NHTSA Proposed A Rule That Would Require Vehicles To 'Talk' To Each Other

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
In an attempt to eliminate or mitigate the severity non-impaired vehicle crashes, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has proposed a rule that would mandate vehicle-to-vehicle communication that allows cars to communicate with each other to avoid crashes.

Citing an enormous potential to reduce crashes on U.S. roadways, the U.S. Department of Transportation issued a proposed rule today that would advance the deployment of connected vehicle technologies throughout the U.S. light vehicle fleet. The Notice of Proposed Rulemaking would enable vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) communication technology on all new light-duty vehicles, enabling a multitude of new crash-avoidance applications that, once fully deployed, could prevent hundreds of thousands of crashes every year by helping vehicles “talk” to each other.
 
With you DracoD. I'd be all for this AS LONG AS any and all comms cannot interfere with any and all controls. Activating self-driving however incurs the risks/rewards as associated.
 
I just hope I am dead before they take away my ability to drive at all. Safe or not... We can do anything we want in this world until we are caught. With the advent of self driving cars and blaming humans and not the automated vehicles for accidents, stuff like this will just report to the authorities who isn't following the traffic laws.

Either that or when two people are side by side on a two lane highway doing 5MPH under the speed limit. And the car in the fast lane won't speed up or slow down to get out of the way for the 15 cars behind them trying to get by. Hopefully it makes that car speed up and get out of the way. At least that would be my ideal solution.

Cars senses a car approaching from behind at 15MPH faster then what they are traveling. Computer checks we in the fast lane? Yes, we need to get the fuck over. Wouldn't that be a wonderful concept.
 
I have a few cheaper options:
1) Require all drivers to undergo real driver's training and licensing, similar to what is required for semi drivers.
2) Aggressively prosecute and strictly enforce sentencing for DUI arrests.
3) Same as above for driving without a valid license or driving with a suspended license.
 
since this automative driving began, I thought of a kind of A.I. neural network between all cars that would drive accordingly. For example, at a red light, all cars would start at the same time and with the communication between them they could drive more efficiently optimizing traffic.
 
EODetroit said:
Devil is in the details, but seems like a good idea in principle.
Click to expand...

Agreed, but we do see where these kinds of rules lead right?

Either the government mandates that the cars must talk to each other without specifying how, and all the companies go with different solutions, some talk some don't and we get to go through "format wars" until either a standard is mandated or one wins out over the others.

Or the government mandates a standard but fails to specify specifics and the companies all follow different implementations of the standard until the government gets it's head out of it's ass.

Or the government solicits buts for a contracting company to study the technology and develop the "best" standards and protocols and other requirements, and 25 years later and 500% over budget, we get the results that specify that we will use some now outdated shit that we will be stuck with for the next twenty years and no longer performs at a reasonably efficient level.
 
joseardzm said:
since this automative driving began, I thought of a kind of A.I. neural network between all cars that would drive accordingly. For example, at a red light, all cars would start at the same time and with the communication between them they could drive more efficiently optimizing traffic.
Click to expand...

Agreed, in fact I expect them all to be talking, telling each other when they need to transit to an exit lane, who's having a mechanical problem, etc. But, although these cars should be able to take advantage of a "network" they also need to be completely autonomous in the case that the network fails.
 
There's all kinds of useful things that could come out of this tech. Avoiding accidents is one of them, but notification of lane closures and merging would be a significantly higher value. That way the moron in the BMW that's nosing the cones with their blinker on because they couldn't be bothered to merge early doesn't hit someone.
 
Ruoh said:
There's all kinds of useful things that could come out of this tech. Avoiding accidents is one of them, but notification of lane closures and merging would be a significantly higher value. That way the moron in the BMW that's nosing the cones with their blinker on because they couldn't be bothered to merge early doesn't hit someone.
Click to expand...

I've driven on a highway before where there were absolutely no warnings that a lane closure was there.. and almost ran into the barricades because the lane just suddenly ended and a vehicle was right next to me. I had maybe 50 feet of warning and had nowhere to go.

