35934654)

After just having seen what information the iPhone stores without the users knowledge I don't want to know how much more information the future smartcar wants to store and give away to different companies and lawenforcement agencies. No thanks.

Re:iCar with iSurvilance included (2)

Bigbutt (65939) | more than 3 years ago | (#35934736)

That's when they put the magnetic sensors under the road surface to check your RFID and if you get from place A to place B faster than the speed limit would allow, you'll get a pop up on your HUD with

Greetings Law Breaker

The State has determined you have exceeded the posted speed by an average of 25 KPH over the course of the past 6 blocks.

Do you wish to dispute this?

Yes No

You have selected "dispute this claim." Are you sure?

Yes No

You have confirmed that you are sure. Your vehicle will stop in 20 seconds to await your local police. Please pull to the side of the road to prevent impeding traffic.

Thank you, have a nice day.


Re:iCar with iSurvilance included (1)

bhcompy (1877290) | more than 3 years ago | (#35934922)

Look up what OnStar does already

Where are the heads-up displays? (2)

bitpyr8 (1120657) | more than 3 years ago | (#35934686)

My '03 Pontiac has a heads-up display that shows my speed, and radio station briefly when I change stations. I went looking at new cars last year and didn't find a lot of models with the heads-up display. It's a great idea, and the technology has been available for at least 8 years, why isn't it as common as cruise control and interval wipers?

Re:Where are the heads-up displays? (1)

ethanms (319039) | more than 3 years ago | (#35934742)

...HUD adds cost/complexity to build and repairs, but isn't necessarily perceived by the general public as that great of a feature (maybe just because not enough people have experienced it?) ...When it really comes down to it, how often does the average driver actually look at their speedometer (when they haven't just passed a cop)? ...showing the current radio station is nice, but with the proliferation of HD radio, satellite, CD text, iPods, etc, suddenly that's an awful lot of data to be putting into the driver's field of view, whether or not it's slightly opaque.

Re:Where are the heads-up displays? (1)

wagnerrp (1305589) | more than 3 years ago | (#35936354)

You're missing the point. The driver is going to be viewing that data anyway. Doesn't it make more sense to put that data in the driver's field of view, and at a focal length that makes it less disruptive to use? Maybe if people had their speed readily available in their field of view, they could more reliably maintain speed on the highway. Of course maybe if people just used their cruise control, that wouldn't be a problem either.

Re:Where are the heads-up displays? (1)

scdeimos (632778) | more than 3 years ago | (#35937572)

Of course maybe if people just used their cruise control, that wouldn't be a problem either.

In my experience cruise control is quite variable. I've driven a number of CC-equipped vehicles over the years and they're all great on the straight-and-level roads but get to a corner or a hill and a lot of them can't cope.

Good CC systems (eg: Mercedes, Honda CRVs) can power up a hill, or through a corner, and back off appropriately as they crest or exit. Bad CC systems (eg: VW Jetta) apply the power too late and then surge over the crest or exiting the corner.

Cruise control is a relatively simple subsystem. If a lot of manufacturers can't even get that right, what hope is there for driverless technology?

Re:Where are the heads-up displays? (1)

wagnerrp (1305589) | more than 3 years ago | (#35938236)

In my experience cruise control is quite variable. I've driven a number of CC-equipped vehicles over the years and they're all great on the straight-and-level roads but get to a corner or a hill and a lot of them can't cope.

That's really baffling. Any Industrial Engineer worth their degree is going to know their way around tuning PID controllers. A half hour of effort, or some automated algorithms, should get easily manage constants good enough for a couple miles per hour. Half a day should get you a pretty good system. I do agree that some CC implementations are downright pathetic, and I just don't understand why they even bother. I had an underpowered Focus as a loner car once, and on an sharp uphill on-ramp near work, I would drop 10mph before the CC took over.

Re:Where are the heads-up displays? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35934928)

My Cadillac STS has an awesome HUD. Shows:

my current speed
the posted speed limit of the road I'm on
indicators for the built in navigation:
- how far to next turn
- direction of turn
- street name
warning markers for cars that are in my blind spot
warning for cars that I am too close to (adjusted for speed and estimated braking ability)

I love it, as I rarely have to take my eyes off the road which makes me more responsive while driving.

