Eddie Lopez Eddie you'll be fine mate, I'm sending Elon an idea for converting humans into humanoids to use on his production lines (he said he wants to use less robots and more humans so why not keep the human brain alive working in a cyborg body :) haha) developing a perfect way for you to stay kind of alive for all eternity!
One of the things V2V will do is reduce congestion. The yo-yo stop and go of bumper to bumper traffic quite often exacerbated by people changing lanes trying to get ahead. HOV lanes converted to V2V only lanes so a string of 20 cars can work together to open a gap to allow another V2V car in by gently slowing down by reducing car to car spacing. Gradually increasing car to car spacing once the new V2V car has merged or a car has left the V2V lane. All with the goal of keeping a consistent even speed.
Hi Nikki. Being a pilot I have to address your comment about transponders. A transponder is not an emergency device. It is required in every aircraft with an electrical system. Each time an aircraft is hit with a radar beam the transponder sends a single back to the radar ground station. This single allows the aircraft to appear on the radar display showing position and altitude. The ground radar's computer figures speed and direction. Thanks for your work doing these videos. I only recently discovered them and I have learned a lot.
It’s called ADS-b in aircraft. Imagine a “radar” screen displaying all other cars within a few hundred feet (or even miles) even the ones around the corner or on the other side of the bus next to you. It would give you radar/x-ray vision in crappy weather, pure darkness, or heavy traffic.
lets not forget the difference between a simple RFID chip,(more appropriately COIL) and actual RF transmissions. the RFID is passive, until activated by a focused RF signal, when it vibrates at a certain freq. (It's more like a reflector than a light.) Ultimately, V2V will have to be actively broadcasting, to be useful. There will have to be a common interface, for practical purposes, although it would be possible to use several protocols simultaneously. It's amazing the possibilities of V2V, and the array of problems it can solve. There are some downsides, but the benefits outweigh by far any problems. It will likely be taken into account soon by insurance companies, and at some point, it will be considered risky/irresponsable to drive without it, along with higher level autonomy. nice job keeping up with the news, Nikki!
There's a whole issue with security in V2V communications. A hacker could cause tremendous problems by placing phantom vehicles on the road, or by sending false signals out of a transponder, or by deleting actual cars from visibility. If these systems are to be used for real-time driving decisions by autonomous driving systems, they'll need bulletproof security to prevent hacking. Otherwise they could cause more problems than they solve.
Mode C and Mode S transponders are pretty hands off in flight.(VFR/General Aviation) in the USA. Only when using flight following or on a IFR flight plan do I need to dial in a code other than 1200. Soon I need to upgrade to ADS-B which is similar to V2V but also reasonably hands off.
Airplanes have much more than "emergency" transponder. They have: 1. TCAS en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traffic_collision_avoidance_system 2. ADS-B: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automatic_dependent_surveillance_%E2%80%93_broadcast In fact, aircraft can safely be operated pilotless even today. The hard part is actually taxiing on the ground.
This smart infrastructure is what we need before self deriving cars become practical. I can't wait for this technology to arrive. There will always be problems to overcome just like all other tech but I think in the long run it will save lives. One problem is that people will forget how to drive. When auto pilot is always driving then kids who grow up with it won't learn how to drive defensively. It will create a society of people who are 100% reliant on auto.
This would be amazing. Commuting on the freeway during Michigan white outs is no fun. You can stay on the road thanks to rumble strips but stopping when no one can see you is as dangerous as inching forward.
From Wikipedia: "As of 2016, V2V is under threat from cable television and other tech firms that want to take away a big chunk of the radio spectrum currently reserved for it and use those frequencies for high-speed internet service. V2V's current share of spectrum was set aside by the government in 1999. The auto industry is trying to retain all it can saying that it desperately needs the spectrum for V2V. The Federal Communications Commission has taken the side of the tech companies with the National Traffic Safety Board supporting the position of the auto industry. Internet service providers who want the spectrum claim that self-driving cars will make extensive use of V2V unnecessary. The auto industry said it is willing to share the spectrum if V2V service is not slowed or disrupted; the FCC plans to test several sharing schemes.[4]" "
So long as the protocol can incorporate add additional types of information as they're introduced over time. RLE? It'll start with basic information, but as transmission and vehicle capabilities increase, the amount of information and types of date will increase as well. Older cars will still have the information they require, ignore the information they can't use, but pass on the entire data set.
This has some interesting implications. Will cars advertise to local police that someone is speeding? This could impede adoption of this technology for some people. Would this be considered an infringement on peoples right to privacy? Others might argue that driving is a privilege not a right, and therefore would not infringe on privacy.