Do you actually think the construction companies would send the correct data to the system.. HAHAHAHAHAHA
 
I kinda figured we were headed in this direction years ago, as a network of cars being able to talk with each other would optimize travel times and reduce crashes. However, my biggest concern is the next step, automatically auditing that data to report traffic violations. Then they'll rig the game and make it because it's a "ticket/fine" they don't need proof of who is driving, sending the ticket to the registered owners. Thus, completing the already guilty until guilty traffic violation system we see today.

With many municipalities relying on traffic ticket revenue to pay their budgets, it's more than likely an eventuality.

As for the hacking. I don't see that being too much of a problem, depending how the system is deployed. Right now, modern cars are already quite hackable.

I think the system would work wonders in special advanced technology equipped commuter lanes where only cars with the tech could drive. They could piggy back into a convoy and allow you to go about texting or whatever it is that drivers get distracted by these days.
 
Last edited:
Talk about Big Brother. The government will have active, 24 hour tracking of your vehicle, your habits, where you come and go and when.

Wait they can do all of that with cell phones already anyhow
 
  • Like
Reactions: Madoc
like this
cyclone3d said:
I've driven on a highway before where there were absolutely no warnings that a lane closure was there.. and almost ran into the barricades because the lane just suddenly ended and a vehicle was right next to me. I had maybe 50 feet of warning and had nowhere to go.

Do you actually think the construction companies would send the correct data to the system.. HAHAHAHAHAHA
Click to expand...

Why bother? When one of those big arrow LED signs gets lit up, just have a few buttons to push to confirm direction of traffic, GPS lock and let it do the broadcasting to the cars.
 
*hoooonk*
Autonomous Vehicle One: "Hey, I'm DRIVIN' Hea'!"
Autonomous Vehicle Two: "Fug you, other car!"
Autonomous Vehicle One: "Fug me, fug YOU!"

And that's how the first AI road rage fatality incident occurs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Madoc
like this
Ducman69 said:
*hoooonk*
Autonomous Vehicle One: "Hey, I'm DRIVIN' Hea'!"
Autonomous Vehicle Two: "Fug you, other car!"
Autonomous Vehicle One: "Fug me, fug YOU!"

And that's how the first AI road rage fatality incident occurs.
Click to expand...

Give em' the clamps!
 
Ruoh said:
Why bother? When one of those big arrow LED signs gets lit up, just have a few buttons to push to confirm direction of traffic, GPS lock and let it do the broadcasting to the cars.
Click to expand...

So replace ALL the road construction equipment as well?

Ever seen one of those signs not set up properly? Oh, you want the traffic to drive into the median? Why sure.. of course I am going to do that.
 
cyclone3d said:
So replace ALL the road construction equipment as well?

Ever seen one of those signs not set up properly? Oh, you want the traffic to drive into the median? Why sure.. of course I am going to do that.
Click to expand...

So, you're cool with the way it is now. Interesting. Bet you're a late merger then.
 
At first I thought "Hey they're going to tell people there's a crash ahead" and it seemed kind of neat, no need to worry about hackers really if it's just giving you an alert. Then it seems it will use crash avoidance, i.e. being able to slow your car down, and it becomes a bit more worrisome, but in the grand scheme of things nah.

Hacking issues? Ok fine you want to hack a car's driving system, BAM that's instant attempted murder charge with intent. Then put the onus on the car makers, if you make a system that gets hacked the car maker is responsible for not making their system secure, I mean if someone can get in trouble for not securing their wifi hot spot, then auto manufacturers need to be responsible for cutting corners and going cheap.
 
Ruoh said:
So, you're cool with the way it is now. Interesting. Bet you're a late merger then.
Click to expand...

So a guy can't disagree with you on a specific topic without you claiming that he must have a position on something else entirely.

It's not possible for Cyclon3d to be unhappy with the way things are now AND not agree with you? The two are mutually and indelibly linked, one can't exist without the other?
 
