Vehicle to Vehicle communications coming soon

page: 1
8
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 6 2014 @ 05:57 PM
link   
I think this is pretty cool. Vehicle to Vehicle communication could really make things interesting on the road. Here's more:


Vehicle-to-vehicle communications moved one step closer to reality this week with the Obama administration’s plans to push the technology forward. The February 3rd announcement outlines a set of proposed rules would be announced for comment by the time this administration departs in 2017, with hopes that sometime around 2020, cars will communicate with each other and alert drivers to roadside hazards ahead. What happened this week was a plan by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration to have a plan.

Simply put, the first generation of V2V systems would warn the driver but not take control of the car. Later implementations would improve to brake or steer around obstacles and eventually merge with self-driving cars. Here’s our rundown of V2V technologies and some of the implications…


www.extremetech.com...

Eventually, you could say goodbye to hit and run drivers and accidents could decrease because drivers will be alerted to when an accident could occur and who knows the vehicle might even slow down to avoid an accident.

Are there privacy concerns? Yes, especially if this becomes a requirement for every vehicle on the road. I think the benefits outweigh any of those concerns though. It's a long article but here's a little more:


(V2V) communications comprises a wireless network where automobiles send messages to each other with information about what they’re doing. This data would include speed, location, direction of travel, braking, and loss of stability. Vehicle-to-vehicle technology uses dedicated short-range communications (DSRC), a standard set forth by bodies like FCC and ISO. Sometimes it’s described as being a WiFi network because one of the possible frequencies is 5.9GHz, which is used by WiFi, but it’s more accurate to say “WiFi-like.” The range is up to 300 meters or 1000 feet or about 10 seconds at highway speeds (not 3 seconds as some reports say).

V2V would be a mesh network, meaning every node (car, smart traffic signal, etc.) could send, capture and retransmit signals. Five to 10 hops on the network would gather traffic conditions a mile ahead. That’s enough time for even the most distracted driver to take his foot off the gas.

On the first cars, V2V warnings might come to the driver as an alert, perhaps a red light that flashes in the instrument panel, or an amber then red alert for escalating problems. It might indicate the direction of the threat. All that is fluid for now since V2V is still a concept with several thousand working prototypes or retrofitted test cars. Most of the prototypes have advanced to stage where the cars brake and sometimes steer around hazards. Why? It’s more exciting for a legislator or journalist to see a car that stops or swerves, not one with a flashing lamp.


Here's a couple of videos:







posted on Feb, 6 2014 @ 06:10 PM
link   
reply to post by neoholographic
 


Vehicles that drive themselves, that are open to wireless communications will be giant flashing targets for every aspiring hacker desirous of proving their mettle.

Further, abduction, and remote-control murder comes into easier play for those with the tech, or access to people who do.

Whole bus loads of children going missing at the hands of hacker pedophiles is a scary thought.



posted on Feb, 6 2014 @ 06:12 PM
link   
Actually, this is really scary, they will share a frequency band with wifi says the FCC......that means the potential they every time a device comes intoa wifi network, it could potentially data dump to the government....not just what it did, but what vehicles it caeme into contact with.....6 degrees of separation.....they would effectively know where every vehicle is.

Sorry, written on a tablet....will clean this up at home.
edit on 6-2-2014 by pointr97 because: (no reason given)


Edit-imagine this being all the other hacks on steroids......At first, it will be for all new cars, and sold as essential for safety and security(because we haven't heard that one before, and boy it sure hasn't worked)....The program will be expanded, does everyone remember the scrapping of the analog broadcast system for digital? Well, essentially the same, required newer tvs to have the capability, and then for those holdouts that didn't upgrade, they were provided a converter box free of charge(for a period of time)....but they got most of us. Same thing, eventually for those who have older cars, like myself who have 20+ year old vehicles, and refuse to buy new, they will offer us a small device to attach, or just place inside, the vehicle. This device will be registered to the vehicle, the person, or both and will be constantly communicating with other devices that are registered to the car, person, or both. All of these transactions will be stored as the information will be nominal in size but huge in value. Routinely in your travels you happen to stroll through a wifi network, and the devices say HEY!!!! UPLOAD. in a quick burst, it uploads all accumulated data sense last upload, who, what, when, where and why it experienced. It ran into bob's car heading north about a mile ago travelling at 60 mph. Bob had just come from the east at 40 mph....and so on, and bob had passed bill just before he turned north and bill was travelling west. Small bits of data, but Huge in creating a virtual map of the country and where everyone is. So, lets say the devices only store two or three degrees of separation.....the powers only have to find the last easy ding on Bill's car to quickly access other vehicle logs in the same time location or projected locations.
edit on 6-2-2014 by pointr97 because: (no reason given)


