U.S. Government Wants Vehicle-to-vehicle Technology In All New Cars To Reduce Crashes

[jos]

The U.S. Department of Transportation announced that it will require all new cars to implement Vehicle-to-Vehicle (V2V) communication to reduce car crashes by up to 80 percent. V2V technology, which has often been associated with self-driving cars, is not actually necessary for self-driving cars to work, but it could be another way in which to identify obstacles in traffic. It could also be used in regular cars, which combined with some kind of automatic assistance could drastically reduce accidents.The V2V technology is essentially a wireless signal through which cars can communicate with other vehicles in proximity to them. They will share things such as speed and direction, and if there’s any danger, the drivers can be warned about it or the automatic assistance can be engaged to avoid an accident.Cars that use V2V technology may also be able to communicate with infrastructure such as stop signs, letting drivers know how long until the light changes.

 

Source

In 2014 they announced they are considering to make it mandatory but now they made it mandatory.

 Connected cars will be the ultimate Internet of Things. They will collect and make sense of massive amounts of data from a huge array of sources. Cars will talk to other cars, exchanging data and alerting drivers to potential collisions. They’ll talk to sensors on signs on stoplights, bus stops, even ones embedded in the roads to get traffic updates and rerouting alerts. And they’ll communicate with your house, office, and smart devices, acting as an digital assistant, gathering information you need to go about your day. Connected cars, meantime, will help cities and states cut down on congestion and improve safety. On the road, cars will talk to each other, automatically transmitting data such as speed, position, and direction, and send alerts to each other if a crash seems imminent.  Ultimately all these will lead to all car being autonomous and in few years it will be mandatory that all cars be autonomous driving cars..

 

What if the system allows the car to operate only as per the restrictions imposed on a particular road.. Goodbye over speeding..

The system has to open platform.. what if someone put a transmitter on road saying you to stop??? just for prank..

 

But in the end everyone will love this and so does when autonomous cars come by.

when Automatic transmission came everyone accepted, same with adaptive cruise control

[Trik'Stari]

It's for safety!

 

Riiiiiiiiight.

[Kobathor]

Safety by adding technology that can fail? Fuck, America's going to hell.

 

I wish people with brains made regulations.

[Paralectic]

Safety by adding technology that can fail? Fuck, America's going to hell.

 

I wish people with brains made regulations.

This technology is less likely to fail than us,

[SilicateWielder]

Safety by adding technology that can fail? Fuck, America's going to hell.

 

I wish people with brains made regulations.

It's not bad at all, until people start relying on it so much that they don't know how to drive without it.

[Trik'Stari]

I wish people with brains made regulations.

I'm fairly certain that's against regulations.

[bking]

It's not bad at all, until people start relying on it so much that they don't know how to drive without it.

 

And this is a given from day one. People in the US have already decides that things like turn signals, speedometers, etc are too complicated to  actually, ya know.... USE...

[Kobathor]

This technology is less likely to fail than us,

 

It's not bad at all, until people start relying on it so much that they don't know how to drive without it.

 

I'm worried about the second thing. Also, if the tech is less likely to fail, how about shit-for-brains drivers just didn't drive? What happens when somebody needs to drive, but they're so stupid that they don't know the difference between a gas and brake pedal?

[Mayaa]

It's not bad at all, until people start relying on it so much that they don't know how to drive without it.

 

As far as i understood its not going to drive the car for you?

Seems like it would just help you "avoid crashes" and give you warnings and heads ups.

[Zah]

I'm worried about the second thing. Also, if the tech is less likely to fail, how about shit-for-brains drivers just didn't drive? What happens when somebody needs to drive, but they're so stupid that they don't know the difference between a gas and brake pedal?

Because technology removes the largest variable:  the human element.  That's why planes only got safer as the tasks of pilots were taken over by the auto-pilot, not the opposite.

[SilicateWielder]

As far as i understood its not going to drive the car for you?

Seems like it would just help you "avoid crashes" and give you warnings and heads ups.

 

 

It also seems to do some things like braking automatically, but yes it does not drive for you.

Although people might become to accustomed to that automatic breaking that should it fail to function you'd end up just ramming into a vehicle at full-force.

[ivan134]

Because technology removes the largest variable:  the human element.  That's why planes only got safer as the tasks of pilots were taken over by the auto-pilot, not the opposite.

Hey, get out outta here! Only tin foil hatters are welcome here!!!

[Kobathor]

Because technology removes the largest variable:  the human element.  That's why planes only got safer as the tasks of pilots were taken over by the auto-pilot, not the opposite.

There aren't hundreds of thousands of planes flying 10 ft from each other in a state, last I checked.

[Admiral Naismith]

Because technology removes the largest variable:  the human element.  That's why planes only got safer as the tasks of pilots were taken over by the auto-pilot, not the opposite.

That last bit is not the whole truth. Auto-pilot helped in some situations. Improved reliability, better designs, better training, etc. did more to make flying safer than auto-pilot ever did.

 

The most dangerous part of a flight is take off and landing. You need a pilot for that. Auto-pilots have f*cked over real pilots before (as we see with a lot of air-bus incidents).

[Zah]

There aren't hundreds of thousands of planes flying 10 ft from each other in a state, last I checked.

https://planefinder.net/

 

There are 8k planes in the sky at this very moment.  At the speed they are going and where they are located, it could be as if they were 10ft from each other.

[Kobathor]

https://planefinder.net/

 

There are 8k planes in the sky at this very moment.  At the speed they are going and where they are located, they could very well be 10ft from each other.

Airliners are never 10ft from each other, that's about as unsafe as it gets. Try again.

[Zah]

Airliners are never 10ft from each other, that's about as unsafe as it gets. Try again.

While I reworded my post, this is still incorrect.  Airliners may not (although they can and do), but military planes do.

[Kobathor]

While I reworded my post, this is still incorrect.  Airliners may not (although they can and do), but military planes do.

Military planes use way, way less autopilot. My point stands.

[CoffeeBlack]

I'm worried about the second thing. Also, if the tech is less likely to fail, how about shit-for-brains drivers just didn't drive? What happens when somebody needs to drive, but they're so stupid that they don't know the difference between a gas and brake pedal?

They wouldn't go anywhere because you can't disengage park without depressing the brake pedal.

[Sauron]

It makes sense, but frankly I doubt it would be much safer than just normal, non connected self driving cars. The only risk still comes from a malfunction.

[Zah]

Military planes use way, way less autopilot. My point stands.

Back that claim up.

[Sidiox]

As long as it remains just warnings this seems pretty good. I've long wondered why this hasn't been implemented yet. And I can't wait till this evolves into no more human driving just full ai driven cars. (Except for where needed of course)

[bking]

Because technology removes the largest variable:  the human element.  That's why planes only got safer as the tasks of pilots were taken over by the auto-pilot, not the opposite.

 

But there's a HUGE difference there. Pilots are ever vigilant and are trained how to respond to alerts. A driver (probably someone texting and driving if my observations of the drivers around me most days are accurate) will do WHAT exactly when the system tells them a "situation" is imminent? 

[Virtual01]

Well if it's for safety and the government wants it, that 100% guarantees it's not for safety. Anyone wanna bet on what kind of underhanded freedom destroying goal this is really trying to accomplish?

[jos]

Well if it's for safety and the government wants it, that 100% guarantees it's not for safety. Anyone wanna bet on what kind of underhanded freedom destroying goal this is really trying to accomplish?

Imagine all data being collected by cloud..