14 ms·
Toyota Lifts the Veil on Its Guardian Driver-Assist System
- extesy 8y agoHas Toyota ever demonstrated any real-world success in autonomous driving or they only have PR articles and marketing videos?
- john-foley 8y agoI wouldn't bet against Toyota's engineers.
- rasz 8y agoWhy? They cant even make a sport car anymore, last one was 100% Subaru, and the new one will be BMW.
- offsetr 8y agoThey're awful successful & have delivered on PR & hype in the past. It's always clear when its a concept (such as the hydrogen powered vehicles) or whether its for a consumer rollout.
- threeseed 8y agoThey have demonstrated a lot of real-world success in building cars at scale and delivering new technologies to the market. They may be slower than other companies at innovating but when they do it's global and at significant scale.
- rckclmbr 8y agoToyota manufacturing is where a lot of our best practices in shipping reliable software today came from.
- jki275 8y agoI seriously doubt that given the horrendous state of their software as proven in the unintended acceleration cases.
- King-Aaron 8y agoWhat reason do you have to doubt the most successful automotive manufacturer on Earth?
- monocasa 8y agoThey are publicly known to have shitty software and software practices from the testimony during the unintended acceleration trial.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- taneq 8y agoYou're getting downvotes but I don't see any links to examples of real-world Toyota autonomous driving. Honestly I kind of feel like Toyota's still stuck in the 90s. They were ahead of the game but all they seem to have done since then is endlessly fine-tune and finesse the same vehicles.
- dazc 8y ago'...but all they seem to have done since then is endlessly fine-tune and finesse the same vehicles.' If only the other mainstream manufacturers would follow suit?
- lotsofpulp 8y agoI love the 1GR-FE/5VZ-FE/2UZ-FE engines, I would just keep buying the same car with those. Except they last for hundreds of thousands of miles, so I might only need one other in my lifetime.
- taneq 8y agoI just want a low km 2JZ-GTE so that when my 7M-GTE blows up again I have something better to replace it with. :)
- gambiting 8y agoThe worst thing that stops me from even considering them is the absolutely attrocious and outdated infotainment and dashboard design. I drove a brand new Auris and Yaris recently and jesus, it felt like being in a car from 2004 - awful, slow touchscreens with animations straight from WindowsCE era, huge unnecessary buttons on the dash(why do you get the second/minute/hour buttons for setting the clock right on the top of the dash??? How many times in the lifetime of the vehicle are you going to use them? Why give them such a prominent place?). Even their most "futuristic" vehicles like the Prius feel extremely outdated inside.
- lotsofpulp 8y ago
- justin66 8y agoThey demonstrated autonomous parking in a Lexus back when that was somewhat novel, in 2005 or 2006.
- icebraining 8y agoThat was the upgraded version :) the original came in the 2003 Prius Hybrid: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligent_Parking_Assist_System https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligent_Parking_Assist_Sys...
- conroy 8y agoHere's the full Guardian press conference from CES today https://youtu.be/SbtfdrC6Cho?t=592 https://youtu.be/SbtfdrC6Cho?t=592
- tejaswiy 8y ago> The driver might almost forget the help he’s getting, and attribute the success to his own powers I really like this idea but I feel this is the key in getting it right. Several video games achieve this feeling of seamlessness when translating raw input from a controller to in-game actions. However this does occasionally go wrong and can be a frustrating experience in video games (especially if you're playing online competitively) but in the real world it can have much more drastic consequences. Also, given the complexity of the real world, it's somewhat scary to think of a scenario where you're actually trying to take a drastic action on the road but are prevented by the system from doing-so because it feels that the action is unsafe.
- jghn 8y agoThe lane assist in my VW can get a little troublesome in areas of road construction where lane markers have been painted over and such. At times the car picks up the wrong lane area and encourages me to stay there instead of the real lane. It’s more of an annoyance than anything but it’s still a distraction when at highway speeds
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- chime 8y agoNext version should detect whether a site is under-construction (# of cones per 100m, GPS-tagged construction zone from publicly available DB, sudden speed change, unexpected traffic etc.) and turn on the soft-mode for lane-assist where it says 'You might be driving through a construction zone, so lane assist will not fight'.
- matt-attack 8y agoI feel that until a car can ascertain that it’s in a construction zone using only vision (like you and I do) we’ll never achieve what we need. Any autonomous system that relies on (or even incorporates) stored databases of any kind is implicitly worse than a teenage first time driver and should therefore not be considered acceptable.
- matte_black 8y agoThis might be a good way to lock people into a brand if they become dependent on systems like this to drive somewhat decently.
- stickfigure 8y agoThe press release says they will offer to license the technology to "all" auto makers.
- 908087 8y agoWhat happens when someone who learns to "drive" with a system like this ends up in a rental car that doesn't have it? I've personally watched friends almost side swipe cars after becoming too dependent on "blind spot detection" telling them when it's safe to change lanes.