Re:Where are the heads-up displays? (2)

AK Marc (707885) | more than 3 years ago | (#35935160)

I think we need more like the Cadillac HUD that showed IR via HUD for nightime driving. Some high-powered IR spotlights pointed ahead that won't blind people and you can get a black-and-white image that greatly exceeds what you can get from visual light. Process that and put that up overlaid across the windshield. Or just have alerts pop up when an object is detected via IR/radar that is outside visual range. Or just have glasses that process visual light in full color and IR as a black-and-white overlay so you pop on your night-vision glasses and get full 3D view in superhuman spectrum (with processing that identifies oncoming cars and "deletes" their spotlights so that everyone sees better).

Re:Where are the heads-up displays? (1)

wagnerrp (1305589) | more than 3 years ago | (#35936196)

I have an '03 Grand Prix and often wonder the same thing.

Re:Where are the heads-up displays? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35939510)

It's older than that. Pontiac has had HUD as an option in Bonnevilles and Gran Prix's going back to 1988. Even occasionally as an option in the Grand Ams during the 1990s... Cadillacs and Corvettes have also had it too.

Why isn't it more common? Who knows? Probably considered too redundant/gimmicky or requires a certain windshield angle to take advantage of surface reflection while using compact optics.

Re:Where are the heads-up displays? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#35941192)

The primary purpose of a HUD in a fighter aircraft is to provide collimated symbology that is used for targeting and shooting at things. Aside from that, it is only useful as a replacement/enhancement to existing meters and while enhancing the user experience in some ways, it can degrade them in other ways.

Re:Where are the heads-up displays? (1)

Thelasko (1196535) | more than 2 years ago | (#35941554)

Pontiacs have had HUD units since 1988. [] I had a friend that had a hand-me-down Bonneville in 1997 with HUD for vehicle speed.

In 2000 Cadillac [] had a night vision system that was displayed via HUD.

For some reason they just didn't catch on.

avoid vendor lock, please (1)

magarity (164372) | more than 3 years ago | (#35934772)

My car has a standard 1/8" plug for an external player to use the stereo but my wife's car came with an ipod socket which is useless as we don't have any ithings. I imagine the pressure on the car makers to include car stereos locking in to one or another proprietary format (probably the ipod type; I think I was lucky) and the consumer being really stuck.

Re:avoid vendor lock, please (1)

Nerdfest (867930) | more than 3 years ago | (#35934882)

I've mentioned here before that I know someone who didn't buy a card because it had an iPod connector. He bought one that had a USB connector instead. It would be acceptable to have both, but at least the non-proprietary connector should be supported. I'd prefer they didn't support the non-proprietary connectors at all as it just encourages those companies to continue their lock-in.

Re:avoid vendor lock, please (1)

c6gunner (950153) | more than 3 years ago | (#35935304)

That's just retarded. You can buy a new deck for $100 these days, or get a fancier model and have it installed for $300. That's the first thing I did after buying my last vehicle - the stock decks are usually shit anyway. You don't make a $30,000 purchasing decision based on the availability of a $300 part. Or,at least, a rational person doesn't. If you have any sense, you'll select the vehicle that best suits you needs based on fuel efficiency, cabin/cargo room, power/handling, reliability metrics and warranty, and general "feel", then buy the base model with the least amount of gee-whiz features you can find and upgrade whatever you want with after-market parts.

Re:avoid vendor lock, please (1)

BKX (5066) | more than 3 years ago | (#35937362)

This. Seriously.

Why do people insist on spending an extra $5000 for leather, power seats, an underpowered "premium" soundsystem, heated seats, etc.? I will never understand this. Those things are anti-features for me. Leather is uncomfortable in the summer, and freezing in the winter. Heated seats make my butt sweat. Soundsystems ten times better sounding than anything Toyota makes are dime a dozen. Brush your mirrors off when you brush your windows, for pit's sake. And learn how to shift a gear, and save some cash now and forever.

The only accessory-type features that I wouldn't to live without in a car either mandatory by law (power steering and brakes, anti-lock brakes and/or traction control, seat belts, air bags, all of which are either currently required in the US or slated to be required in the future) or hard to find cars without anyway, like power windows and locks (I don't care so much about keyless entry, but power locks are necessary in my neighborhood).

Air conditioning is nice but I've lived without it before, and is therefore a neutral feature.

Re:avoid vendor lock, please (1)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 3 years ago | (#35938998)

It's good that you know what you want in a car, but why do you insist that others share your taste?

