Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Jalopnik)   Research project seeks to end distracted driving by monitoring whether or not you're paying attention. What happens when you're not? They automatically SHUT DOWN EVERYTHING   (jalopnik.com ) divider line
    More: Interesting, scientific research, distracted driving, cure monitoring, shut downs  
•       •       •

1212 clicks; posted to Geek » on 09 Nov 2013 at 5:59 PM (2 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



22 Comments   (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2013-11-09 04:04:30 PM  
That's going to wonders for rear end collisions.I mean, cool if you own a bodyshop.
 
2013-11-09 04:43:17 PM  
It'd be funnier if it sped up when you weren't paying attention.
 
2013-11-09 04:57:46 PM  

Chinchillazilla: It'd be funnier if it sped up when you weren't paying attention.


And the stereo would start blasting Yakety Sax.
 
2013-11-09 06:05:26 PM  
With this thing there'd be about 3 cars on the entire DC beltway that stayed in motion. Not that that's much different than most days...
 
2013-11-09 06:10:30 PM  
You can't solve a legal problem with technology. As long as cops give a free pass to people who should not be driving in the first place, the problems they create will continue to exist.
 
2013-11-09 06:22:45 PM  
My HS English teacher used to say you stop paying attention roughly every 90 seconds, and she used to love the moments when you could tell she lost the entire class at the same time. "Everybody hit that 90 second mark together, didn't you?" She'd then smile and continue with whatever she was saying. It was a great way to handle those moments when you just space out, versus being disrespectful.

I hate the idea of fly-by-wire anyway (there's no way you can engineer for failure enough when computers are involved), but I can't imagine a functional car that shutdowns every minute and a half or so. Stop and go traffic on the 405 at rush hour isn't that bad.
 
2013-11-09 06:25:38 PM  
Quit researching 'the problem' and find a solution.  Develop a safe reliable autopilot so I can do what I farking want while 'driving' to work.  Otherwise, no funding and STFU.
 
2013-11-09 06:39:02 PM  
I see people idiots chatting away and texting while pretending not to text (I can see your statue-still head and your eyes looking down, a-holes) all the effing time.

Cars need to have cell signal jammers, full stop.
People die all the time because of this crap and it's time for it to stop.
 
2013-11-09 06:54:43 PM  
Great, more nanny tech
 
2013-11-09 07:59:41 PM  
So thats why cars are passing this texting copper.

i.imgur.com

/Laws are for the little people anyways.
 
2013-11-09 09:04:49 PM  
Self-driving cars would be a million times more valuable and useful. Not just asleep at the wheel -- drunk? Not licensed? Blind? Elderly? Doesn't matter. No parking? Send the car home, it'll pick you up later. You're not using your car 23.5 hours out of the day? Why even buy an entire car to have yourself that you aren't using most of the time -- share cars instead. Municipalities can cut back on resource-draining routine traffic patrols, and instead concentrate on crime prevention. If V2V collision avoidance is better than human, you really don't need to install and maintain those traffic laws, signals and signage, just set all the car's settings to the optimum safe parameters.

Life on American roads will be unrecognizable if self-driving cars happen.
 
2013-11-09 09:29:54 PM  

HotIgneous Intruder: I see people idiots chatting away and texting while pretending not to text (I can see your statue-still head and your eyes looking down, a-holes) all the effing time.

Cars need to have cell signal jammers, full stop.
People die all the time because of this crap and it's time for it to stop.


Wow, what an extremely well thought-out idea.
 
2013-11-09 09:33:07 PM  

StopLurkListen: Self-driving cars would be a million times more valuable and useful. Not just asleep at the wheel -- drunk? Not licensed? Blind? Elderly? Doesn't matter. No parking? Send the car home, it'll pick you up later. You're not using your car 23.5 hours out of the day? Why even buy an entire car to have yourself that you aren't using most of the time -- share cars instead. Municipalities can cut back on resource-draining routine traffic patrols, and instead concentrate on crime prevention. If V2V collision avoidance is better than human, you really don't need to install and maintain those traffic laws, signals and signage, just set all the car's settings to the optimum safe parameters.