- taneq 8y agoThe same thing that happens when someone learns to "drive" with an automatic transmission and then ends up in a rental car with a manual transmission: They sheepishly admit they can't drive the vehicle, and ask for one with more automation.
- deelowe 8y agoYou can't get out of a parking spot if you don't know how to drive stick. With this, I'm not so sure it's that straight forward. You know how to do all the functions required to drive, but then you get on the interstate, hit 70mph, turn too quickly and lose all ability to control the vehicle when it presents the slightest unexpected input, over correct, and then end up careening into 4 lanes of traffic.
- 908087 8y agoNot really comparable. It's immediately obvious to someone who can't drive a manual that they need to switch to a vehicle with an automatic transmission. Someone who learned on or became accustomed to a vehicle that transparently corrects all of their mistakes could easily end up in way over their head before realizing that the car they're driving doesn't make up for their lack of basic lane keeping skills / etc.
- code_duck 8y agoI could picture someone in between with manual transmission skills who is used to an automatic getting into trouble. Due to lack of experience they could be fine under avaerage, non-stressful conditions. But if they need to make a quick evasive maneuver, and forget that they have a manual transmission or don’t know what gear to go into, they could end up stalling the car or revving in neutral when they meant to move out-of-the-way quickly.
- tropo 8y agoIt's getting harder to buy a car without crazy stuff. I just want a car. I got one that wants to take over steering, disturbing me as I drive. I disabled that. It also wants to slam on the brakes whenever it gets confused. That misfeature must be disabled every time I start the car. Then there is the built-in cellular data and GPS and the microphone and at least 3 cameras. Yes, they are tracking me, and if they don't do worse already then it's just an involuntary software update away. Some day this will be hacked, and millions will die. That will be a memorable day.
- Casseres 8y agoCan you coverup/unplug the sensors and unplug the cellular modem?
- tropo 8y agoI suspect, from pictures seen on the internet, that the cellular modem antenna can be disconnected if I pop out the center console. This is quite a bit of trouble, with a pretty strong "warranty voided" feel to it. I intend to try it. I wouldn't know where to find the microphone.
- abakker 8y agoJust find where it plugs in. All the wires go to the same few places.
- Casseres 8y agoThe microphones usually have visible coverings in the headliner. However if privacy is your concern, just disabling the celluar modem should be enough. As for voiding any warranty, should a problem arrise, it's up to the manufacturer to prove that whatever you did caused damage. Just taking apart and reassembling a console correctly will not void your warranty. "Warranty Voided if removed/opened" labels are not legally-enforceable in the US. Just look for Youtube videos on how to take it apart (or look for repair videos for other items in the console).
- kozak 8y ago
- dougb 8y agoI'm reminded of this report from CMU on Toyota's Unintended Acceleration and Software Saftey from a few years ago. https://users.ece.cmu.edu/~koopman/pubs/koopman14_toyota_ua_slides.pdf https://users.ece.cmu.edu/~koopman/pubs/koopman14_toyota_ua_... If you haven't seen it before, its an interesting set of slides.
- lostmsu 8y agoSo what are the features of this system exactly?
- netsharc 8y agoIt won't let you drive into a ditch or into a wall (or into the back of a truck), it seems. Jet fighters (also passenger ones) nowadays are flown by computers, you push the joystick to tell it where to go, and the computers control the flight surfaces to follow your request but not beyond the point that it would fall out of the sky. And TFA seems to suggest the system will prevent crashes, so it would probably stop you if you e.g. tried to swerve into an oncoming truck.
- samfriedman 8y agoJet fighters also require computer control because their aerodynamic design is such that they would not be stable without constant computer-commanded micro-adjustments in the control surfaces.
- WrtCdEvrydy 8y agoJet fighters are inherently unstable so you can pull off combat manuevers. Regular planes are inherently stable so they can fly closer to a glider.
- Alex3917 8y ago99% of new cars sold within the U.S. are going to have basic self-driving capability in less than three years. Not really seeing what's unique about what Toyota is doing here.
- inerte 8y agoSource?
- Alex3917 8y agoBy September 2022: https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2016/03/17/automatic-emergency-braking-coming-all-cars-2022/81907516/ https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2016/03/17/automat... So actually less than four years, I thought it was for the 2022 models which would be released in late 2021.
- danso 8y agoThe story you link to refers to automatic emergency braking systems. AEB is standard in several of Toyota’s current models. The IEEE story refers to significantly more sophisticated driver-assist features. So, the difference is, different features.
- nomel 8y agoFrom the last time I looked, none of the competitors have accident avoidance beyond automatic emergency braking. Full motion planning to avoid an accident seems like a huge step forward. edit: Seeing your later comment, you seem to think this is emergency braking. The video clearly shows this goes beyond emergency braking.
