Cyberlaw experts: Take back control. No, we're not talking about Brexit. It's Automated Lane Keeping Systems The UK government said in April that "the first types of self-driving cars could be on UK roads this year" but this is not entirely accurate. Firstly, the announcement refers not to self-driving vehicles, but vehicles fitted with automated lane-keeping systems (ALKS), and secondly, we already have technology similar to this …
Yes. That's where some level of automated driving might actually be useful and low-risk. Both for the driver of the car, and the reduction of unnecessary speeding up and braking that causes unstable "waves" in the traffic flow.
As soon as you include higher speeds and non-motorway driving, the ethical problems (and the political question of where to set the risk/performance trade-off point) become HUGE.
Yes, it's exactly this kind of scenario that automated driving technologies will be most useful.
However to fully function, all the vehicles need it, and ideally you need some form of central control to monitor and make decisions based on all the vehicles.
Absolutely not. Just need vehicle to vehicle comms within a speed-dependent radius, and better sensors than just relying on cameras i.e. radar, lidar.
There's simply no need for some kind of overlord watchdog system to know where all vehicles are at all times. There's enough of that with ANPR as is.
Google of course. They run the world. I hate phone apps, but as I'm going to Greece tomorrow I am forced to download the Greek's app -- from Google Play. And to get there I have to tell Google who I am (again).[1] And -- just them double checking of course -- I have to say (again) whether I'll accept payments via their app store. What? do they think I'll just give up and say yes?
Fuck off Google. Whoever it is to be trusted must in some way be independent of those that want to make money out of you. So that excludes the big tech companies, governments, other business interests.
Who's left?
I suppose the only answer is to roll over, relax, and let the fuckers (whomever they are) screw you over. Welcome to the future.
[1] It's not Google's business to know where I'm going, except they make it their business. Cunts.
Welcome to the world of copyrights. There's a huge number of apps that are restricted by country because whoever made the app only owns the license for one country and not the other. And yes, that means you are only allowed to use the app when you're in the right country. Google has to make a good faith attempt to obey the law... It's up to you to get a VPN.
I have been working on the 'ensemble' project, this is 'platooning' ('convoy') of heavy lorries funded by the EU.
We use V2X radio links (not the cv2x but the 802.11 - good for near a mile and more reliable) so each vehicle broadcasts what it is doing. We have shown that if the front vehicle brakes, the rearmost in a 5 or more platoon only has to coast to a halt... partly because we know even at the moment the driver takes his foot off the accelerator at the front to slow down, partly because as the brake come on we know its a sharper slow down, partly because we know where the lorry in front is and can 'close the gap'.
This shows that with v2x we do NOT need a central system collecting everyones data!
BTW I am also working on my 'magic radar' which listens to v2x and displays on a map screen what is going on - allows you to see the stopped lorry over the hill or the car in front of the lorry you are behind braking... its 'magic' seeing through things and over things (thanks to radio waves passing through lorries, bouncing off things etc etc)
So a trusted set of trucks working together, not every vehicle on the road providing info to each other, completely different class of problem. One can be implemented without a trusted 3rd party, the other very difficult to do with an indepentent or 3rd party securely.
If you are accepting info from any vehicle any info can be sent.
I have fond memories of tramping round the M25 south side at 03.00 one Monday morning at the unbelievable speed of 70mph+ (we'll gloss over the '+'). The place was (whisper it very, very quietly) almost devoid of traffic.
No, I couldn't believe it either. But I took full advantage of it! :-)
The problem with driving automation is sharing a road with the vehicles without it and the BS that manufacturers have actually got a working system yet.
I would suggest that if people want to let their cars drive themselves then it is only on dedicated roads paid for by the the people pushing this tech rather than the tax payer as so far the people pushing this tech have not shown themselves willing to accept responsibility when it goes wrong.
This also provides a a number of necessary advantages such as:
Reduced complexity/confusion for automation systems as all vehicles will be using the same system and also the possibility of system communications being built into the road rather than reliant upon car to car comms that are too open to hacking.
Allowing for specific laws to govern these roads seperate from normal roads laws and I would suggest making the automation manufacturer responsible for insurance and confirming vehcicle road worthiness on their roads.
