5G Lobbyist Argues It May Be a Long Time Before Autonomous Vehicles Reach Cities (eetimes.com) 20
Slashdot reader dkatana shares IoT Times interview with Dr. Johannes Springer, Director General for the 5G Automotive Association, an EU lobbying group pushing for the inclusion of short-range 5G wireless technology in autonomous vehicles for vehicle-to-vehicle communications. Springer describes some of the services already being tested (like in Hamburg, Germany, where even traffic lights can communicate with vehicles for "optimal speed advisories" for avoiding red lights):
We have, for instance, an initiative in Europe called a European Data Task Force, or data task force for world safety. And in this activity, millions of vehicles are already sharing safety-related data between the different car manufacturers. Of course, this data sharing exists via cellular networks. One vehicle that detects, for instance, a black ice warning, or produces a black ice warning, sends this warning via the cellular networks to other vehicles. And this consensus, the data sharing via the cellular networks, creates a lot of benefits for other traffic participants, not, by the way, just the vehicles, but also to other vulnerable road users, cyclists, pedestrians, and so on...
But they also discuss the prospects for automous vehicles beyond highway/intercity driving — and the idea of restricting them in cities to dedicated "safe corridors": Of course, the whole thing starts on a broad scale with restricted areas... And also, the private car industry is going heavily in this direction. If you take, for instance, the example of valet parking, automated parking. So, the automated driving task is restricted to a parking spot, to a parking garage: you can leave your car in front of the parking garage, and the car finds the free parking space by itself. And the same upon returning the vehicle. So this is something which takes place in the city but within a restricted area.
Suppose it goes, for instance, to buses or something like that. In that case, you can also see two examples during the ITS World Congress, two different, let's say, technical setups, where automated driving buses happen in the city. One is in a, let's say, non-controlled environment, and the vehicle drives entirely on its own, yeah? So this is shown by Easy Drive, part of Continental, a company that produces these types of systems. Of course, there is still the need to have a backup driver in the bus, which directly destroys the business case for the bus operator. And secondly, the driving speed is relatively low; I think 30 kilometers per hour or something like that.
The second example is, which is shown by Siemens, called the Heat Project, where the whole environment is completely controlled by roadside infrastructure. You have cameras and all these things equipped at the road to assess the situation and things around the bus. Personally, I don't believe that it can happen in cities or other open urban areas. Maybe, of course, if you have an airport, it might be different. But we cannot afford the necessary infrastructure, let's say, for monitoring the situation around the vehicle in real-time, whether it's a bus or another vehicle. No city is willing to pay for such an infrastructure just for the benefit of autonomous driving. So I'm pretty sure that this will not happen.
In the comments on the original submission, long-time Slashdot reader Gravis Zero discounts this as the opinion of a lobbying group advocating for specific 5G technologies (rather than using WiFi for direct vehicle-to-vehicle and vehicle-to-infrastructure communication).
But for what it's worth, the IoT Times interviewer also says "I've been talking to some experts in smart cities and some vehicle manufacturers... They say that certain types of autonomous driving have been going around for some time... But they are mainly focusing on motorways and intercity driving. We still have many problems allowing full autonomous driving in cities because of the number of different things that can happen."
But they also discuss the prospects for automous vehicles beyond highway/intercity driving — and the idea of restricting them in cities to dedicated "safe corridors": Of course, the whole thing starts on a broad scale with restricted areas... And also, the private car industry is going heavily in this direction. If you take, for instance, the example of valet parking, automated parking. So, the automated driving task is restricted to a parking spot, to a parking garage: you can leave your car in front of the parking garage, and the car finds the free parking space by itself. And the same upon returning the vehicle. So this is something which takes place in the city but within a restricted area.
Suppose it goes, for instance, to buses or something like that. In that case, you can also see two examples during the ITS World Congress, two different, let's say, technical setups, where automated driving buses happen in the city. One is in a, let's say, non-controlled environment, and the vehicle drives entirely on its own, yeah? So this is shown by Easy Drive, part of Continental, a company that produces these types of systems. Of course, there is still the need to have a backup driver in the bus, which directly destroys the business case for the bus operator. And secondly, the driving speed is relatively low; I think 30 kilometers per hour or something like that.
The second example is, which is shown by Siemens, called the Heat Project, where the whole environment is completely controlled by roadside infrastructure. You have cameras and all these things equipped at the road to assess the situation and things around the bus. Personally, I don't believe that it can happen in cities or other open urban areas. Maybe, of course, if you have an airport, it might be different. But we cannot afford the necessary infrastructure, let's say, for monitoring the situation around the vehicle in real-time, whether it's a bus or another vehicle. No city is willing to pay for such an infrastructure just for the benefit of autonomous driving. So I'm pretty sure that this will not happen.