Being able to move around freely, I'd consider a right. But being able to do it by car in a shared space where certain rules have to be followed for everyones benefit is a privilege. Adoption will be driven by requirement, for example when you want to drive on the highway, you need it, otherwise you have to take slower country roads. It might not sound fair, but I'm sure insurance rates for example will rise as well for cars that don't have a system like this installed (at least when it turns out that it actually prevents accidents).
What right to privacy? Between Google, Facebook, your cell phone company and the NSA we no longer have privacy. Google and Facebook can give a far more accurate and detailed analysis of who you are and what your interests and beliefs are than you can. Google, Facebook and your cell phone company track your location all the time. Even in the privacy of your own home. They probably know which side of the bed you sleep on. Sad to say but privacy is passé. Privacy is a quaint notion in today always on, always connected, always tracked world.
the amount of privacy today is dictated by the amount of data that a given data base has acquire and the ability of the firm that is monitoring that data has to analyze it... it is after all a finite problem with today's computing systems, where trigger words are necessary to sift the data... so the concept that to hide a drop of water, you put it in an ocean works... however, in the future when Quantum Computers take over no such limit on ability to analyze data will exist, no matter the quantity.... so then there will be a cause for concern... or we will just learn to adapt, and require people to live to a higher standered of ethics and morality, or the laws will have to be changed to allow more freedoms... it will be an interesting corundum,
For this to work, every vehicle with it needs to use a compatible protocol. I recall reading that the US Government decided to no longer fund the research and standardisation of this last November. (On the internet, so must be true). Will Japanese car companies produce one standard, Europe another and each US car maker another? A bit like charging standards really.
NO, V2V is a privacy hell. At least not until we have solid protection by the law regarding storage, usage and review of that data. Even then automatically broadcasting your position for everyone to read will make it easy to brake those laws. A better approach would be not using a permanent UID in the system, but to negotiate a new ID in each interaction, or on a time intervals. But im quite sure privacy is not a concern for the designers of those systems right now.
Its only one company, getting universal support by all will be difficult. Trsnspoders in only new cars would be pointless retro fitting to old cars will be very expensive for the poor with old cars fitting transponders to the roads traffic light would take decades cost an unfeasible among and would still miss minor roads. Any gaps in the system would cause disaster if the car assumed that everything has them.
Isn't V2V kind of useless until all cars have them? Why do we not have smarter sensors on traffic lights that could see ALL cars, bikes, pedestrians, animals, etc? If Traffic signals were intelligent, intersections would be safer and traffic would flow better.
No. At first, transponder equipped cars and buses act as proxies for the rest of traffic. From that data some general conditions can be inferred. That would be horrifically expensive and turn every road into something worse than London as far a state surveillance goes. It is unnecessary to have a camera, and computer, watching an intersection when no traffic is around. That wastes resources and energy that could be used on a more comprehensive solution that is applied only when and where needed. Traffic signals are already intelligent. The extra loop near the end of a left turn signal lane is there to detect traffic backup on the turn that could impact straight ahead traffic. In many large cities, traffic lights are connected, allowing as much unimpeded movement as possible on popular commute routes during commuting hours.
It won't help much, sorry (it won't hurt). It works on airplanes because the air is not generally full of objects like rocks, street signs, pedestrians, etc, and the objects that ARE there can be mapped (mountains, towers, etc). Thus is solves a very small part of the problem with cars, and one that is already solved in any case. Another car is a fairly easy object to detect using sensors that are already on self driving cars.
Sure, so if you are ever planning to run a red light at an intersection where you can't see cross traffic, it might save you, at the cost of equipping ALL cars, and as you say, useless until all cars are so equipped. Sorry, not seeing it. And I think I have company.
Hi Nikki, I believe that GM has already introduced DSRC to the market. So Toyota is not the first one. See www.theverge.com/2017/3/9/14869110/cadillac-cts-sedan-v2v-communication-dsrc-gm
As a cyclist, I would absolutely carry a V2V transponder on every single ride if this were a thing. Generally I ride defensively, and so haven't had too many close calls, but just this morning someone came across to the apex of a corner where I was about to be, and an auto car with V2V probably wouldn't have.
You mention emergency vehicle awareness but the video at said moments show a police bike stopping a driver in a BMW... is this just a way on “not saying” but showing the real issue that will come of V2V communications? As police then, can scan for every vehicle going along at illegal speeds and just fine the millions of said vehicle owners directly... talk about a Police State!
the world is over poppulaterd and ther trying to make cars safer and safer no wonder idiots who caurse most acsidents always seem to walk away without a scratch