Without the automation manufacturer being clearly and legally responsible for accidents on their roads then they will continue to blaim others for the failures of their systems and until this is the case then automation is more of a risk than letting humans do the work.
I would suggest that rather than cars the automation guys get delivery trucks working first as this is an area begging for improvement and already has much builtin monitoring and money for improvement. Reducing the amount of trucks and ideally making them all electric as standard for these roads would offer more public support than what we have seen to date with driverless cars.
Ah, Dad's Army. I see the Dad's Army film is on again on BBC2 this evening. Something for the brexiters, then, eh? BBC. And for the rest of us to change channels (or better turn off). Can't we ever forget the fucking war and move on?
Oh, and while I'm on a tangent, I hear a Mr Nigel Farage is to host his own show on GB News. You couldn't make it up. Is that to increase it's viewer figures from zero to 17.4 million?
"How can we all be satisfied that drivers of vehicles fitted with ALKS know how and when to take back control of their vehicle? "
For me, the answer is simple : we can't.
As long as there are bloody Tesla idiots who put themselves in the back seat of their car, I am not going to put an ounce of trust in any technology that purports allowing the driver to not pay attention to the road.
Give me a true autonomous vehicle, or get lost.
It seems that last point is actually harder than was advertised.
My last three cars claimed to be able to keep me in lane (ish) and avoid accidents but they all failed to detect or wrongly detected where lanes were at one time or the other. They all also falsely alerted me to accidents which weren't about to happen (no it's not me driving like and idiot and it was also reported by other drivers of the cars concerned).
I'd love to say the errors were very uncommon but they weren't and all three cars were from different manufacturers.
Some new technology has been useful, like blind spot monitoring (as long as you still look), radar cruise control (as long as you sill pay attention) and reversing cameras/radar (as long as you still look) but I think autonomous driving is either too difficult to achieve (except in very tightly controlled environments) or will require constant supervision which rather spoils the point.
I have the occasional misfortune of having to drive through the roadworks where the M3 and M27 join. New lane markings have been painted over partially scrubbed out old markings and the car fights me over which set of markings we should follow. I figure we both have about 50% accuracy except when the road is wet and the sun is glinting on the puddles, at which point we are both bloody confused.
I very carefully selected the poverty spec version of a recent car purchase precisely because it doesn't have all the technotoys.
Though I do feel that leaving the keyfob button to unlatch the boot but not including the function itself was a bit mean.
For a few years I regularly drove rental cars, whilst it was fun playing with the new toys, what quickly became clear, there were significant differences between systems that would lead to the sorts of results related here about the J3 > J5 section of the M3.
One of the simplest systems that vendors seem to consistently get wrong, is the automatic windscreen wipers. My current car just can't do intermittent or detect when the rain/spray has stopped and windsreen is dry. It also has problems with cloud bursts/motorway spray, deciding that a leisurely sweep is better than full speed - it is at times like this I yearn for the full manual control that I enjoyed on various cars up to circa 2010.
Seconded! I know that exact bit of road and I agree, the lane markings are impossible to distinguish from the painted over one at times. All you can do is follow the car in front and how they're getting it right.
On that same bit of road, when they started the road works years ago they imposed a 50mph limit. It was enforced with average speed cameras so you couldn't speed up then slow down for the camera. Result was that my commute became quicker and less stressful because all the lanes were all going the same speed, no swerving across the lanes, no sudden braking, just steady, constant motion. And this is what autonomous cars could bring n first instance, where they can all travel together at the same speed smoothing out the journey.
I have pretty much the same feeling. When, not so long ago, I first drove a vehicle with simple cruise control turned on, I felt my right foot not being on the accelerator pedal meant I wasn't ready to respond to conditions on the road should I need it to. There would be a delay, potentially fatal, in my reactions. It was then I figured there were only two states of vehicle automation - totally manual or totally autonomous. I believe that's 0 and 5 in the levels of autonomy as they are currently understood. The only exception I might make is for emergency braking, but I'm not even sure about that as it still requires accurate identification of what constitutes an emergency.