- Alex3917 8y agoI get that it's not just emergency breaking. My point though is that by 2022, all new cars are going to have both the sensors and the processing hardware needed to do this. So most new cars will probably have this sort of functionality, even if they're not required to by this specific industry agreement. (Lots of cars already have this, including ones that aren't even that expensive, e.g. pretty much any Subaru.)
- TimesOldRoman 8y agoThis sounds very bad. It should be all or nothing control, at least that way people will not become marginally complacent, just out of practice (although most drivers can not drive for a month and drive again no problem).
- jedberg 8y agoI'm glad they called out the 737 crash that was attributed to automation paradox. That's a real danger here, and I hope they do something about it.
- nolemurs 8y agoI feel like this angle is massively overplayed in articles about autonomous vehicles. Is automation paradox a real issue? Absolutely. But at present, all the evidence seems to indicate that the people automated cars will save far outnumber the people they will kill. Focusing on the dangers is alarmist and misleading. The 737 crash is a good example really - I've never heard anyone with experience in the field suggest anything other than that the automation makes planes safer. Focusing instead on the fact that the automation isn't perfectly safe only makes sense if you're a media company looking to scare people.
- jedberg 8y agoI don't think it's overplayed at all. It gives people a false sense of a security when they have automation that works 99% of the time. Look at all the people who think that Teslas can drive themselves. Most of the time they are fine, but then they are lulled into a false sense of security. Sure, they get a ton of warnings, but you start to ignore the warnings when it keeps working most of the time. Heck, my car has adaptive cruise control, and I already find myself wandering sometimes, assuming that it will slam on the brakes if someone gets in front of me. And I'm well aware of the automation paradox and its dangers.
- nolemurs 8y agoThe issue I have is that when people talk about the dangers of automation they never compare them to the dangers of non-automated driving. They always make it sound as if automation is making things more dangerous. The current evidence suggests that semi-autonomous cars are on balance safer than purely human driven cars. The evidence isn't conclusive, but I've literally seen no evidence presented to support the case that semi-autonomous cars are more dangerous - at best I've seen people argue that we can't yet trust the safety claims. Teslas have been on the road long enough now and in large enough numbers that if they were really more dangerous than non-semi-autonomous cars, I think we'd have seen some non-anecdotal evidence by now. The reasonable presentation of the issue would be "semi-autonomous vehicles likely make people safer, but there are still dangers and people should pay attention." Instead, the story you're telling is "Tesla drivers are dying, semi-autonomous cars are dangerous, and you should be scared." You must see how this is misleading at best, and likely downright counterproductive from an overall safety point of view.
- AJRF 8y agoBit of an aside, but; I recently was talking to a engineering lead at Rolls Royce and asked why it seems like Silicon Valley is coming in and eating car manufacturers lunch on autopilot/auto-assist/driver-assist and he said they aren't really, none of them are very far along compared to the car companies. It's to do with the car companies engineering with an eye to redundant systems that all play harmoniously with each other rather than just tacking LIDAR onto a car and using TensorFlow to do image recognition. He pointed me to GeorgeHotz YouTube channel who developed in the open for CommaAI (now shut down), this company got 8m in funding (small cheese to a VC, but still showed there was interest in the project) and he was just googling answers and training his model on one single video he downloaded of the internet. The 'play loose and fast' with the rules approach won't fly with self-driving and the car companies are looking to build something that works in the field with as close to imperceptible failures as can be realistically allowed. The incumbents are building it right, but slow. And I would much prefer that approach if it leads to increased safety
- shaklee3 8y agoI'm pretty sure commai is not shut down. A review video was posted recently: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-52xEXhjXmY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-52xEXhjXmY
- kodablah 8y agoI always discount someone in a discussion, as you might w/ that engineering lead, when they point to the worst examples as the norm. Especially when they trivialize real efforts with things like "just tacking on X and using Y". There are arguments for methodical, and there are some methodical approaches happening outside the car industry, but to pretend that methodical is the same as opaque is folly. I think a more appropriate answer by that lead as to why it "seems" that way is due to the guardedness of the industry. Whether that manifests as safety or stagnation is a different discussion compared to what it appears like. Until it's done correctly by any side, nobody is "right" and the way it seems or not is a PR thing. At the very least, one defending the traditional car manufacturers' approaches would at least concede the impetus might never had arisen, or not for a long time, with their closeted and often-unrealized research methods. Especially if it's counter to the traditional income funnel.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- ForHackernews 8y agoIMHO, Toyota's more cautious approach to AI-augmented driving is the correct way to move towards autonomous vehicles. If we want humans to trust a computer to drive, start off by having the computer only intervene to save humans from situations where they would have crashed otherwise. Tesla's so-called "autopilot" looks shockingly dangerous and reckless in comparison, and may hinder acceptance of autonomous driving in the long-term.
- rbanffy 8y agoQuick, someone make a competitor named Colossus.