Beta
×

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!

Your Car Will Soon Sense If You're Tired Or Not Paying Attention

Soulskill posted about 7 months ago | from the it'll-send-you-a-text-asking-you-to-look-at-the-road dept.

Transportation 178

cartechboy writes "Distracted driving is a large issue, and it's getting worse as we become more entangled with our technology. To help combat this growing problem Volvo is showing off new technology that allows the car to sense when a driver is tired or not paying attention. The system bathes the driver in infrared light that can pick up the driver's position and eye movements. If the driver becomes inattentive or begins to drift off to sleep, it will alert you. Besides the safety aspect of this system, it will also be able to recognize the person sitting behind the wheel, allowing the car to tailor itself to that person's stored preferences. Further, it will be able to adjust the vehicle's exterior lighting in the direction the driver is looking based on the detected eye movement. Volvo's quick to note the system can't photograph the driver. People, the future is coming, and your vehicle is going to be watching you."

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

Not If I don't buy it (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46527639)

Even rear view cameras are still incredibly pricey add ons for most cars. I doubt much of this will be forced on us ( though with the current administration "knowing best" for how I should spend my money, who know)

Re:Not If I don't buy it (4, Insightful)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | about 7 months ago | (#46527681)

Perhaps there would be incentives in form of reduced insurance premiums. (That would actually make perfect sense, insurance companies tend to give benefits to people exhibiting responsible behavior.)

Re:Not If I don't buy it (2)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about 7 months ago | (#46527895)

Perhaps there would be incentives in form of reduced insurance premiums. (That would actually make perfect sense, insurance companies tend to give benefits to people exhibiting responsible behavior.)

"Reasonable" is subjective. For example, some people may find the idea of your insurance company goading you into willfully installing a tracking device [progressive.com] as reasonable; many people, myself included, disagree.

I think you're suffering from a case of confirmation bias here.

Re:Not If I don't buy it (2)

SternisheFan (2529412) | about 7 months ago | (#46528311)

A few weeks ago someone posted here how he drove like a little old lady for 3 weeks with the Progressive dongle in his car. Then whe sent it back to Progressive and got a big discount on his insurance, though that differs greatly from this always on body scanner in TFS.

Re:Not If I don't buy it (5, Insightful)

i kan reed (749298) | about 7 months ago | (#46527707)

Yeah, and I hate how that evil government makes me purchase seat belts and air bags. And brakes, not just that, but brakes that meet safety standards. Stupid government "knowing best".

Re:Not If I don't buy it (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46527833)

0/10
You can do better than that, Reed!

Re:Not If I don't buy it (1)

CohibaVancouver (864662) | about 7 months ago | (#46527905)

...not to mention all those pollution controls the evil government forces on us to ensure my kids have clean air to breathe. Airborne toxins build character.

Re:Not If I don't buy it (1, Interesting)

OhPlz (168413) | about 7 months ago | (#46527919)

Seat belts are a stupid requirement since adults don't have to wear them in my state (New Hampshire).

Freedom includes the freedom to do stupid things.

Re:Not If I don't buy it (1)

PRMan (959735) | about 7 months ago | (#46528195)

Freedom also includes the freedom to wear it if desired. If it wasn't there, how would people wear it?

Re:Not If I don't buy it (1)

OhPlz (168413) | about 7 months ago | (#46528929)

I'd like a massaging driver's seat, but I'm not going to demand that every vehicle have one just to suit my own desire.

Re:Not If I don't buy it (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46528501)

Freedom to do stupid things shouldn't involve other people. Without a seatbelt in a collision, you're going to turn into a projectile and smash through the windshield. This means your stupidity contributes to trauma to the emergency responders when they have to literally scrape your bloody carcass off the road.

Re:Not If I don't buy it (1)

OhPlz (168413) | about 7 months ago | (#46528965)

If emergency responders are traumatized by seeing blood and gore, they may have chosen the wrong career. That would be like a surgeon who faints at the sight of blood.

Re:Not If I don't buy it (0)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about 7 months ago | (#46527927)

Yeah, and I hate how that evil government makes me purchase seat belts and air bags. And brakes, not just that, but brakes that meet safety standards. Stupid government "knowing best".