Re:avoid vendor lock, please (1)

berashith (222128) | more than 2 years ago | (#35941202)

leather ... i have kids, who spill stuff... an leather wipes clean easily ,as opposed to cloth which smells like fermenting yogurt for months
heated seats... because they are leather, and I only heat them when they are cold. Once they are warm, i use the handy "off" feature
sound ... mine is an amplified Bose system, not great, but good enough. Some cars come with horribly altered radio housings that can fit aftermarket heads
Air conditioning .. well, i live in Atlanta, there are very few people who think AC is optional here.
power locks ... interesting you find that a necessity, having "power" in the description doesnt make them stronger. just push down the manual ones and the door stays locked .

I would only agree with you that features are a personal choice. You have your requests, I have mine. The car companies figure out a status quo and build to sell the most cars. I would like to have the high end features, internal amenities and large suspension components with a smaller engine. unfortunately there are not enough people like me that want fuel efficiency, comfort, and safety in the same car. when you upgrade one, you upgrade them all. Now, if i were willing to pay an enormous premium then I am sure that someone would build me the car I want. I would never make up the cost difference by using less fuel however.

Re:avoid vendor lock, please (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35938608)

Stereos in a lot of new cars are integrated into the dashboard. They are not a simple swap like they were 10 years ago, and don't have anywhere for an aftermarket one to be fitted.

Re:avoid vendor lock, please (1)

afidel (530433) | more than 3 years ago | (#35934884)

Bluetooth and A2DP are the best for this, my dad's phones sync to his car and he can voice dial them with the integrated audio stuff and steering wheel controls, the 2012 Equinox is supposed to have a full A2DP stack so you should be able to control things like Pandora using the wheel controls. This is one of the reasons I'm waiting till this fall to replace my current car (along with waiting to see if BMW brings the x1 diesel, if Ford brings the Vertrek concept as the next Escape, and whether Mazda will bring the CX-7 diesel to the US, I want a high MPG crossover with AWD).

Re:avoid vendor lock, please (1)

colinnwn (677715) | more than 3 years ago | (#35935808)

If you want great Bluetooth support, don't hold your breath on a Mazda CX-7. Parents bought a CX-9 recently, it is a great car, but the Bluetooth support is beyond terrible. It doesn't support phone book sync or more than 1 connected phone at the same time. It frequently drops connections or forgets to autoconnect to a phone if the other person's phone was in it last. This is with 2 old Motorola dumb phones that have excellent Bluetooth support in every other use we've tried with them.

If you want to be able to voice dial someone, you manually have to send each phone number to it by Bluetooth, then teach a voice dial name to it. My $240 aftermarket stereo from 2 years ago supports up to 3 connected phones at the same time, always autoconnects and stays connected to phones, supports bulk phonebook access, and requires no voice dial teaching. If I was a Mazda engineer or marketing person, I'd never have allowed that to be installed on a car. It isn't a feature, it is a liability.

Re:avoid vendor lock, please (1)

DCstewieG (824956) | more than 3 years ago | (#35934944)

While I think they should have both, consider this a failing of all other manufacturers not standardizing on a common port to compete with the iPod dock. The fact that I plug one wire into my iPod in the car and get audio, power, and control is a beautiful thing. Maybe there's a chance now with Micro USB becoming standard. The iPod dock and the consistency it provides accessory manufacturers is a huge advantage for Apple.

Re:avoid vendor lock, please (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 3 years ago | (#35935052)

They did, it is called USB. You ipod dock cable even supports that.

Re:avoid vendor lock, please (1)

magarity (164372) | more than 3 years ago | (#35935260)

They did, it is called USB. You ipod dock cable even supports that.

But USB is just a protocol for sending data, not how the data is structured. So a player plugged into a USB from a stereo just becomes a storage device that could be used by the dash player. This creates a number of difficulties by itself as the dash player has to navigate any given player's file structure, etc, and provide a unified way to present what it finds to the operator for selection. At least the ipod cable eliminates this because the dash player just takes the input or uses the ithings protocols. The 1/8" plug in mine of course just relies on operating the portable player. A generic USB actually has a lot of potential to be not as good as either of these, depending on your portable player and the dash player's ability to browse it.

