5 ms·
The patent is about reading a symbol on the ground that triggers the reading of a QR-code to get precise GPS location. Roughly. Actually, the QR-code (or equiv
by Wilya 15y ago
The patent is about reading a symbol on the ground that triggers the reading of a QR-code to get precise GPS location. Roughly.
Actually, the QR-code (or equivalent) is used to fetch "instructions for performing the autonomous vehicle instruction" (which could be anything).
And the QR-code can be replaced by a lot of things (radio signal, etc).
- roc 15y agoYeah, it'd be nice if more people read patent claims before passing judgement. I took the obvious practical implementation of this to be a method to guide autonomous vehicles into a parking lot/structure. The car rolls up to the landing strip, the driver gets out, the car switches to autonomous mode, gets the connection information to the parking management server, asks for and receives a spot assignment and instructions on getting there, etc. GPS and map data are simply insufficient to handle autonomous parking. There are precious few universals in parking laws, customs, lot-flow, etc. And automatic parking is one of the unavoidable expectations of self-driving cars.
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- sliverstorm 15y agoit'd be nice if more people read patent claims before passing judgement Unlikely; that would put a real damper on the amount of righteous vitriol people can muster.
- cabalamat 15y ago> it'd be nice if more people read patent claims before passing judgement. It'd also be nice if patents were written in a language that made them readily understandable. Then more people might read them. I'm sure I'm not the only person who finds them obscure bordering on incomprehensible.
- nitrogen 15y agoIf you want more people to read patents, you need to make them more understandable (as you say), and get rid of treble damages for potentially accidental infringement of a patent you "should have" been aware of because you were reading patents.
- anigbrowl 15y ago'Make things as simple as possible, but no simpler.'
- fredliu 15y agoIn many cases, it is exactly their intention to write the patent in that obscure way, in order to have more wiggle room, and in most cases it's lawyers who write those patents, not engineers.
- danmaz74 15y agoAnd automatic parking is one of the unavoidable expectations of self-driving cars. Actually, I would be perfectly content if I only had to park my car, but it drove itself from just outside the source parking lot (or street) and the destination one. And just not having to drive on freeways (a much more controlled environment than usual roads) would be incredibly useful :)
- stbullard 15y agoDoes anyone know how this works in practice? Are any measures taken to prevent someone from spray-painting a rogue QR code on the ground to reroute traffic?
- Vivtek 15y agoYou'll need a license to purchase spray paint, of course - what are you, some kind of anarchist?
- cjfont 15y agoAre there any measures in place today preventing someone from throwing road spikes on a busy interstate?
- stbullard 15y agoThere are laws, and social mores - but those certainly don't stop people from hacking road signs or removing traffic signals.(1,2) Moreover, unlike spikes on the road, a tampered-with indicator might not be immediately obvious, even in its effects. Anyway, I finally had a chance to read through the patent; it's enough of a concern that they specifically address it: "In some embodiments, the data provided by the reference indicator 250 may be encoded or cryptographically signed for security purposes. By providing encoded or cryptographically signed data, the ability for a third party to disrupt the autonomous vehicles may be mitigated." (1) http://www.google.com/search?q=sign+hacking http://www.google.com/search?q=sign+hacking (2) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Street_sign_theft http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Street_sign_theft
- mbell 15y agoPresumably based on the wording of the patent, the QR code just contains a URL from which to fetch the actually instructions for the car. Thus I would assume there are security measures built into the instruction retrieval, SSL or some other authentication/encryption scheme. Thus simply changing the QR code wouldn't allow forged instructions to be sent to the car, you'd have to break the security on the data link.
- 15y ago
- femngi 15y agoStuff like this makes me twitch. Why are researchers so keen to have my car controlled by radio tags? The potential for abuse is seemingly never discussed because I feel that admitting it will kill this idea stone dead, as it should.
- efnx 15y agoAre you implying that researchers want to take control of your autonomous vehicle on behalf of the government or some overreaching corporation? The marker/URL scheme is just a solution to the problem of delivering instructions when needed, I don't think it's malicious.
- nitrogen 15y agoI think the implication is that researchers aren't discussing the possibility of someone else using their system to take control of your car. If you are security conscious, and your car can be controlled externally, you might want to assume that it will be controlled externally until you can prove otherwise. Look at it this way: if driverless cars are widely adopted in Country A, and the new Country A government decides to go rogue and oppressive on its citizens, the rogue government could prevent people from getting to protests by shutting their cars down remotely.
- anigbrowl 15y agoMost protests take place in cities, where one can walk. What you describe is as 'first world problem.' In repressive countries, the government just sends out some troops to establish a checkpoint and stop cars by pointing guns at the drivers. No special technology required.
- nitrogen 15y agoLet's suppose "Country A" is a country that is subject to first world problems, and that many of Country A's angry citizens are in suburbs and semi-rural areas within driving distance of ideal protest zones, but they want to express their anger in person.
- thebigshane 15y agoI think this would be a perfect opportunity to change the Title here on HN. Avoiding flame-bait is always a worth cause. Suggestion: "Google awarded patent involved with driver-less vehicles"
- jacquesm 15y agoSymbols on the ground are infrastructure, you should not be able to patent a thing like that. Imagine every company that makes vehicles having to license someone else's tech in order to be able to use public roads, or a huge variety (one for every brand) of competing symbols polluting the roads. Signs on roads == traffic signs, open formats and readable by everybody.
- notyourwork 15y agoThey won't be called public roads when this happens.
- hamrickdavid 15y agoThe person who invented the original traffic signal patented it in 1923 (http://www.google.com/patents?id=EHJoAAAAEBAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=1475024&hl=en&sa=X&ei=fmXqTsSwI4G3twexk9ztCQ&ved=0CDMQ6AEwAA http://www.google.com/patents?id=EHJoAAAAEBAJ&printsec=f...). The idea was unique, novel, and non-obvious at the time. It's easy to see an invention now that is ubiquitous and say that it's obvious.
- jacquesm 15y agoIt is not 1923.