Edit-Oh and for those that say, but the device can just be disabled on those older vehicles......What do you think will happen when the majority of the cars on the street have these devices and they run into an unscannable vehicle? Ever watch Idiocracy, bells and whistles will go off......and it will either raise huge red flags, or maybe a drone will be sent to investigate, or at the least, logged in all those vehicles....in which a path of that unknown vehicle could be determined.
edit on 6-2-2014 by pointr97 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 6 2014 @ 06:19 PM
link   
Your car's computer already has a "cell phone number" and can be hacked with a cell phone, I was reading about it earlier today.
So, one less thing to worry about.



posted on Feb, 6 2014 @ 06:19 PM
link   
reply to post by neoholographic
 


1. Use your cell phones

2. TSA...Really?

3. Obama likes it...read between the lines.

Thank you for your time.


Peace



edit on 6-2-2014 by jude11 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 6 2014 @ 06:26 PM
link   
It's all fun and games until I tell your car WRECK AHEAD! and it slams on the brakes and goes off the road.

I'll be taking orders for the gadget right after this comes out. Fun and games for the whole family!



posted on Feb, 6 2014 @ 06:26 PM
link   

AliceBleachWhite
reply to post by neoholographic
 


Vehicles that drive themselves, that are open to wireless communications will be giant flashing targets for every aspiring hacker desirous of proving their mettle.

Further, abduction, and remote-control murder comes into easier play for those with the tech, or access to people who do.

Whole bus loads of children going missing at the hands of hacker pedophiles is a scary thought.


It's ok, only the NSA, TSA and DHS will have the encryption keys, so only they will be able to murder, abduct, etc. people. Oh wait, aren't they already murdering them in their cars?

Yeah, this is a dangerous implementation of technology. In the wrong hands (like any government agency, terrorist or hacktivist) this could create absolute havoc within society.

Cheers - Dave



posted on Feb, 6 2014 @ 06:28 PM
link   
reply to post by bobs_uruncle
 


Makes me think of that reporter who drove his car straight into a tree at over 100mph recently.



posted on Feb, 6 2014 @ 06:30 PM
link   
So they're' really turning up the screws, they're gonna watch your every move.



posted on Feb, 6 2014 @ 06:31 PM
link   

abe froman
reply to post by bobs_uruncle
 


Makes me think of that reporter who drove his car straight into a tree at over 100mph recently.


That is exactly what I was thinking. And if these assclowns in government can adjust your car while you're driving, you can be quite sure they can adjust the black box after they kill you. Or maybe they'd just call it a national security issue like they do every time I talk to them about me or anything else LOL.

Cheers - Dave



posted on Feb, 6 2014 @ 06:50 PM
link   
Man I was hoping for a "hail them!" "on screen!". Not a car to car thing. But yeah I could hack this no problemo.



posted on Feb, 6 2014 @ 06:51 PM
link   
reply to post by neoholographic
 


This concept violates the our freedom of expression. I have the right to say things, and I have the right to not say things. Things I have the right to remain silent on are my speed, where I'm going, and what I'm going to do next.



posted on Feb, 6 2014 @ 08:10 PM
link   

fractal2
reply to post by neoholographic
 


This concept violates the our freedom of expression. I have the right to say things, and I have the right to not say things. Things I have the right to remain silent on are my speed, where I'm going, and what I'm going to do next.


Oh, you can remain silent all you want.....However, don't think your car or your neighbors car won't drop a dime on you.



posted on Feb, 6 2014 @ 08:22 PM
link   
Already covered this in another thread but I'll let this one run and I'll let mine go to the bin since yours is better. This technology isn't new and you don't see teens crashing planes don't be silly. Chances are there will only be "hard" input methods for changing code and such that would make any of the things you paranoid guys come up with impossible, ie the car computer will be "offline" unless in the dealer. And I'm sure there will be a fail safe anti corruption software that will auto park if comprised. Pretty much what we have in planes already. What worries me is that even though this tech is available the government hasn't twisted the autos arms for things like manditory back up cameras and stuff. We had them put in seat belts, air bags, and the like.



posted on Feb, 6 2014 @ 09:06 PM
link   
I don't see that leap of technology being as great as it's supposed benefits claim.
In fact, I see a whole host of problems that could arise from that tech.