OK, c'mon now - stop grasping at straws.

Brakes are a bit more than a government-required safety system, they're an essential part of any vehicle.

Re:Not If I don't buy it (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46528077)

woosh?

Re:Not If I don't buy it (1)

i kan reed (749298) | about 7 months ago | (#46528567)

Yeah, this was far more of a sarcastic post than an honest attempt to debate the idea on merit. I wasn't really presenting a serious case, but neither was the AC.

Re:Not If I don't buy it (1)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about 7 months ago | (#46529071)

Then I shall allow it.

Hey, what's that 'whooshing' sound I hear?

Re:Not If I don't buy it (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46527939)

How did this bullshit get modded up? As soon as the government starts mandating that tracking/surveillance technology be installed in cars, you know you're fucked.

Your logic seems to be, "These other things the government does are okay, so this must be okay too!"

Re:Not If I don't buy it (0)

Ichijo (607641) | about 7 months ago | (#46528341)

Set belt and air bag requirements are only so you can be a good consumer by driving faster, consuming more fuel, which allows you to contribute more to the GOP's donors. Notice how these safety measures only protect the people in the car and not pedestrians or bicyclists (who are disproportionately Democrats).

It's kind of a form of genocide if you think about it.

It makes sense for a government to protect people from other people, but is protecting people from themselves really worth the loss of freedom?

Re:Not If I don't buy it (1)

i kan reed (749298) | about 7 months ago | (#46528587)

This is the stupidest post.

"these safety measures only protect people in the car"

"brakes"

The mind boggles.

Re:Not If I don't buy it (1)

ackthpt (218170) | about 7 months ago | (#46527803)

In Soviet Russia - Car buys YOU!

MORE TINFOIL! (1)

Thud457 (234763) | about 7 months ago | (#46528153)

Rockwell was right!

I always feel like Michael Jackson's watching meeeee.....

Re:Not If I don't buy it (2)

Zynder (2773551) | about 7 months ago | (#46527817)

You don't shop much. Rear view cams can be had for $15 and a mirror monitor for about the same on Amazon, eBay, Alibaba, and other places. If you consider $30 to been incredibly pricey then may I suggest you join the 21st century and stop valuing costs like you're spending 1969 dollars. Cokes aren't a nickel and sadly a dime bag costs way more than a dime.

Re:Not If I don't buy it (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | about 7 months ago | (#46528255)

Sadly, most people probably couldn't follow the instructions to install the rear view cam. You don't want a mirror cam anyway, the mirrors suck.

Re:Not If I don't buy it (1)

icebike (68054) | about 7 months ago | (#46527823)

I know people who would buy this in a heartbeat. (Especially if it reduces insurance costs).

Rear cams are not that essential. They are nice to have.

Collision avoidance radar, braking systems, lane monitoring and blind spot monitoring systems are getting cheap, and some combinations of these components are showing up on sub $20K cars.

Re:Not If I don't buy it (1)

Trax3001BBS (2368736) | about 7 months ago | (#46528199)

Even rear view cameras are still incredibly pricey add ons for most cars. I doubt much of this will be forced on us ( though with the current administration "knowing best" for how I should spend my money, who know)

The first cars didn't have rear view mirrors, and an unreliable source claimed the police worked hard to not have them installed as the drivers could see they were being followed.I could see it as being true due to my run-ins over tinted windows, they couldn't see in and didn't like that.

Great! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46527641)

When it goes bad, it will disable the vehicle, you won't be able to fix it yourself, and it will cost $1500 at the dealer. What's not to love!

Re:Great! (1)

icebike (68054) | about 7 months ago | (#46527881)

Bull.
Does your car fail to start if you don't buckle your seat belt?
Does your car not work if your tail light goes out or your turn signal fails?
If you disable your front collision avoidance system does your car not work?

Re:Great! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46527987)

If you buy a German car those weird electrical issues are free!

Re:Great! (1)

icebike (68054) | about 7 months ago | (#46528183)

What electrical issues? None of those affect driveability.

