No V2V Comms for Smart Cars, says Trump

"When you make a thing, a thing that is new, it is so complicated making it that it is bound to be ugly. But those that make it after you, they don’t have to worry about making it. And they can make it pretty, and so everybody can like it when others make it after you."

- Pablo Picasso

Comments

  • 21 Comments sorted by Date Added Votes
  • While vehicle-to-vehicle accidents have the most injuries/fatalities, it seems that this should be extended to phone apps so pedestrians, bikes, and older vehicles could join the party. To those that cringe from a "big brother is watching" standpoint, I submit that that ship has sailed quite a while ago for all practical purposes.

    On the other hand, this is one of the reasons that I like the propeller; I think it might just be one of the most capable chips that you can still be certain of everything it's doing. Is this still true for the P2, considering that it's done in verilog and the actual gates are synthesized in a blob that no human can understand (i.e., do we trust ON-Semi) ? Is there another reason that the die came out larger than expected ? I really doubt it, and I'm not trying to start a rumor, but I don't think we can be certain, and it seems that this uncertainty will only grow with time, so we probably have to develop things to deal with it rather than try in vain to halt it (or even slow it down).
  • It's only Big Brother when there's uniquely identifying information that's transmitted. It's not strictly needed for V2V, but I'm sure it's in the minds of car makers and insurers. There is an economic incentive for cars to contain this technology. So while the government may not mandate it, the industry may find it suits their bottom line anyway. Expect to see it on many new vehicles, and (probably) offered as a discount incentive by your insurance company.

    Apropos of this, just today there's a new piece about a man in LA suing to find out how much GPS data has been randomly collected by the police (who also have the ability to take and store a snapshot of your license). Apparently it's quite a bit, and the data is indiscriminately captured.

  • I guess you would have to dismantle the wafer and see if there are any sections dedicated as special Or OEM use.
  • Oh boy. Is it tin hat time?

    Not so Gordon. We leave enough trails of what we do that even if none of them uniquely identify us if someone can correlate it all they have us nailed. That ability to correlate it all is what "big data" is all about.

    There are all kind of reasons why people want to know all about us:

    Banks would like it because then when you ask for a loan they can evaluate the risk.

    Insurance companies would like to know all about your driving habits for the similar reasons.

    The police would like it because, well, terrorism.

    And so on and so on.

    But here is a kicker I have been thinking about recently. All the time I keep reading how modern Artificial Intelligence and Deep Learning systems are going to replace the middle classes in the work that they do. In banks, in insurance companies and so on.

    That means we end up with no actual humans spying on us with that huge pile of "big data". Only a network of AI. Tenaciously trying to optimize profits for it's masters.

    "Big Brother" is already here on this forum. Why does it contact Facebook when I come here. Why does it contact gravatar? I did not ask for or expect that. There must be something in it for them.

  • California will mandate it, then the whole country will have to follow suit. Go Cali!

    -Phil
    “Perfection is achieved not when there is nothing more to add, but when there is nothing left to take away. -Antoine de Saint-Exupery
  • Gordon,
    It's only Big Brother when there's uniquely identifying information that's transmitted. It's not strictly needed for V2V,
    Actually that is not clear to me.

    As it happens I was invited to a conference about DSRC and other traffic technologies at the Microsoft offices in San Jose this summer.

    One guy on a panel discussion talked about how DSRC, or V2V, could prevent accidents if vehicles could communicate. At intersections for example.

    Another guy basically said that such real time communication is not what DSRC is good for.

    Now here is the thing. If my car is going to talk to your car somehow such that we avoid crashing into each other, then I need a secure way of knowing that the messages my car gets are actually from your car. Not just generated by some hacker for devious purposes. Such security ends up demanding that I know who you are. Or at least your car.

    I put my hand up and put this question about security to the panel of DSRC experts on stage. I only got a waffly reply.

    It's a bit like that problem the Yanks and Brits had during the Gulf war. Their fighter jets had transponders to identify the good guys from the bad guys in the air. The idea being you did not launch missiles at the friendly guys. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Identification_friend_or_foe Problem was they had different versions of the systems. A Yank could not tell a Brit was friendly and vice versa.













  • California will mandate it, then the whole country will have to follow suit. Go Cali!

    -Phil

    Cali's pleased as punch to have the full blessing of the PNW!

    This as I install line following photocells on my new Leaf...