Simple cruise control is excellent once you're used to it, it means less aches in your right leg from holding it in a constant position. If you are concerned about not having time to react if something happens, it sound like in that kind of situation (busy traffic, close to vehicle in front) you shouldn't be using it - I tend to use it only when the road far ahead is pretty clear, you still have to anticipate a way in advance what might happen in the next 15-45 seconds and act accordingly.
Its best use by far is on dual carriageways with average speed cameras, so you can watch the road not the speedometer!
I have a vehicle that has ALKS which has never been engaged. If I am not able to maintain the correct lane, then I should stop and get some rest (unfortunately, not everyone thinks that way).
Having been in the technology business for over half a century, I am naturally highly sceptical of 'breakthrough' technology as it usually isn't. I am also highly sceptical of autonomous anything.
There are some autonomous vehicles in appropriate settings where the traffic density is low enough to permit such operation and / or where the hazards to a human operator are very high. That is one of the reasons that autonomous (sometimes semi-autonomous) minehunters have been developed among other things. There are autonomous (very large) trucks used at mining operations but that is hardly a high traffic density zone.
New technology though?
ABS? They may be electronic now, but they were fitted to aircraft designed in the 50s which although mechanical had the same underlying mode of operation.
Regenerative braking? That was in use in South Africa (railways) at least 50 years ago. Trains were timed so as to have one going down a steep incline while another was going up. The train going down fed electricity back into the local power section so the train going up had enough energy available. My power electrical lecturer waxed lyrical about it in the early 70s.
Lane keeping at it's simplest is not rocket science; there are lots of problems to contend with, though, particularly in reduced visibility.
There are some useful pieces of technology in the vehicle, though; it is an automatic and when I am going down an incline and I brake moderately hard, the system will automatically downshift me to the lowest appropriate gear which is very useful in the rather hilly terrain around here.
Then there are things that have uses in some countries but are a waste of space and resources in the UK; cruise control comes to mind. For the most part, trying to use cruise control in the UK is more effort than it is worth. I found it very useful in the USA, though.
I have yet to see any real breakthroughs for road vehicles.
For the most part, trying to use cruise control in the UK is more effort than it is worth
That depends on driving style. If you're the kind of driver that is forever overtaking other vehicles just because they are driving at 5mph less than you or because you think shaving twenty seconds of a half hour journey is worthwhile then, yes, CC will seem pointless.
But I use it almost constantly on motorways, especially now that I have a car with radar control. I just plop myself in lane one, set it to 60mph and for the most part ignore it. A couple of times an hour if there's a long line of HGVs ahead I might pop out into lane two and get my foot down because that probably means there's a dirth of HGVs after that. Also if a hill is severely slowing them down, But otherwise I just bimble along having a nice relaxed drive and probably adding no more than fifteen minutes to the duration.
I also sometimes use it on single carriageways if I'm familiar with them. I nearly always use it on the A422 Middleton Cheney bypass though it's only a mile or two long. I'd use it along the whole stretch to Brackley (have done in rush hour on occasion) but I'm marginally better at managing fuel consumption on the relatively hilly bits so I tend to only use it where it's flat.
I'd never want to own a car that didn't have it ever again.
As an anecdotal conformation, my old jeep, built circa 1999, has cruise control. It also hates going over 63 (why 63 specifically I have no idea, but it reliably overheats if I go past that). So anything over 50, I put it in cruise control at 60 and just trundle along. If someone wants to pass me, they can figure it out themselves.
I use cruise all the time and have got very used to it.
The control also has a rapid +/- 5 mph function which makes speeding up and slowing down rapidly a real controlled option, especially as the latter presses the brakes as well if you go down very rapidly. It’s really no different to hand controlled throttles in other vehicle types such as those adapted for accessiblility or, indeed, motorcycles.
Of course you gave to be ready to take full control at an instant’s notice if needed, so full diligence is still and always required. The dangerous bit is the leaning curve until your neural networks are fully adapted.
Of course you gave to be ready to take full control at an instant’s notice if needed,
Yeah, like when I took longer to pass someone than the idiot behind me liked. Then when I pulled in they overtook me, pulled in in front of me and then deliberately braked.
WFH makes life so much nicer!