Re:Great! (1, Informative)

Amtrak (2430376) | about 7 months ago | (#46528235)

True enough. But when the car company's terrible media center software causes a buffer overflow in the memory shared by this system and it the sensor to think that I'm now my wife and it will move the seat to far forward and I won't be able to properly drive the car. CRASH!

Think that isn't possible, clearly you haven't driven a Ford built in the last few years. My uncle bought a new Ford Torus SHO and when you pushed a certain sequence of buttons on the radio while the car was at a red light (i.e. in 1st gear and not moving) the car would shift to reverse without indication. The only way to tell it had happened was to see that the backup cam was suddenly displaying on the review mirror. To get back out of reverse you had to put the car in neutral then back into first. Needless to say my uncle returned that car and now has an Audi.

I don't think I'm going to be buying a car with one of these new infotainment systems until they start physically separating them from the drive by wire systems.

In Soviet Russia (1)

OricAtmos48K (979353) | about 7 months ago | (#46527645)

You will be watching your car !

Re:In Soviet Russia (3, Funny)

ackthpt (218170) | about 7 months ago | (#46527813)

You will be watching your car watching YOU!

And Let Me Guess (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46527657)

When this technology reaches the UK, authorities will mandate that the car transmit a signal to the local police so the proper action can be taken. It's the next logical step in the UK's transformation to a dystopian police state.

Re:And Let Me Guess (1)

Holladon (1620389) | about 7 months ago | (#46527693)

Why would you think the UK is the only country that might make use of this?

Re:And Let Me Guess (1)

ackthpt (218170) | about 7 months ago | (#46527887)

Look kids, Big Ben! Parliament!

Look kids, Big Ben! Parliament!

Look kids, Big Ben! Parliament!

Look kids, Big Ben! Parliament!

Look kids, Big Ben! Parliament!

...

it appears to be hung in an infinite loop

Owned by Ford, an American company (1)

Gothmolly (148874) | about 7 months ago | (#46527663)

Remember kids, Ford owns Volvo (and Jaguar, and some others). So, when you hear "don't worry it won't photograph you", just keep that in mind.

Wrong (5, Informative)

damn_registrars (1103043) | about 7 months ago | (#46527769)

Remember kids, Ford owns Volvo (and Jaguar, and some others)

That was true about a decade ago. Ford sold Volvo to a Chinese company is 2010 [wikipedia.org] and sold Jaguar to an Indian company in 2008 [wikipedia.org] .

So, when you hear "don't worry it won't photograph you", just keep that in mind.

Keep what in mind, then? That they used to own Volvo and Jaguar? I'm not sure how that is relevant.

Re:Wrong (1)

rnturn (11092) | about 7 months ago | (#46528455)

``Keep what in mind, then? That they used to own Volvo and Jaguar? I'm not sure how that is relevant.''

Wasn't it a Ford exec that admitted that their autos' sensors knew when drivers exceeded the speed limit?

(Though I'd guess they meant every time someone drives faster than 55MPH. An outdated limit now, at least in Illinois, as we have 70MPH speed limits away from populous areas.)

Re:Wrong (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46528739)

Wasn't it a Ford exec that admitted that their autos' sensors knew when drivers exceeded the speed limit?

And if you think other companies don't have similar instrumentation, you're pretty clueless.

Keep that in mind while shopping for a horse, I guess.

Re:Owned by Ford, an American company (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46527771)

Until 2010, when Volvo Car Corporation was sold to Geely Automobile of China

Re:Owned by Ford, an American company (1)

Nethead (1563) | about 7 months ago | (#46527785)

Neeerrrrrt! That is incorrect. The correct answer is, "Who is Greely of China."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V... [wikipedia.org]

Ford sold the Volvo Car Corporation in 2010 to Geely Automobile of China for $1.8 billion, following on from their sale of Jaguar Land Rover in 2008 and Aston Martin in 2007.

Re:Owned by Ford, an American company (1)

ackthpt (218170) | about 7 months ago | (#46527829)

Neeerrrrrt! That is incorrect. The correct answer is, "Who is Greely of China."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V... [wikipedia.org]

Ford sold the Volvo Car Corporation in 2010 to Geely Automobile of China for $1.8 billion, following on from their sale of Jaguar Land Rover in 2008 and Aston Martin in 2007.