In the comments on the original submission, long-time Slashdot reader Gravis Zero discounts this as the opinion of a lobbying group advocating for specific 5G technologies (rather than using WiFi for direct vehicle-to-vehicle and vehicle-to-infrastructure communication).
But for what it's worth, the IoT Times interviewer also says "I've been talking to some experts in smart cities and some vehicle manufacturers... They say that certain types of autonomous driving have been going around for some time... But they are mainly focusing on motorways and intercity driving. We still have many problems allowing full autonomous driving in cities because of the number of different things that can happen."
Stop it already. (Score:5, Insightful)
Stop trying to panic governments into paying for your unneeded 5G build out.
Re: (Score:2)
Stop trying to panic governments into paying for your unneeded 5G build out.
Using 5G to smooth traffic flow is way cheaper than dealing with congestion by building more lanes and bridges.
Re: (Score:3)
Using 5G to smooth traffic flow
Particularly once I've reverse engineered the V2V protocols and discovered the command for "Move over. A VIP is approaching."
Smoother for me. Oh, you meant smoother for everyone? Good luck with that.
Re: (Score:2)
Using 5G to smooth traffic flow is way cheaper than dealing with congestion by building more lanes and bridges.
I would rather see my tax dollars go to lanes and bridges than deal with harebrained dystopian flow control schemes.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The day all the infrastructure gets updated for this is never.
You must be American. But I get it. When my infrastructure is crumbling around me I too couldn't comprehend the idea that others are doing grander things with theirs.
No government is panic buying. They are investing in the next level. If you traffic lights can't even independently handle someone pushing the walk button without stopping cars from turning across an area where no people are walking then I agree this kind of thing isn't for you.
But the world isn't like that, much of our infrastructure in Europe
trick is... (Score:3)
you don't actually need 5G to achieve autonomy in vehicles.
Re: (Score:3)
You do if the point is to monetize your driving by streaming you advertising you literally cannot escape from. Just wait until your self driving car is blaring 360 degree ads at 80 dB that you cannot turn off, turn down, or disable. Just like at the gas pump or from the airline seat back :)
Re: (Score:1)
If it needs 5G to function then it is already fail (Score:4, Insightful)
If all it takes to shut down your transportation network is a failure of the cellular system, or a good jammer, then it is already untrustworthy. It needs to be able to function autonomously from cached data. Just fence it off from confusing streets and let it make the closest approach it can manage to people's actual locations and notify them of arrival location through the app for pickups.
Re: (Score:2)
If all it takes to shut down your transportation network is a failure of the cellular system, or a good jammer, then it is already untrustworthy.
What makes you think the transportation network shuts down when 5G doesn't work? It may surprise you to know that fallback mechanisms are a thing that exist, and even the dumbest of these fallback mechanisms in some countries are smarter than the smartest infrastructure in others.
"Fund our profits!" (Score:3)
The whole 5GAA lobbying group is backed by corporations that want to make money off selling short-range 5G for cars. Some just want to sell their chips to be put in cars while car manufacturers want to sell Autonomous Driving As a Service. They all say, "government needs to fund our profits!" because they are sociopaths who would sell tickets to watch someone rape their own mother. I know exactly what the people involved will say, "it's not like that, I'm just doing my job," which is how every sociopathic corporation works.
Nobody takes responsibility for their actions, they just "just doing their job". I'm pretty sure I've heard the "just following orders" excuse somewhere before.
Government control (Score:2)
One will be the police demanding a radio-controlled kill-switch in every car, similar to what OnStar offers.
Premise completely wrong (Score:2)
How is it going to be a long time if it's already happening?
There are completely autonomous taxis in Phoenix, Arizona right now, and have been for over a year. Waymo One will pick you up (without a human "safety driver" in the car), you get into an empty car and ride to your destination.
A lazy journalist interviewing a clueless industry hack does not make for an informative article.
Re: (Score:2)
No, they don't, not in Phoenix, not for over a year now. There are no drivers or any other humans in the Waymo One cars in Phoenix, other than the passengers who do not sit behind the wheel.
Before responding with any more inane drivel, maybe you should look at ANY source before posting.
There are so many results on Google: https://www.google.com/search?... [google.com] Or you could have watched any of the hundreds of videos: https://www.youtube.com/result... [youtube.com] Or just done any kind of research whatsoever other than contra
Forget about the comms being the problem (Score:2)
But let's face it, that's the least of their problems driving in cities. There are so many variables in cities from pedestrians, roadworks, other traffic, obstacles, potholes, faulty lights, weather, police & emergency vehicles etc. that they wouldn't go a single hour without doing something stupid or dangerous. If they have an alert and attentive driver who is able to monit