If I'm not mistaken, I do believe most current car makers have auto-emergency braking and adaptive cruise control and are more or less ready to implement this change. What I'm kinda concerned about is consumption. Having less and less vehicles crash is going to change things. If fewer car crashes happen that means there's going to be a shift in things like junkyards, repair shops and insurance claims. The article mentioned US light duty fleet... That vaguely points towards the lower income level vehicles. Sadly since manual trans as we all know (or at least should) is becoming less and less of an option depending on your vehicle of choice... it's kinda like having a bunch of Geo Metro's with automatic transmissions unable to crash and becoming more and more prevalent while it's occupant slowly gets turned away from critical thinking as long as they check facebook and all the other social media apps.
 
sfsuphysics said:
At first I thought "Hey they're going to tell people there's a crash ahead" and it seemed kind of neat, no need to worry about hackers really if it's just giving you an alert. Then it seems it will use crash avoidance, i.e. being able to slow your car down, and it becomes a bit more worrisome, but in the grand scheme of things nah.

Hacking issues? Ok fine you want to hack a car's driving system, BAM that's instant attempted murder charge with intent. Then put the onus on the car makers, if you make a system that gets hacked the car maker is responsible for not making their system secure, I mean if someone can get in trouble for not securing their wifi hot spot, then auto manufacturers need to be responsible for cutting corners and going cheap.
Click to expand...


Ummm, and when someone who lives outside the city and has a sick kid that needs an emergency room is forced to slow down because of some stupid shit, I can see a problem here. Maybe we'll be able to enter a code for emergencies, that we will remember how to enter when in an emergency.

I'm not really against you or picking on you on this one sfsuphysics, your post simply opened an opportunity to voice a concern. The greater good only ever leads to mediocrity, and mediocrity never ever seems to satisfy the extraordinary, which comes along more often than most people realize.
 
gathagan said:
I have a few cheaper options:
1) Require all drivers to undergo real driver's training and licensing, similar to what is required for semi drivers.
2) Aggressively prosecute and strictly enforce sentencing for DUI arrests.
3) Same as above for driving without a valid license or driving with a suspended license.
Click to expand...
4) Aggressively ticket distracted drivers. I commute on a motorcycle, so my head is on a swivel constantly. I'd wager that the percent of distracted drivers is well over a third, probably getting close to half.
 
Great Tiger said:
If I'm not mistaken, I do believe most current car makers have auto-emergency braking and adaptive cruise control and are more or less ready to implement this change. What I'm kinda concerned about is consumption. Having less and less vehicles crash is going to change things. If fewer car crashes happen that means there's going to be a shift in things like junkyards, repair shops and insurance claims. The article mentioned US light duty fleet... That vaguely points towards the lower income level vehicles. Sadly since manual trans as we all know (or at least should) is becoming less and less of an option depending on your vehicle of choice... it's kinda like having a bunch of Geo Metro's with automatic transmissions unable to crash and becoming more and more prevalent while it's occupant slowly gets turned away from critical thinking as long as they check facebook and all the other social media apps.
Click to expand...

No, the US light duty fleet is a vehicle classification that has to do with vehicle type and weight. It has nothing to do with vehicle cost or income levels of owners.
 
If every vehicle could communicate with all other vehicles, and were self driving, traffic lights and stops would completely disappear. Traffic would flow significantly more smoothly and you would get to where you want to go safer and faster in almost all circumstances.
 
I thought this was kinda a given?

When a random large heavy object falls on to a live traffic freeway road all of a sudden, obviously it makes sense for ALL cars to steer Right/left to avoid said object, as well as avoiding hitting eachother. I figured that was common sense?
 
bigdogchris said:
If every vehicle could communicate with all other vehicles, and were self driving, traffic lights and stops would completely disappear. Traffic would flow significantly more smoothly and you would get to where you want to go safer and faster in almost all circumstances.
Click to expand...

Sure, why not. All the traffic can get organized into "blocks" with gaps between the blocks large enough for cross traffic "blocks" to pass through without ever needing to stop.