Greely was an newspaper editor, who advised people to drive west on Rout 66 (or something like that.)

With this innovation, the car can get it's kicks, too.

Re:Owned by Ford, an American company (1)

gtall (79522) | about 7 months ago | (#46528439)

No, he was a Catholic priest, Andrew Greely, wrote several novels and was in general, a thorn in the backside of the Catholic church. I only recall one bit from one of his novels, it was something sci fi and the gist was G-d was should have aimed a lightning bolt at a cluster of bishops.

Re:Owned by Ford, an American company (2)

icebike (68054) | about 7 months ago | (#46527891)

Ford does not own Jaguar.

Re:Owned by Ford, an American company (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46527903)

Given Ford's safety record (remember the $5 manufacturing cost they saved on each Pinto?), I have serious doubts about this.

How long before Republicans... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46527671)

start ticketing people for being perceived as tired? They don't work hard so they know it will disproportionately affect the poor and minorities so they're going to hammer on this issue hard.

Re:How long before Republicans... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46528305)

Sure cause card carrying democrat job's bank employee's work so hard..... Both sides of the aisle are full of lazy assholes grow up.

Flying car (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46527679)

What I want: flying car.
What I get: car that makes sure I don't ever go flying.

Ah, the irony.

Great! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46527689)

When it goes bad, it will disable the vehicle, be impossible to fix yourself, and cost $1500 at the dealer. More complexity just waiting to fail. Meh!

Re:Great! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46527893)

More complexity just waiting to fail.

This kind of complexity is good if it tries to minimize disasters like the when the driver falls asleep.

Re:Great! (1)

icebike (68054) | about 7 months ago | (#46527907)

How many times are you going to post the same nonsense?

Infrared Blind (4, Insightful)

qpqp (1969898) | about 7 months ago | (#46527695)

The system bathes the driver in infrared light

Anyone else feels like this is going to be a strain on our eyes?

Re:Infrared Blind (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46527979)

As shown here [www.pion.cz] , there's a whole lot more range that is generally defined as 'infrared' than there is light you can see.

Even if it was really really close infrared and you had a slightly wider visible spectrum than most people, red light is best for this sort of thing. Stargazers have long been advised that if they are going to bring a star chart with them to help identify stars, to put a red filter over the flashlight to ease the transition between the chart and the sky. A dull deep-red glow should have no significant effect on a driver.

Re:Infrared Blind (1)

SternisheFan (2529412) | about 7 months ago | (#46528415)

A piece of electrical tape will defeat this nicely.

Re:Infrared Blind (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46528475)

You don't have to see the light for it to be damaging.

Re:Infrared Blind (2)

Khoa (935586) | about 7 months ago | (#46528323)

According to the Indian journal of ophthalmology: IR radiation can lead to cataracts... "The protein of eye lens is very sensitive to IR radiation which is hazardous and may lead to cataract." Source: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pm... [nih.gov]

Seat belt ding? (1)

mavriikk (3290887) | about 7 months ago | (#46527701)

Get ready kids... Car are about to become extremely annoying.

Re:Seat belt ding? (1)

Trax3001BBS (2368736) | about 7 months ago | (#46528251)

Get ready kids... Car are about to become extremely annoying.

ding
You door is ajar
ding
You door is ajar
ding ...

Done been there.

Re:Seat belt ding? (1)

gtall (79522) | about 7 months ago | (#46528471)

Car: Ding, ding ding, your door is ajar, your door is ajar.
Owner: I know, fuck off.
Car: Ding, ding, ding, your door continues to be ajar, your door continues to be ajar.
Owner: Blow it out your ass.
Car: DING, DING, DING, You are failing to recognize a serious condition, I would like to talk to you about this. You are failing to recognize a serious condition, I would like to talk to you about it.
Owner: Cram it, I'm armed.
Car: DING, DONG, DING, DONG, I will be forced to inform your insurance company if we do not have a meaningful conversation about your attitude very shortly. I will be forced to inform your insurance company if we do not have a meaningful conversation about your attitude very shortly.
Owner: BLAM
Car: ding....ding...dohing...done...oh screw it.