I feel that's the difference. Cruise control maintains a constant speed under your own command, but it doesn't control the vehicle. It can't slow down for you. All these other technologies purport to control some active aspect of driving, like maintaining lane position, or slowing down when an obstacle appears, or navigating the car. When I'm driving with cruise control I still have to keep my eye on the road and my hands on the wheel. I still have to be ready to brake when traffic is slowing. I'm still mentally in control of the car, I just have a perfect foot position.
The problem with control automation is that you reduce your attention to what the car is doing. That's dangerous.
Sounds to me like using ALKS as it exists today is going to be more difficult for a non-suicidal driver than driving without it is. You have to do everything you'd do while driving except the trivial job of manipulating the steering wheel plus watching out for early warning that your car is going to try to kill you. What possible benefit does the driver gain from this technology until it is truly ready for prime time?
I have a lane system on my car....I "play" with it once in a while. Would I trust it or depend on it? Absolutely not!
Mine, AFAIK, depends on "seeing" the road markings to determine if in lane. How many times do the lane markings disappear, are worn out or the system not "see" them? A lot in my experience. I also have a system that picks up on road speed signs and displays the value on the dash. I would say it is only accurate 60-70% of the time. That for me makes it bordering on the useless.
These car manufacturers don't seem to state where their control units have been made and which country has jurisdiction on workers being able to access remotely the car and modify it's behaviour.
There is a possibility that in time of conflict, a foreign power can take control over the cars and use them as weapons.
For me a self driving car is a no no and if they are let on the road without any oversight...
Come on, why would any regime that manufactures components for self-driving systems pass on such opportunity?
Imagine Winnie the Pooh having a button "Turn cars into oncoming traffic" when the conflict with Taiwan starts - western countries will be too busy dealing with casualties at home. Plus it would cost almost nothing.
They already have a security law that enables them to force any citizen or organisation to help with such plan.
Then why not just write 37mph/60kmh. +- signifies a margin of error or tolerance, not 'about'
And I agree with your second point, it's almost certainly exactly 60kmh,and approximately 37mph. Cars are metric in Europe. Same reason we have 0-62mph times now instead of the classic 0-60mph (0-62mph equals 0-100kmh). The UK is just backward in insisting on converting to old units.
Changed my upvote to a downvote at the last line. All technically accurate and correct but then you go on about being 'backward' and insisting on using old units... why is it backwards? 1. Old units tend to be appreciated instinctively by older people who grew up with them and what is backwards about being inclusive? 2. The imperial units of mph, miles, yards, feet and inches, and mpg are on all the road signs. Why is it backwards to want people to understand and apply the message in the real world?
We live in a mixed measurement world and it's not a problem. I fill my car with litres and understand the economy as mpg. My emissions are measured in grams per kilometre, and my thermometer is set to centigrade but my insurance is based on my annual mileage estimate.
It is backwards cos we're out of step with the rest of the continent. You seem to have taken it as an insult when it was an observation. I use, and will probably always use, miles, mpg myself. But most of the world (except the US) moved on with no problem, are we somehow less capable? You can use metric officially and still be a mixed units society. The current situation where children are taught metric right through school, then have to self teach imperial, cos older people can't move on, is absurd
Why is "being out of step with the rest of the continent" backwards? There's a direction to these things is there?
It IS an insult, even if it is an observation.
Moved on with no problem? Moved on WHERE?
We DO use metric and we ARE a mixed units society. Children are taught metric right through school, as indeed was I from over 40 years ago, and I use metric for most things. I use miles and mpg... I know the units and I understand them. They're what we use in everyday life. They're relatable. As for Americans... they use lbs for someone's weight... Never got that myself... now STONES and POUNDS... I used to understand how heavy that was in relationship to me... now I use kg.
But no hard feelings; here, have 0.568 of a litre on me.
>The current situation where children are taught metric right through school, then have to self teach imperial, ..., is absurd
Totally agree, but then my early education was all imperial until 'decimalisation' at which point we all learnt the metric system and how to convert between systems.
In later life when I starting working with my older brother on cars and motorbikes, it was a small step to understand the difference between AF, BSF/Whitworth etc. This also prepared me for DIY plumbing, where it is important (if you want a water tight fit) to know whether you are dealing with metric, imperial or metric equivalent to imperial...