    "When you make a thing, a thing that is new, it is so complicated making it that it is bound to be ugly. But those that make it after you, they don’t have to worry about making it. And they can make it pretty, and so everybody can like it when others make it after you."

    - Pablo Picasso
  • GordonMcCombGordonMcComb Posts: 3,146
    edited November 1 Vote Up0Vote Down
    Heater. wrote: »
    I need a secure way of knowing that the messages my car gets are actually from your car.

    All it needs to know is that it's someone's car, not my car, Erco's car, Phil's car, or any specific person's car. At its basic level, ownership of the vehicle is irrelevant for the technology to work, any more than backup sensors only detect a nearby object, not who owns the object, or even what the object is.

    That doesn't mean there couldn't be personally identifying information stored, and insurance companies especially would want this.

    I mentioned both of these in my first post. The one doesn't obviate the other.

  • erco wrote: »
    This as I install line following photocells on my new Leaf...

    Yesterday's technology. The Chinese already have a self-driving train (it travels over roads) that follows lines. Hit the streets yesterday.

    http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/infrastructure/a26782/china-built-a-self-driving-something/

  • Heater. wrote: »
    That means we end up with no actual humans spying on us with that huge pile of "big data". Only a network of AI. Tenaciously trying to optimize profits for it's masters.

    If you rented a car for your trips to California, likely you were captured by completely automated systems installed on police cruisers. They took a picture of your license plate, converting it to data using optical character recognition, checked the plate for any issues such as stolen vehicle, and then stored your instantaneous location using the GPS on the cruiser. That data is being kept indefinitely.

    Even if you didn't rent a car, your face was autonomously analyzed when you got off the plane, walked through the airport terminal, and onto the bus or cab you took. Ditto for cameras in major downtown areas as you walked past and into restaurants, bars, hotels...

    So what you mention is already the norm, though the US is actually behind the times in the surveillance biz compared to London and several European cities. The UK has fully embraced Orwell -- he was British, after all.

    The US is catching up, though.

  • The Chinese already have a self-driving train (it travels over roads) that follows lines. Hit the streets yesterday.

    Master Gordon is always one step ahead. That looks pretty cool. Wonder what happens when someone steps off the curb in front of it. Traffic flows differently, and lives are valued differently in China. When I was in China on business, we were driving on the highway in a shuttle bus. Suddenly ahead, traffic was madly swerving and braking, as did we. Turns out, there was old school "road repair" going on. No signs, no cones, no warning. One guy was sitting down in the middle of the highway, chipping away at the asphalt with a hammer & chisel.

    With his back turned to oncoming traffic.

    No bright yellow, Scotchlite laser-reflecting, RF-emitting vest. Just a white T-shirt.

    I would give him 20 minutes in the US, judging by all the reports of drivers changing flat tires in the fast lane.

    "When you make a thing, a thing that is new, it is so complicated making it that it is bound to be ugly. But those that make it after you, they don’t have to worry about making it. And they can make it pretty, and so everybody can like it when others make it after you."

    - Pablo Picasso
  • In Oz (NSW at least), many police cars are fitted with plate recognition which is sent to the cloud and back comes info for stolen/unregistered/wanted cars and if the owner is wanted or has a suspended license. The police then stop the vehicle. Its all automated (cameras permanently in) until the warning to stop the car/driver comes back.

    We all want those cars/drivers off our roads, so we accept the invasion of privacy.

    Maye if we could access that info, in the case of a wrongful arrest, we could use it to prove we were not there!
    My Prop boards: P8XBlade2, RamBlade, CpuBlade, TriBlade
    Prop OS (also see Sphinx, PropDos, PropCmd, Spinix)
    Website: www.clusos.com
    Prop Tools (Index) , Emulators (Index) , ZiCog (Z80)
  • Cluso99 wrote: »
    In Oz (NSW at least), many police cars are fitted with plate recognition which is sent to the cloud and back comes info for stolen/unregistered/wanted cars and if the owner is wanted or has a suspended license. The police then stop the vehicle. Its all automated (cameras permanently in) until the warning to stop the car/driver comes back.

    In the UK there are hundreds of the little blighters - many on dedicated poles at the sides of the road, some temporarily fixed to lamp-posts and the Police even using ANPR on CCTV feeds from other organisations. Number-plates can be 'tagged' with indicators for persons-of-interest, etc., Scary stuff.



    South Saxons - "we wunt be druv".
  • with them self driving cars on the horizon, I see a Country Song coming where not just your dog and your wife left you, but your truck left you too...