Car Sensors Suck (1)

Russ1642 (1087959) | about 7 months ago | (#46527711)

I'll bet it works as well as automatic headlights and automatic windshield wipers. Hell, even gas tank level sensors still suck. Engineers may design something that works, but by the time it makes it into a production vehicle it's been hacked up and cheapened and built out of flimsy plastic components to the point of being useless.

Re:Car Sensors Suck (4, Interesting)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about 7 months ago | (#46527943)

"Automotive engineers are so smart, they're stupid" - almost every mechanic I've ever met

Re:Car Sensors Suck (1)

Opportunist (166417) | about 7 months ago | (#46528227)

Engineers are like programmers. Their inclination to "do it right" is direct proportional to them being subjected to using their creation. Be honest, people, if you know you'll never ever have to use the piece of junk you create, how much effort will you put into it past what's necessary to get it to specs, even if you KNOW that the specs don't address something critical that will bite the user in the behind?

Re:Car Sensors Suck (2)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about 7 months ago | (#46528361)

Engineers are like programmers. Their inclination to "do it right" is direct proportional to them being subjected to using their creation. Be honest, people, if you know you'll never ever have to use the piece of junk you create, how much effort will you put into it past what's necessary to get it to specs, even if you KNOW that the specs don't address something critical that will bite the user in the behind?

That is precisely why I think all automotive engineers should have to be ASE certified mechanics first - maybe then they'll think twice about doing stupid shit like putting the goddamn fuel filter behind the brake booster.

Seriously, changing a fuel filter should not be a 2 hour job...

Re:Car Sensors Suck (1)

icebike (68054) | about 7 months ago | (#46527969)

My automatic headlights and automatic wipers work perfectly. As does my auto high-beam.
So does my collision avoidance braking system,
blind spot monitoring,
traction control system,
rear cross-traffic detection,
adaptive cruise control,
parking assist radars,
keyless entry, keyless starting,
remote start, etc.

What do you have against safety and convenience features?
Why do they all have to be made of metal and weigh a ton, instead of never-rusting plastic?

Take a look at this chart [transporta...morrow.com] and tell me which part of the past you think we should revisit.

The Police (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46527725)

Every breath you take
Every turn you make
Every every time you brake
Every step you take
You car'll be watching you.

Bloodhound Gang (2)

MRe_nl (306212) | about 7 months ago | (#46527845)

You got your Jesus on the dashboard
But the Devil's under my hood
You're takin' it down legal, I'm pullin' it up to no good
God is your copilot, I let Satan ride shotgun
You pay a toll to get to Heaven
But on the road to hell there's none

Get up you're asleep at the wheel
Get up you're asleep at the wheel
Get up you're asleep at the wheel
Get up you're asleep at the wheel
Get up you're asleep at the wheel
Get up you're asleep at the wheel
Get up you're asleep at the wheel
Get up you're asleep at the wheel

Free upgrades? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46527727)

So Volvo is installing this tech in old Datsuns?

Wake me up when... (1)

jtownatpunk.net (245670) | about 7 months ago | (#46527749)

Wake me up when my vehicles can drive themselves.

Re:Wake me up when... (1)

Cro Magnon (467622) | about 7 months ago | (#46527799)

Actually, if your vehicles are driving themselves, you have less reason to be awake.

Re:Wake me up when... (1)

ackthpt (218170) | about 7 months ago | (#46527853)

Actually, if your vehicles are driving themselves, you have less reason to be awake.

Less time focused on the road means more time to read Tech Bulletins! Yes!!!

warning: your car may swerve out of control without warning...

Re:Wake me up when... (1)

icebike (68054) | about 7 months ago | (#46528003)

Why in the name of blissful sleep would you want to be awoken then?