Re:avoid vendor lock, please (1)

mspohr (589790) | more than 3 years ago | (#35935856)

I just bought a car with a USB port. Works great. You can plug in an iPad/pod/phone etc and play your music. You can also plug in a generic USB memory stick (or any device that looks like a USB memory stick) and it will play your music, playlists, play by type of music, etc. Also has a round jack for stereo input.

Re:avoid vendor lock, please (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35935432)

> a failing of all other manufacturers not standardizing on a common port

Just so. For better or worse, iPods are the defacto standard mp3 player, and as such, their ports are the defacto standard for this kind of thing. If you're a car mfg and you are going to pick one, you go with the one with the biggest market share.

Re:avoid vendor lock, please (1)

Penguinshit (591885) | more than 3 years ago | (#35935526)

Any design feature of a car began on the drawing board minimum 3 years prior to showroom release. Once spec'd it is difficult to inject changes. When these cars were designed the iPod/Phone was the vast market leader. Expect more choice/generic in the near future.

Re:avoid vendor lock, please (1)

u38cg (607297) | more than 3 years ago | (#35938968)

Hmm...the socket is proprietary but the electronics are identical: surely there must be an aftermarket connector that would let you hook up a normal MP3 player.

The obligatory BSOD post (1)

hilldog (656513) | more than 3 years ago | (#35934802)

Well someone had to do it. Suppose a segfault would be just as bad.

Re:The obligatory BSOD post (1)

TD-Linux (1295697) | more than 3 years ago | (#35936364)

You do realize that your car is already driven by a computer? That there is nothing but a CAN bus between the accelerator and the fuel injection nowadays? That various valves and operating parameters are adjusted by control loops running thousands of times per second?

Admittedly, an autopilot of sorts would be much more complicated. However, there's no reason to believe that it wouldn't be written well enough to not crash. And it would certainly not impede manual control of the car, which would probably be a different system and have higher priority on the bus so that a misbehaving autopilot could do no harm.

In car computing? No thanks. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35934806)

Just give me a nice convertible with a 6-speed manual gearbox and the bare minimum of electronics needed to keep the engine running efficiently.

Driving a car should be interesting enough by itself, I'd rather drive than be a passenger in a driverless Googlemobile soaking up pre-made online entertainment

Re:In car computing? No thanks. (1)

AK Marc (707885) | more than 3 years ago | (#35935184)

This? []

Why not piggyback existing technology? (1)

MasterEvilAce (792905) | more than 3 years ago | (#35934838)

I have a "smart" phone that has internet, GPS, and map data, and an SD card filled with music. Why can't I piggyback off my phone? My phone is designed with touch interfaces in mind, just like modern cars. However, two years from now, I can replace my phone with one twice as powerful, faster, and more features... and i'll be stuck with a car that uses slower, more outdated technology. This is similar to television sets becoming computers.. except computers that are locked in time and are only as good as when they were last updated. I should be able to plug in my phone and either use my phone's interface (or even a custom app from the carmaker) to do whatever I need to do, pull up anything I need, etc. This way, I won't have to hack up my dash to put an ipad in there.

This is pretty much the only way cars can improve. (1)

mlts (1038732) | more than 3 years ago | (#35934870)

Without a complete re-engineering, car MPG isn't going to be increasing. Nor, with traffic as congested as it is, does horsepower mattered as it used to.

So, what is left is making the ride more comfortable and safer. Because smaller modes of transportation are becoming more common (motorcycles, mopeds, bicycles, pedicabs), vehicles that have the ability to warn about stuff in blind spots are becoming more important, especially modern cars where visibility is impaired by the pillars airbags are stashed in.

Of course, a safe driver is a safe driver, but having a warning system so Jane Xanax who is on the cellphone and putting on makeup gets buzzed that if she is about to turn a motorcyclist into an organ donor, or that the beer tap on Joe Sixpack's dash cuts him off after four servings of Miller Light, before his BAC gets to the legal limit.

I am all for automatic driving cars that use a mesh network. This means freeways that can run at the max speed of the slowest vehicle, not the minimum speed of the most drunk, stoned, high, baked, moron on a cellphone. Taking the human equation out on the freeways is a good thing, as it allows for much higher vehicle density as opposed to having to deal with people's reaction times (or lack thereof).