Shit, I'll pull out my crystal ball and really go for broke..... someday ..... we'll have flying cars :ROFLMAO:

And, as long as we are in a wishing mood, since our cars can talk, I want my car to talk to me wife so I don't have to :LOL:
 
DWolvin said:
4) Aggressively ticket distracted drivers. I commute on a motorcycle, so my head is on a swivel constantly. I'd wager that the percent of distracted drivers is well over a third, probably getting close to half.
Click to expand...
I feel ya'.
My only vehicle for the last 15 years has been a motorcycle.
Last year I started riding the bus to work and only drive on the weekends.
The drop in stress is amazing, it saves about 200 miles of wear and tear a week, and I get about 3 miles of walking in a day.
 
gathagan said:
I have a few cheaper options:
1) Require all drivers to undergo real driver's training and licensing, similar to what is required for semi drivers.
2) Aggressively prosecute and strictly enforce sentencing for DUI arrests.
3) Same as above for driving without a valid license or driving with a suspended license.
Click to expand...


I think the number one thing that would help more than anything else is to stop obsessing about vehicle speeds and instead to go hardcore after following distances. Absolutely enforce a 2 second following distance on all roads. Instant 3 year suspension if you are caught tailgating.

2 second following distance at 60mph = 176ft (~12 typical car lengths)
2 second following distance at 80mph = 234ft (~16 typical car lengths)
 
Ha! They would pull over 85% of drivers in the first week. I see people at half car length following distance while going 80mph every day.
 
We're about to the point where on odd numbered days there's news about networking more things together, autonomous vehicles, etc, and on even number days there's news about a new exploit in some network, hardware, etc.

What could possibly go wrong?

Of course if the government mandates it, it'll all magically work so I guess it's a moot point.
 
cyclone3d said:
Do you actually think the construction companies would send the correct data to the system.. HAHAHAHAHAHA
Click to expand...

Mandate it and implement severe fines for late/incorrect information. Companies should verify the information beforehand, then verify the signs are working and displaying the correct information before doing any roadwork. Failure to comply with these simply and easy to follow rules would result in a fine and/or forfeit of future government contracts. If someone is injured due to their negligence (it'll be very rare with self driving cars, as Tesla is already showing), it'll open them up to lawsuits. No company would dare risk cutting corners and risk punishment and massive profit loss.
 
Anyone who complains about this in terms of tracking and has a smart phone that is carrying around is full of shit.

As with everything else, there are good and bad things about it. Less accidents, cars making way for emergency vehicles and government officials. n fact, I can imagine privileges being sold. Oh man...

Ruoh said:
Give em' the clamps!
Click to expand...

Coochie, coochie!

[giggling] Stop it! You're mussing up my trajectory!
 
sfsuphysics said:
At first I thought "Hey they're going to tell people there's a crash ahead" and it seemed kind of neat, no need to worry about hackers really if it's just giving you an alert. Then it seems it will use crash avoidance, i.e. being able to slow your car down, and it becomes a bit more worrisome, but in the grand scheme of things nah.

Hacking issues? Ok fine you want to hack a car's driving system, BAM that's instant attempted murder charge with intent. Then put the onus on the car makers, if you make a system that gets hacked the car maker is responsible for not making their system secure, I mean if someone can get in trouble for not securing their wifi hot spot, then auto manufacturers need to be responsible for cutting corners and going cheap.
Click to expand...

The auto industry will just buy off CONgress for exceptions or do like they did with the vaccine industry. You can't sue the car makers for crappy software, you go to a Fed gov arbitration court/gov agency and they decide if you have a case and will pay you out of a fund.
 
gathagan said:
I have a few cheaper options:
1) Require all drivers to undergo real driver's training and licensing, similar to what is required for semi drivers.
2) Aggressively prosecute and strictly enforce sentencing for DUI arrests.
3) Same as above for driving without a valid license or driving with a suspended license.
Click to expand...

Do I get a free pass since I already have my cdl?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top