Re:Wake me up when... (1)

Opportunist (166417) | about 7 months ago | (#46528237)

Well, technically, while you are sleeping your vehicle is driving itself... not necessarily where you want it to, but while you're sleeping, you're not the driver. You're a passenger. No matter what seat you're in.

of course (1)

hypergreatthing (254983) | about 7 months ago | (#46527825)

They're not going to collect it
They won't be sending out signals to the police
They won't be sending out data to your insurance companies
They won't be collecting data for accident coverage
They won't be storing the data and combining it in other databases (ohh you just went to the gym? You just came back from your mistress's place and were tired?)
They won't be selling it to your health insurance provider (xx was driving tired for extended periods of time, must have some disease, drop coverage immediately)
Sorry, there's too many reasons why not to get it and very little reason to get it.

Re:of course (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46528041)

Yeah but think of the marketing analytics:

Driver distracted by billboard design on highway!

Ding 'em for a ticket AND increase an ad impression

No worries for me. (1)

Nethead (1563) | about 7 months ago | (#46527847)

Considering that my 1998 Volvo V70 wagon (versatile) should last me another 20 years, and I'll be 73 then, this will come in handy when I'm ready to buy again. And if that dies, I still have my 2001 S60 to putz around in.

Big Deal (1)

Ukab the Great (87152) | about 7 months ago | (#46527849)

Wives and girlfriends been making use of this technology for millennia.

Old news (1)

pinzvidz (3520933) | about 7 months ago | (#46527955)

Huh? There is nothing new about this, quite a few manufacturers have this technology in place already.

maximum number of drivers exceeded (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46527965)

Also soon, cars will be licensed for up to two drivers...additional drivers only $9.99 extra per month.

It might be worth it (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46527971)

If this means the car can tell when you're trying to smoke a cigarette, text, and yell at your kid in the backseat while in motion (I'm not even going to claim "while driving" since that's often third or fourth on the list of priorities), then for all of our sakes, it's a good idea. I can only hope the car waits until the next time you stop at a traffic light, shuts itself off, and won't restart until you write "I'm sorry I'm such an asshole" 50 times with your finger on the entertainment screen.

Why me?!! (1)

Lew Perin (30124) | about 7 months ago | (#46527975)

“If the driver becomes inattentive or begins to drift off to sleep, it will alert you.”

Re:Why me?!! (1)

Opportunist (166417) | about 7 months ago | (#46528257)

Because you didn't opt out in time.

Can I Point it at You? (1)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about 7 months ago | (#46527985)

Being that I'm not a completely narcissistic imbecile, paying attention while driving is not an issue I have; hell, sometimes it feels like I'm the only one on the road who actually understands that the task of operating 2 tons of steel and rubber at high speeds should be the driver's primary focus. Not to say that I haven't fucked up, but I at least bothered to learn from my mistakes. Plus, I'm not so stupid/selfish/what-have-you that I would ignore fatigue and risk the lives of everyone around me by not pulling over to rest when necessary.

That said - is there some way I can point this system at all the other cars on the road? I would find it far more useful to know which other drivers are not paying attention/about to fall asleep/whatever, than to have a Big Brother system to tell me shit about myself I should already know.

hSo8o (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46528021)

consider that Right to thei crowd in

Props to the Submitter (1)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about 7 months ago | (#46528029)

Thank you, thank you, thank you, for no longer linking to greencarreports.com in every single item you post.

That has to be one of the worst, fallacious "news" sites I've ever seen.

My Car Already Does That... (1)

SwashbucklingCowboy (727629) | about 7 months ago | (#46528037)

This isn't new...

Re:My Car Already Does That... (1)

PRMan (959735) | about 7 months ago | (#46528225)

Mine too.

Re:My Car Already Does That... (1)

Anonymous Psychopath (18031) | about 7 months ago | (#46528885)

The method is new. Most (all?) current systems use the lane departure warning system and steering wheel input to determine if the driver is drowsy, but they do not put a camera on the driver themselves. The current system on my Ford doesn't seem to work very well.

Mercedes Steering Tracking (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46528051)

My Mercedes has something like this, although not as advanced. It tracks variations in steering--when you're alert you constantly make small steering adjustments, while you make fewer, larger adjustments when tired.

Using this information, along with the time of day and how long you've been driving, it will flash a light and make an annoying sound if it determines you're fatigued.

This was actually kind of annoying on a recent road trip (actually on the return trip, late at night). My co-pilot and I would switch seats and see who could go the longest without triggering the warning.