Re:This is pretty much the only way cars can impro (1)

AK Marc (707885) | more than 3 years ago | (#35935336)

I also foresee when cars will link to the one in front like a train. That will form a direct connection for communication, turning it into a longer car. Why that? Because the economy will improve with the proximity of the cars and the carrying capacity of the road will increase dramatically. As long as they get the linking to be a safe thing, safety should be improved because the chains will "think" as one and when it's your turn to get off, you disconnect and exit, back to regular car mode. And the others close up and continue on to their exit.

But I personally think that GSM GPS should be in all cars with all trips taken transmitted back to a central node. That node can look at actual traffic in real-time and route people based on the best way to get there. It could also take into account individual driving patters to give appropriate directions (give grandma a route with lower speeds because she drives slow) and the ability to modify routes in real-time for congestion and problems would greatly help. Timing lights based on cars approaching it, rather than poorly timed based on a 3-year old study, handling onramp metering with actual intelligence, rather than time of day, suggesting longer routes that will take less time because of avoiding congestion, and such will make such a system instantly increase the capacity of the roads and decrease fatalities.

Of course, it wouldn't be cheap, and piles of people would come out of the woodwork demanding their Constitutional Right to drive inefficiently...

Re:This is pretty much the only way cars can impro (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35939002)

You hit upon a point there. Right now, stoplights and other traffic control mechanisms are used as a revenue generating function first thing, controlling the flow of moving vehicles second. For example, in a lot of small towns, there is a sensor in front of their 1-2 lights. This is to ensure that the light is red, and possibly net the town either $200 for a citation, or perhaps a jackpot if there is a marijuana seed, and zero tolerance civil forfeiture laws get them a nice vehicle they can use.

Will cities give up this cash cow? Would be nice. However, most larger cities are more interested in building stadiums for their sports teams than actually doing much in the way of easing congestion.

I see an automatic car initiative coming from car makers, well-clued companies like Google, and countries like China that have 6 day, 1000 mile traffic jams and have governments with the cajones to do something about their infrastructure problems.

US cities don't give a flying fuck how long commuters wait on their roads -- there is little to no economic interest in actually doing anything about it. Of course, these same city planners refuse to do anything about downtown crime, so people who can afford to do so keep moving outward to more suburban areas in order for their kids to grow up thinking that encountering a stray in the neighborhood means a lost puppy, as opposed to a .45 cal bullet from a gang shootout.

Time will tell -- Google's initiative and other research is going to pay off big when vehicles can be moved along far more densely on roads than now. A side effect, assuming a non-corrupt city that actually might lay in the ground work -- allow people to sleep, read a book, or browse /. for the length of the commute, instead of having to be active and wary the whole trip time.

Great, just what we need... (1)

Elviswind (1959800) | more than 3 years ago | (#35934872)

...16-year-old girls everywhere driving around with Facebook on the heads-up display. You might as well install a keg in the trunk with the tap in the dash for all this will do to teen accident rates.

Can I just get... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35935044)

.. an interface that doesn't suck, powered by a system that is faster than a circa '99 laptop.

Things that are illegal in WA state (1)

WillAffleckUW (858324) | more than 3 years ago | (#35935198)

Talking on cell phones while driving

Texting while driving

Watching vids while driving

Yes, that means you. And if the car is turned on and in a roadway, that counts, no matter what your excuse is.

Re:Things that are illegal in WA state (1)

Nethead (1563) | more than 3 years ago | (#35936030)

Now if they could learn RCW 46.61.100. []

Step right up, it's the next toy for idiots ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35935272)

Never mind that 30,000+ people die in motor vehicle
accidents every year in the US alone. Yes, let's not
pay attention to that despite the fact that it exceeds
the deaths caused by terrorism by at least an order of
magnitude, every year.

Let's provide the occupants of the car with even more
ways they can distract themselves from the driving,
so the road continues to be the most dangerous activity
the average person experiences. What a great idea !

the future of high roaming fees if tied to a phone (0)

Joe The Dragon (967727) | more than 3 years ago | (#35935428)

the future of high roaming fees if tied to a phone and lot's of lock in and don't even think of going to canada or mexico with a us data plan.

Driving. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35935434)

What ever happened to *driving*? You know, going out for a drive. Automobiling. Motoring. Just driving, for pete's sake, keeping our concentration on the road.

fighter-jet style HUD (1)

Culture20 (968837) | more than 3 years ago | (#35935774)

Please no.
1. Fighter Pilots are trained to read their HUDs, and also trained (presumably) in how to ignore them when appropriate.
2. Fighter jets usually don't fly in super-tight formations (Blue Angels being the exception). Especially not in tight formations of hundreds or thousands.