    Enjoy!

    Mike
    I am just another Code Monkey.

    A determined coder can write COBOL programs in any language. -- Author unknown.

    The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this post are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119.
  • In the Sacramento, CA area, the police recently tracked down a suspect by using their "Police Observation Devices" or PODs. The police were alerted when the suspect's vehicle passed by a POD and was eventually pulled over. The suspect died in a shoot out with the police.
    sacbee.com/news/local/crime/article98237277.html

    If your car is equipped with an OnStar device, it is possible that your car could be taken over and pulled over if your eyes leave the road for a extended period of time and they can not reach you.
    https://dmv.org/articles/general-motors-eye-tracking-technology.php
    I can hear the turn now:
    "I always feel like somebody's watching me. And I have not privacy".

    Also, I remember a few moons ago that the DVM was trying to tap into services such as OnStar to go after folks who do not pay their license or registration fee. If the owner failed to pay, they could shut the car off until the fee was paid. I am not sure where this is at this time.

    And, Alexa enabled devices have already been used as evidence in Murder cases. Since some car companies are looking to add this feature to vehicles, It would be interesting to know what police could pull from the device and use if you get pulled over or arrested or a key word triggers some government agency.
    https://wired.com/2017/02/murder-case-tests-alexas-devotion-privacy/

  • JonM wrote: »
    Also, I remember a few moons ago that the DVM was trying to tap into services such as OnStar to go after folks who do not pay their license or registration fee. If the owner failed to pay, they could shut the car off until the fee was paid. I am not sure where this is at this time.

    This sounds highly dubious. Unless the DMV tapped into the OnStar signal, which is encrypted, they wouldn't know where the vehicle was. It could be out of state, and therefore out of jurisdiction and possibly registered elsewhere. The OnStar signal doesn't magically stop at the state lines.

    It's also dubious GM would be cooperative, as users would likely terminate their service agreements with this level of intrusion. There are other GPS-based monitoring systems to choose from.

  • msrobots wrote: »
    with them self driving cars on the horizon, I see a Country Song coming where not just your dog and your wife left you, but your truck left you too...

    THAT'S funny. As my wizened old neighbor use to say, "To be happy, a man only needs two of these three things: a good woman, a good dog, a good truck."

    And yeah, now it can all go poof!

    "When you make a thing, a thing that is new, it is so complicated making it that it is bound to be ugly. But those that make it after you, they don’t have to worry about making it. And they can make it pretty, and so everybody can like it when others make it after you."

    - Pablo Picasso
  • yetiyeti Posts: 339
    edited November 3 Vote Up0Vote Down
    msrobots wrote: »
    with them self driving cars on the horizon, I see a Country Song coming where not just your dog and your wife left you, but your truck left you too...
    If you hurt your truck's AI's feelings... why not?

    Meet Sophia: The first robot declared a citizen by Saudi Arabia
    Why not some rights for every AI?
    ...some complex questions will show up soon!
    May a man and his truck get divorced?
    Windows.
    No Source – No Go!
    Please help: http://rosettacode.org/wiki/Category:Spin
    Why Asimov's Laws of Robotics Don't Work - Computerphile
    DNA is a four letter word.
  • I am actually buying the first pick-up truck in my life. They are not so common in Germany, but now living for 12 years in the US of A I feel the strong need to own one.

    But poor as I am I can not afford cars younger then half of my age so I settled down on some 72 Dodge for $400.

    One could claim that it has a personality, but surely no AI in there.

    Enjoy!

    Mike
    I am just another Code Monkey.

    A determined coder can write COBOL programs in any language. -- Author unknown.

    The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this post are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119.
  • RS_JimRS_Jim Posts: 1,074
    edited November 4 Vote Up0Vote Down
    msrobots wrote: »
    with them self driving cars on the horizon, I see a Country Song coming where not just your dog and your wife left you, but your truck left you too...
    Or your truck left you and took your wife and your dog.

    Jim
  • yeti wrote: »

    Meet Sophia: The first robot declared a citizen by Saudi Arabia
    Why not some rights for every AI?
    ...some complex questions will show up soon!
    May a man and his truck get divorced?

    So, does Sophia get a Maintenance Plan or sign up for some sort of Health Care plan just in case it get's sick (or would that be a malfunction)?

    It would seem that 'Westworld" is getting closer to reality.
Sign In or Register to comment.