NON (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46528053)

And when I'm horny will it drive to a Motel 6 and try to fuck me ?

Ha ha ;-D

Re:NON (1)

Trax3001BBS (2368736) | about 7 months ago | (#46528337)

And when I'm horny will it drive to a Motel 6 and try to fuck me ?

That would be an OnStar extra for those who have it installed on 5 or more vehicles, "I need laid".

Not a tech problem, not a tech solution (2, Insightful)

FuzzNugget (2840687) | about 7 months ago | (#46528085)

Why does everyone think that everything can be solved with technology? Oh, right, it's easier to sell than telling everyone they mostly suck at something and that they need to get better at it than, "here's a magic $product that will fix all your problems."

The problem is not technology, the problem is not our gadgets,; the problem is our collective attitude about driving and (lack of) training. Requirements to obtain (and retain) a driver's license in some countries would be shocking to most people in North America. Our standards are pathetic and woefully inadequate. Oh, you can follow some basic instructions that a chimp could do for 15 minutes? Here, now you can drive anything outside of a big rig, motorcycle or bus (unless it's an RV, because apparently, having fewer passengers magically turns it into an agile sports sedan... or something), including hauling your big-ass 5th wheel.

That shit doesn't fly in places where driving is taken seriously. Just Google "driving license in [European country]" and wait for your jaw to drop.

If we actually trained people to have vehicular and situational awareness, they would realize that it's a bad idea to be dicking around with their gizmos while operating a multi-ton projectile around hundreds of other multi-ton projectiles, pedestrians, cyclists and municipal structures... and we wouldn't be trying to develop bullshit tech like this or legislating laws ripe for abuse.

That kind of training takes years of practice, not 15 minutes in a mostly controlled situation. But you can't put that in a box and slap on a price sticker.

Re:Not a tech problem, not a tech solution (1)

Trax3001BBS (2368736) | about 7 months ago | (#46528457)

The problem is not technology, the problem is not our gadgets,; the problem is our collective attitude about driving and (lack of) training. Requirements to obtain (and retain) a driver's license in some countries would be shocking to most people in North America. Our standards are pathetic and woefully inadequate. Oh, you can follow some basic instructions that a chimp could do for 15 minutes? Here, now you can drive anything outside of a big rig, motorcycle or bus (unless it's an RV, because apparently, having fewer passengers magically turns it into an agile sports sedan... or something), including hauling your big-ass 5th wheel.

Ex-father by law is a truck driver and has a fit that no extra training or licensing is required for the RV's, 5th wheels, or such; and one point we do agree on. (USA)

Re:Not a tech problem, not a tech solution (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46528497)

That kind of training takes years of practice, not 15 minutes in a mostly controlled situation. But you can't put that in a box and slap on a price sticker.

We can put that in a box, though. And should. Automating away whatever deficiencies drivers might have is good. Automating away drivers altogether is good.
Training, and years of practice, just to learn to drive, is utter waste of human effort.

My vehicle is not ever going to watch me. (1)

rdelsambuco (552369) | about 7 months ago | (#46528343)

My vehicle is a bicycle.

Re:My vehicle is not ever going to watch me. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46528577)

So young, so naive.
Ot's only a matter of time before some company realises that there is a huge market for bicycle security gadgets and starts lobbying to make them mandatory.

Watching where you are looking is great... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46528381)

... though I'm not sure what for. But... is it really a good idea for my car to shift lighting to where I'm looking. Example: I glance at the car in the oncoming lane, should my car be shining lights in the other driver's eyes? Headlights are focused slightly to the right side (where we drive on the right-hand side) to avoid shining bright headlights into an oncoming driver's eyes. How many accidents might occur because this "smart" car has temporarily blinded another driver?

Blue is the new Infrared. (1)

fahrbot-bot (874524) | about 7 months ago | (#46528493)

From TFS and TFA:

The system bathes the driver in infrared light ...

Yet in both TFA photos, the light is drawn in blue.

My car already has a sensor to wake me up... (1)

Rhacman (1528815) | about 7 months ago | (#46528529)

It's called an air-bag.

women (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46528913)

Now if they could just invent a car that detects if the driver is a woman...

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?