Life on American roads will be unrecognizable if self-driving cars happen.


Passive transport exists. It's called public transportation. No one cares about it in areas where owning a car is feasible.

Self driving cars will not exist in our lifetime. Too many variables. The infrastructure change required is nearly unfathomable.
 
2013-11-09 09:45:25 PM  

eatin' fetus: HotIgneous Intruder: I see people idiots chatting away and texting while pretending not to text (I can see your statue-still head and your eyes looking down, a-holes) all the effing time.

Cars need to have cell signal jammers, full stop.
People die all the time because of this crap and it's time for it to stop.

Wow, what an extremely well thought-out idea.


If the car is running: no signal. I'm not sure I see what the problem is.
 
2013-11-09 10:02:28 PM  

eatin' fetus: StopLurkListen: Self-driving cars would be a million times more valuable and useful. Not just asleep at the wheel -- drunk? Not licensed? Blind? Elderly? Doesn't matter. No parking? Send the car home, it'll pick you up later. You're not using your car 23.5 hours out of the day? Why even buy an entire car to have yourself that you aren't using most of the time -- share cars instead. Municipalities can cut back on resource-draining routine traffic patrols, and instead concentrate on crime prevention. If V2V collision avoidance is better than human, you really don't need to install and maintain those traffic laws, signals and signage, just set all the car's settings to the optimum safe parameters.

Life on American roads will be unrecognizable if self-driving cars happen.

Passive transport exists. It's called public transportation. No one cares about it in areas where owning a car is feasible.

Self driving cars will not exist in our lifetime. Too many variables. The infrastructure change required is nearly unfathomable.


lolwut? You couldn't be more wrong.
They exist. Now. Today.

The Google self driving cars alone as of last year had gone over 300,000 miles. They have at least 12 of them on the road at any given time. And Google isn't the only one who has created self-driving cars. Most of the major car companies have either made, are making or are getting ready to make one. Some universities have even made their own.

And there is absolutely no specialized infrastructure needed because the cars just drive on existing roads. Computing technology has advanced past the point of us needing to make giant slot cars or something. They built the motherfarker into a Prius for crying out loud, and they're already driving around in traffic with humans. That's not the future, that's today.
 
2013-11-09 10:07:09 PM  

eatin' fetus: The infrastructure change required is nearly unfathomable.


I don't buy that. But I think the biggest obstacle will be the legal responsibilities when accidents do happen.
 
2013-11-09 10:10:16 PM  

Generation_D: Great, more nanny tech


car's gps locks out while in motion. they never considered how many people use the passenger as navigator.
 
2013-11-10 01:21:08 AM  
Let us step back from the brink of farkdom and admit:

1. Driving is easy
2. Most people at most times do a staggeringly good job driving
3. It's fine
 
2013-11-10 03:39:10 AM  

Frederf: Let us step back from the brink of farkdom and admit:

1. Driving is easy
2. Most people at most times do a staggeringly good job driving
3. It's fine


If it's fine for you to text while driving, you'd better not say shiat about me cutting traffic at 140mph on my sport bike.

Hey it's fine... driving is easy, right?
 
2013-11-10 06:15:05 AM  
ID rather they just make it legal to ram the fark out of those assholes that are talking on their phone or texting.
 
2013-11-10 11:26:38 AM  

Frederf: Let us step back from the brink of farkdom and admit:

1. Driving is easy
2. Most people at most times do a staggeringly good job driving
3. It's fine


Total crap. Almost all accidents boil down to some form of failure by one or more of the meat creatures piloting the vehicles. A huge number of people die from vehicular accidents each year - it's one of the leading causes of death, particularly among the young.

We make driving as easy as possible for us, but we didn't evolve to drive cars and aren't particularly suited for it. Driving is a perfect task for machines and once we can finally turn it over to them we'll not only eliminate one of the leading causes of death in our country but also make life much easier for us all as well.
 
2013-11-10 12:26:44 PM  
Fun fact: It's impossible to drive faster than 45mph while playing the harmonica.  I don't know why this is.  It just is.
 
Displayed 22 of 22 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report