The biggest stumbling block to adopting self-drivng cars is the necessity for a driver in the seat.
Get rid of the driver, and the controls, use ML and you have the world's most experienced driver taking you everywhere.
No, shut up! There are no 'edge cases' - do you thinkg the world's most experienced driver doesn't know what to do?
I think they were starting from a slightly different place.
If you believe self-driving cars are the future then that means removing the driving seat and controls.
For this to happen we need "the world's most experienced driver taking you everywhere".
However, as you note ML (and AI) isn't all it is hyped up to be, thus true self-driving cars aren't going to be a reality anytime soon.
A very experienced cyclist in my local area was killed a few years ago by a Tesla driver. While not knowing the inquest / legal outcome of this case, given the location it happened there is practically zero chance that this wasn't down to the driver not paying attention to the road, and with it being a Tesla a good chance that autopilot was engaged as well. The last thing we currently want to allow is hands off lane assist.
I was on site at a DXC office a few years back, during a break one of the managers mentioned to us that they had fully autonomous driving solved and it was only the insurance companies stopping them from being used. I somehow managed to maintain professionalism and avoided shouting bullshit while laughing my arse off at him.
The article says, "industry and regulators have solved all the issues relating to how drivers interact with advanced driving assistance systems." but they are not mentioning all the issues of how advanced driving assistance systems interact with the designated driver.
Back in the 1950's, as a 5 year old kid I could just catch the bus every day to go to school and then back home - if we get this new technology to work (I doubt it) does this mean that every five year old will have their very own voice controlled vehicle?
When self-driving vehicles were first described I thought this might be a nice technology advance but now, after watching it fail too often I wonder if we would not all be better off returning to the days of decent bus and rail services.
For some inexplicable reason, the "artificial intelligence" could identify a moving car in front as an obstacle, but not the stationary big yellow and black rectangular plate.
And actually it's not an autopilot in the strict sense. But even if it were, the big difference between aviation and road traffic is the separation between vehicles and obstacles and the time available for decision making. There's a fallacious assumption that road vehicle avoidance automation should make decisions about the nature of obstacles, which makes the process much more complicated (and complexity is hazardous).. Aviation collision avoidance systems very sensibly aren't expected to discriminate between different categories of obstacle - just to warn that there's one (of any old kind) ahead.
My Corolla has lane assist and I avoid it most of the time. It likes to sit at the right side of a lane rather than the centre which suggests it's not been correctly updated for LH drive vehicles. It also sways a bit as it goes and is constantly twitching the wheel. If I relax and let it do its own thing it moans that I'm not holding the wheel. But if I'm holding the wheel there's a constant low grade struggle going on which is more tiring than me just holding onto the wheel unassisted.
Those who make the rules are falling for the idea that humans make mistakes (they do) and that driver "assistance" things do not (provably false, time and time again.) A big difference is that when a human makes a mistake, they take immediate corrective action. The assistance things just blunder on.
Driving is killing thousands each and every day.
The goal must be safer cars, one big way of doing so is going towards removing human error.
The proposed law permits automation in very specific conditions (slow mowing motorway traffic, without any pedestrian nearby). This will act as proving grounds for the technology with very low probability for serious injuries.
I believe we will see a decrease is small crashes and that it will lead to fewer accidents. And when it’s proven it can move one to other conditions as well.
Stop being afraid of everything new, stop putting laws that will hinder progress towards lower fatalities.
Except when the motorway has snarled up for long enough people get out of their cars and wonder about, try and find a loo etc.
It might not be legal, but that's no reason for wanting to kill people with a pressing blander problem.
There are no "simple cases" with which to experiment as a first case. The only way is to make the developers of the SW as liable as the wetware would be in a no autonomous vehicle would be. So your AV crashes and the designated driver, and the development team right the way up to the CEO and the major share holder all get to stand in the dock and in the event that a custodial sentence is given for dangerous driving the bosses and share holders get to spend time behind bars. If they are not prepared to accept that sort of responsibility they clearly don't have enough faith in their own product so why the hell should we have.