SatNav should be restricted to passenger or vehicle-stopped usage.

Re:fighter-jet style HUD (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 3 years ago | (#35936640)

I want HUD really bad. Halo:Reach actually presents a really nice view of what I would like it to do in cars. The primary purpose is to outline things that I the driver need to be aware of. Sensors could detect and outline pedestrians, other vehicles, and those things in between (like bicyclists) in poor-visibility conditions. Streets can be labeled with their names regardless of whether the sign has been stolen or not. Looking down at the dash for car status is eliminated, because anything important will pop up along the bottom of the view.

I'd also like to see vehicles labeled with range, vector, and velocity, but that's not appropriate for the average driver, perhaps. Ideally it would feature pupil tracking so it could tell me only about cars I'm looking at.

It should go without saying that I want the system to alert me to cars on a collision vector. The more sure it is that they are going to hit me, the more alert I get.

There is no reason whatsoever that this sort of stuff can't slowly be phased in. The only reason it hasn't happened already is that pupil tracking and convincing projection onto your glass have been expensive until recently. Both are getting cheaper right now, which is why you're hearing about it.

If anyone is looking for a HUD dash for an S13, I have one sitting around. Untested though...

Wow, clairvoyance... (2)

AugstWest (79042) | more than 3 years ago | (#35936860)

"smartphones will become the primary means of in-car entertainment" ...and soon they will run on gas, and have steering wheels.

It's always nice when pundits predict stuff that's been happening for at least 5 years already.

Make auto-pilot cars optional, just like HOV/Tolls (1)

bhmit1 (2270) | more than 3 years ago | (#35936910)

Instead of spending all the time, effort, and high risk should there be a failure, on an auto-pilot to handles real world situations perfectly, why not focus on the easy wins. Over long highways and busy cities, build HOV like lanes designed just for auto-pilot cars. If the car has the technology, it communicates with a gate that allows the car to enter the physically separate lane. When you get to the end of the special lane (or to your exit), you take control of the car before it lets you exit back on to the existing roads.

Include the technology for automatic valet parking that could be a seller for high end/big city areas, and you start the adoption process gradually. Even better is if the car can self-dock with a charging station while you're not using it. Companies like zipcar could purchase vehicles with the technology to get through rush-hour on the special lanes, and then the cars would reposition to high demand areas by themselves. Or the city could purchase vehicles and use them as an individual mass transit option that doesn't require building tracks, high voltage power lines, train stations, and the train cars.

For the paranoid, they don't have to give up control or even buy a car with the technology in it. But for the rest of us that would like to have our car drive at an optimal fuel efficient speed without any traffic jams while we read a book or talk on the phone, we can choose to trust the technology.

Tesla (1)

goosesensor (1431303) | more than 3 years ago | (#35938896)

Check out Tesla's new Model S interface. It's pretty cool. Coincidentally, I interviewed with them today to work on the project. They shot me down like a bad of bricks. Tough cookies, those ones.

Patent system - auto oligarchy interaction (1)

beachdog (690633) | more than 3 years ago | (#35939084)

What is really going on is the automobile makers are announcing they have begun filing patents.

This is a continuation of the industrial patent game that has been played since the beginning of the auto industry.

The patent game is a game played between the auto companies. The payout of the game is membership and position in the global auto manufacturing hierarchy.

What kind of innovation, what software, what interface? Well the patent game allows only a spotty blend of best of breed and second best solutions.

Patents are these strange objects that confer the exclusive right to manufacture an invention for a limited period of time. For any manufacturer, patents promise guaranteed business.

I think the patent game should be changed using inspiration from the Creative Commons and Open Source and Free Software movement. The point to focus on is to require patents to be licensed on the same terms and the same price to all applicants. Equal terms for all is to address the problem of patents supporting manufacturing oligopoly and the complementary problem of the best of breed solutions being locked away for scores of years.

Another problem with the patent game is the toxic effects as patent holders grasp for extraordinary or highest possible profits. The unfortunate effect of owning a patent is to the patent holder, the only fair price is "all the market will bear". That monopoly inspired grasping is a really difficult thing to regulate or balance in respect to what is fair for the commons.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?