So it starts as simple and benign as this: Your Car Gives You Warnings
You are cruising along a stretch of interstate, and there is a wreck up ahead... somehow
the car knows that, and tells you to change your route. Or it knows that the right lane is closed, merge left now!

Then eventually, your car will be smarter than you, be able to sense the roadway ahead (and behind) and account for traffic flows... fallen objects blahblah blah and adjust. So smart, in fact that for your morning commute - all one needs to do is shuffle out of bed, hop in and take a nap while your luxurious ride takes you to your destination. hah!

What ever happened to old school "situational awareness" when driving?
Do people not know what visual aids like stop signs, roadside readerboards are?
In 20 years from now, that might be truly be the case. Sad.


Rant off.
T-



posted on Feb, 6 2014 @ 11:53 PM
link   
reply to post by neoholographic
 

A friend of mine is a commercial pilot, has been for many years. He says Boeing planes are made for pilots and Airbus isn't, as in, the Airbus planes are run by computers that can and do override the pilots, including in an emergency situation. He told me of sensors that go bad and tell a plane it isn't on the ground when it is so it won't shut the engine down or reverse thrusters. Not a good idea. Or due to a downdraft, a plane is coming too close in towards a mountain and when the pilot tries to pull up, the plane's computer overrides his attempt as it is too close to a stall speed... which would you rather do; risk a stall or slam into a mountain? There are other stories similar.

Now, consider this for driving. A car stopping when it shouldn't or swerving when it shouldn't or deciding to override a driver and do something that an experienced driver decides has a lower risk of difficulty or death or hitting a deer vs hitting a solid stone wall, braking when you need to accelerate to avoid a collision.... I say this idea is full of potential death causing problems. and of course, just allows you to be tracked even far more closely. You drifted over a line.... so obviously you are driving recklessly and should be pulled over. Here, in winter, the lanes are determined by physics and lines can't even be seen under the ice and snow.... but by satellite or gps tracking, you drove over the yellow or white line. Will your insurance go up? Will you get a ticket? Have you committed a crime? Safer? eh. Maybe? Big Brother (government/corporation)? Absolutely! Do YOU want to hand over control of your vehicle to someone/something else WHILE you are driving?



posted on Feb, 7 2014 @ 12:06 AM
link   
It would be a bit scary if people can communicate anger towards someone driving badly near them, and then you would see death threats and such.. Road rage is way more common than road hazards.

If it was implemented, I would tear it from the car, or jam it along with any other linked systems.
edit on 7-2-2014 by alienreality because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 7 2014 @ 03:46 AM
link   
reply to post by neoholographic
 


i'm currently studying vehicle to vehicle communication as part of my Networks, Security, and Systems degree at university and It's a very interesting subject. The IEEE have created standards for it which will be the basis of ITS (Intelligent Transportation Systems). There are few different ways this can operate, but most likely is that vehicles will be grouped with one acting as the main node. I believe WAVE (802.11p) will be the standard used and, yes, it has its own frequency range laid out.

The v2v systems will most likely be implemented along with roadside infrastructure (v2r) which will feedback all of the info processed by cars as well as propagating potential hazard or congestion warnings.

Ideally ITSs will be used to give early warning about cars breaking heavily ahead, but one of the main challenges so far has been to reduce the latency - no point in an early warning system if the warning takes longer than the required stopping distance.

It's a really interesting area of networking, one which they are still testing. If Obama pushes to implement this, at least we'll have a real-life prototype to base studies and further development on, but it does mean that in 5 to 10 years it will seem antiquated compared to the systems the rest of the world implement. Not dissimilar to our antiquated railway here in the UK - we laid the ground work, and everyone else followed with better tech.

Peace



posted on Feb, 7 2014 @ 03:52 AM
link   
reply to post by telemetry
 


I tend to agree with the "dumbing drivers down" aspect of your post, but there so many situations where v2v could react quicker than you could.

In the wild, pack mentality keeps animals alive because if one gets a fright and runs, they ALL run instantly. When someone wrecks their car at 70mph on a busy motorway in the rain, v2v could potentially prevent every other car in the vicinity from skidding out of control or crashing by slowing every vehicle down safely, and simultaneously.

It will save lives...eventually. This won't really happen until ITSs are able to override vehicle controls though.



posted on Feb, 7 2014 @ 04:12 AM
link   
This is just the first baby step.The goal is a fully automated car that drives/parks itself.You just need to tell it where you want to go.No more stolen cars,drunk drivers,dangerous driving and accidents.Yet some only see the worst instead of the possibilities.



new topics
top topics
 
8
<<   2 >>

log in

join