>and the development team right the way up to the CEO and the major share holder all get to stand in the dock
No, they should be forced to stay in an isolation unit/hotel until the case gets to court, using a system similar to CoViD track and trace. I expect their appetite for mass deployment of unproven tech will be considerably abated.
@AC "So your AV crashes and the designated driver, and the development team right the way up to the CEO and the major share holder all get to stand in the dock"
Never going to happen, when was the last time you saw a development team or CEO or the major share holder in the dock?
We have had exploding SUVs, failing brakes etc, ever seen anyone from the car company in the dock?
No so why would you expect it to happen in automated cars!
My car lacks several features I have found I can do without as it looks after the functions for me. Manual transmission, manual choke, steering column advance and retard and mixture control levers to name a few. I find the radar cruise control a boon but then I do live in Australia. The book says the ALKS only operates above 60 km/hr and on motorways. I may get around to trying it out soon but then I am a bit old fashioned.
I drove a car with one of those on it this holiday. Totally bloody useless. I only had it on because I thought it was part of the cruise control - turns out it had just a limiter rather than true cruise. Nothing to do with breaking the law - it's not turned on by default, it's settable to any limit regardless of the road limit... helps possibly with average speed cameras in road work areas on a motorway where increased vigilance is required but the limit is tight, if you can be arsed to turn it on and set it.
Is it really the law that one has to drive hands on the wheel and eyes on the road? I'd have thought it was more along the lines of it being prohibited to operate the vehicle in a careless or dangerous manner which is then interpreted to mean being in control and aware of the road.
My car parks itself, hands off the wheel. Is operating it in that way illegal? I have to have my foot partially braking for it to work and have my hand near the wheel.
Certain German brands will have something of that ilk I'd imagine. They appear to target a particularly 'knobby' part of the automotive market so those drivers will presumably still want to ride around in a 'knobby' fashion even when they aren't doing the driving.
The real question is whether such a switch would default to on or off when the vehicle is started.
My car sounds a buzzer if it suspects a lane drift. However, the local roads have been extensively patched, often with 3 inch wide bands of patching. These patches are read as lane markers, constantly triggering warnings until it is disabled.
Lane checking has marginal value on well-maintained motorways, but where are they to be found?
My car has a form of haptic feedback - if I drift into the lane marking it pulls the steering wheel in the appropriate direction unless I am indicating a lane change. I really don't know if it would actually stay in lane reliably if I took my hands off the wheel - I'm too much of a coward to try that - but it will certainly alert me if my attention (and direction) wanders. It is also clever enough to engage only on major roads so I regard it as akin to anti-lock breaking ... driver safety assist not self-drive.
I drove one of these cars on an 'empty' motorway, the car will slowly oscillate within the lane. However, depending on where it is in its oscillation when you hit a change in road markings you can find yourself going up the exit ramp instead of remaining on the road...
We also know that when confronted with instructions and information via digital interface, that users of technology tend to skim over what is being communicated [see here].
Much work was done on the comparative readability of on-screen text with hardcopy in the 1990's. Not able to grab the paper I was looking for but in general on-screen documents were significantly less readable. So not only do people skim or ignore the Ts&Cs, even those who do skim them are likely to not have correctly read what they did read.
How safe are cyclists? It's bad enough already with drivers zooming past far too close, or trying to overtake me but underestimating my speed (UK legal ebike, 250W, 15mph max cut off speed, no throttle), and ending up close to crashing into bollards or oncoming traffic. Do these systems recognise cylcists and more importantly, will they make room?
That's available on several UK models now. My Corolla has it (both reverse in and parallel park). I have used the automatic reverse into a space feature a few times and I'd describe that as okay-ish and actually worthwhile in a tight car park.
I had hoped it might have some degree of intelligence but I've since decided that it doesn't. I think it's just programmed with the basic algorithm and appears to have little or no ability to adjust to the gap into which its reversing. It won't start unless you're lined up within its parameters and it will stop if it detects an obstruction but your ending location will depend entirely on your start. It will happily park the car so close to another that you can't get out of the driver's door for instance even if that leaves an unnecessarily large gap on the passenger side.
I haven't tried the parallel parking but other owners have said it can curb the wheels if your starting position is off. I suppose it can't detect the curb but that's not nice and could be expensive.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
