Vehicle-to-vehicle tech to see backlash?

V2V Technology TeslaMondoAssuming Tesla vanguards “autopilot” and ever-purer autonomous driving using V2V technology, Tesla may find itself on the front lines of yet another battle — this time from people who fear government tracking, terrorist hacking and myriad health hazards from radio-frequency overload.

The NHTSA is very bullish on V2V, and has just issued a big, thick, meaty update all about its efforts to bring it to market smoothly. It’s available here. Scroll down and click just below the big, yellow comment button. As with most government docs, even the executive summary needs a summary, so here is TeslaMondo’s summary of the NHTSA summary. We’ll get into the paranoia afterward.

1. This stuff could save your life. Just two of the myriad V2V components, Intersection Movement Assist and Left Turn Assist, would prevent 25,000 to 592,000 crashes and save 49 to 1,083 lives annually, if every vehicle had those features.

2. Cost? About $341 to $350 per vehicle in 2020, decreasing to $209 to $227 by 2058, as manufacturers gain experience producing this equipment (learning curve).

3. Experiments using SAE and IEEE protocols showed both were too vague, so new communication protocols are needed to ensure vehicles don’t get their signals crossed. GPS surely can help too, but exactly how is TBD.

4. Safety systems that focus on one particular scenario, such as left-turn assist, need to be better-tailored for that exact scenario. For example, current left-turn assist systems activate only when the driver uses the turn signal. What if he doesn’t?

5. The NHTSA does have the authority to mandate some V2V systems in new light vehicles but could also require they be retrofitted into commercial vehicles already in service.

6. Wi-Fi, cordless phones and V2V would share the same 5.8-5.9 GHz frequency. The FCC would have to get involved to make sure we’re not headed for a mess there.

7. The NHTSA has a lot of work to do in making sure every company offering V2V technology complies with a universal standard, or else some cars might not talk to each other properly.

8. What about end-of-life issues? Electronics do get old and die, and so older cars might not have a properly-functioning V2V system.

9. Tight security needs to govern every V2V transmission to ensure accuracy and protect from outside influence. Will a private entity step into this space? Probably, but “private entities have not committed to doing so to date.”

10. Lawyers. Remember them? Automakers are worried about increased liability. But the NHTSA can kick that can down the road a bit because the systems currently under consideration involve only warning the driver, not taking over the vehicle. Baby steps . . .

11. Privacy concerns. TeslaMondo had better post this one verbatim: “At the outset, readers should understand some very important points about the V2V system as currently contemplated by NHTSA. The system will not collect or store any data identifying individuals or individual vehicles, nor will it enable the government to do so. There is no data in the safety messages exchanged by vehicles or collected by the V2V system that could be used by law enforcement or private entities to personally identify a speeding or erratic driver. The system—operated by private entities—will not enable tracking through space and time of vehicles linked to specific owners or drivers. Third parties Weird Al tin foil hat TeslaMondoattempting to use the system to track a vehicle would find it extremely difficult to do so, particularly in light of far simpler and cheaper means available for that purpose. The system will not collect financial information, personal communications, or other information linked to individuals. The system will enroll V2V enabled vehicles automatically, without collecting any information that identifies specific vehicles or owners. The system will not provide a ‘pipe’ into the vehicle for extracting data. The system will enable NHTSA and motor vehicle manufacturers to find lots or production runs of potentially defective V2V equipment without use of VIN numbers or other information that could identify specific drivers or vehicles. Our research to date suggests that drivers may be concerned about the possibility that the government or a private entity could use V2V communications to track their daily activities and whereabouts. However, as designed, NHTSA is confident that the V2V system both achieves the agency’s safety goals and protects consumer privacy appropriately.”

12. Consumer acceptance. If people reject V2V, or don’t get system updates — and those might be MANDATED — we’re in trouble. Ergo, “The agency is exploring ways to make such downloads automatic, but more research is needed to understand this issue fully.”

13. Malicious attacks. “NHTSA acknowledges that privacy and system security are current and relevant areas of discussion and that some may have concerns about the vulnerability of this system to malicious attack. We understand those concerns and intend to explore the risks and safeguards fully in our in-depth analysis of system security. Recently, for example, we have been in contact with DARPA bout possible protections against software vulnerabilities.” DARPA stands for Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency.

Now, back to the problem. The NHTSA has a brand new comment section for V2V technology. So far, almost every commenter is scared of it. Are we seeing a mere vocal minority, or the start of a bigger backlash over motorist civil liberties etc., with Tesla stuck in the middle — clowns to the left and jokers to the right? A quick Google search will yield all manner of nail-biting over V2V in the blogosphere. Again, just a fringe crew, or is this the start of big turbulence?

Or is Tesla developing something totally proprietary, akin to its Supercharging network, and therefore outside the scope of any brewing pushback against the feds? But If so, wouldn’t that pose an “island” problem, given the need for consistency as stressed by the NHTSA? We’ll soon find out. If you consider three years “soon.”

Also, have you ever driven in Manhattan? Ever merged into the Holland Tunnel from NJ? TeslaMondo will hereby declare that V2Teslamondo Indian intersectionV technology would cause paralysis in some situations, so it needs to be user-defeatable. Sometimes you have to use YOUR OWN JUDGEMENT or else you’ll never get home. And we’re just talking about the USA. What about V2V in other nations? Say, India for example. See that GIF? Some driving is best left to the human brain.

Tagged , , ,

5 thoughts on “Vehicle-to-vehicle tech to see backlash?

  1. Offgridman says:

    I think your concerns about letting people take over from the V2V technology are unfounded. And I can understand this with the only examples so far being simplified cruise control systems in cars,, or watching what the Google self driving car does in videos. But the California laws make that testing on public roads always be at or below the speed limit and not on any highways. And so far any animated demo videos show the V2V technology in slow motion just so our eyesight can keep up with it.
    However computers and machine technology have always been able to ‘think’ and react much faster than people, why else would all of our factories be going to robotic assembly. If the robots just made things at the same speed as people even 24 hours a day it wouldn’t justify the cost. But even the automated lathes in machine shops thirty years ago could turn out fifty or a hundred pieces in the time it would take a person.
    So when V2V is applied to all vehicles your gif of India will look just the same but with all the vehicles moving much faster. And at Manhattan tunnel all the hesitancy and stuttering of the stop and go traffic will be gone, it will be a steady flow of bumper to bumper vehicles at much faster speeds because all the cars will know at what speeds, when and where the other ones want to go without the need of human guesstimates.
    In a way you are falling into the same fallacy of the commenter’s on the V2V comment section and way underestimating the competency of the coming self driven cars and should realize that if they are made by Musk the speed and safety at which they will deliver us to our destinations.


  2. rwfahey says:

    Full adoption of V2V, when everyone has it, will likely allow beautifully lubricated traffic. Agreed. It’s the interim years that may require an “off” button. And even under full adoption, how would V2V allow travel under extreme scenarios like this:

    You’re in Times Square. It’s 4 p.m. Your light turns green. Pedestrians and bicyclists from both sides are still crossing in front of you. They don’t have V2V. A box truck is partially blocking the intersection because his V2V system yielded to someone who double-parked. Therefore, you don’t have a straight path. A cabbie in the next lane has nudged in front of you despite V2V because the alternative was hitting a street cart. So both he and you are waiting for a gap in pedestrians so someone can slip around the truck in the hopes of crossing the intersection without getting stuck at the other side with your ass end blocking cross-traffic. You have a chance to move just as your light turns yellow, but you’ll have to play chicken with one more pedestrian, cut off the cabbie, go sideways past the box truck, then play chicken with more pedestrians across the street, and then stick the front of your car partially into a garage entrance to keep your back end out of cross traffic.

    If V2V can prevent this scenario, and it’s very routine in NYC, then we’ve truly arrived in Utopia.


  3. Offgridman says:

    In the scenario that you describe, the answer is that totally self driving care will not only utilize the V2V information but also forward and side view cameras that will become standard equipment just like a lot of new cars now have backup or rear view cameras. And these will encorporate infrared to not only keep track of any pedestrians but also the cats, dogs and deer that are encountered not only in city but rural driving situations.
    It doesn’t change the fact that computer and sensor technology is quite easily going to drive our cars with much faster reactions and better able to constantly monitor the surroundings without distractions from phones, radio, or girls in short skirts than people are able to. While also keeping the passengers and surrounding vehicles and pedestrians safer.


  4. Offgridman says:

    Also as a PS, Tesla is already considering and ready to deal with these types of situations. Why else would they have bought the Israeli company a couple of months back that has developed a system for monitoring everything that is going on around the vehicle. Research into their system shows that not only do they monitor other vehicles, but everything that is around your car.


  5. rwfahey says:

    Tesla didn’t buy Mobileye, but the two companies do have a “business relationship.”


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s