3 ms·

Speaking of, I was just wondering the other day: Why did cars never get some sort of networking protocol, that would have let them "feel" the speed and bearing

Speaking of, I was just wondering the other day: Why did cars never get some sort of networking protocol, that would have let them "feel" the speed and bearing of other nearby vehicles and avoid collisions, jams etc? Something like that could have been implemented with radio tech available half a century ago or even sooner.

Emoticon4032 3y ago
Seems ripe for spoofed data. After all, how would you verify that what you receive from other cars is valid/real?
- Filligree 3y ago
  There are a hundred different ways to cause car accidents if that’s what you want to do; this would be adding a single, highly technical one. In practice, people just don’t do that.
  - Nextgrid 3y ago
    I disagree. Most obnoxious things you can do right now require some sort of physical presence and traceability. You can cause dangerous situations/accidents by blinding people with lasers. You can throw bricks or other obstructions on the highway, and so on. The problem is that both of these acts immediately pinpoint you (or at least your general location) as the culprit, so it's pretty risky, not just from a law enforcement point of view but also from a "brick in the face" point of view where you might get a taste of your own medicine by the angry driver whose windshield got destroyed by your mischief. A technology-based attack on the other hand is invisible. By the time someone even uncovers that this was an attack rather than a generic malfunction you're long gone or may not even have been physically there to begin with.
netsharc 3y ago
Mercedes has a concept (or maybe they have it on some models: https://group.mercedes-benz.com/innovation/case/connectivity/car-to-x-2.html https://group.mercedes-benz.com/innovation/case/connectivity... ) I look forward to the old trite HN comment of "I don't want my car to be calling home, I drive a 1980's fully mechanical car and I like it that way!"
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
calciphus 3y ago
You mean like the traffic monitoring and road hazard reporting of Waze, Google maps Apple maps, etc? Having a car directly implement that protocol instead of software on an internet connected phone is of limited additional value but adds massive complexity.
carlyfan 3y ago
Is that protocol called the brake and signal lights? Up until Silicon Valley got their hairy hands into self driving tech, there was never a need for such data to be communicated to other *cars* (not drivers).
- konschubert 3y ago
  I wonder if the families of the 19 000 who died in traffic last year in the US alone also consider this a solved problem...
fiatpandas 3y ago
Qualcomm developed a tech for this: https://www.qualcomm.com/products/automotive/c-v2x/overview https://www.qualcomm.com/products/automotive/c-v2x/overview
orev 3y ago
They already tried this probably 20 years ago. The frequencies were allocated to car companies for inter-vehicle communication for exactly this purpose, and the car companies promptly did nothing with the technology except sit on it. Finally the FCC took it back because they clearly had no intention of doing anything with it. I can’t find a source, but I’m fairly sure it has now been allocated as the 6GHz WiFi band.

Emoticon4032 3y ago

Seems ripe for spoofed data. After all, how would you verify that what you receive from other cars is valid/real?

Filligree 3y ago
There are a hundred different ways to cause car accidents if that’s what you want to do; this would be adding a single, highly technical one. In practice, people just don’t do that.
- Nextgrid 3y ago
  I disagree. Most obnoxious things you can do right now require some sort of physical presence and traceability. You can cause dangerous situations/accidents by blinding people with lasers. You can throw bricks or other obstructions on the highway, and so on. The problem is that both of these acts immediately pinpoint you (or at least your general location) as the culprit, so it's pretty risky, not just from a law enforcement point of view but also from a "brick in the face" point of view where you might get a taste of your own medicine by the angry driver whose windshield got destroyed by your mischief. A technology-based attack on the other hand is invisible. By the time someone even uncovers that this was an attack rather than a generic malfunction you're long gone or may not even have been physically there to begin with.

netsharc 3y ago

Mercedes has a concept (or maybe they have it on some models: https://group.mercedes-benz.com/innovation/case/connectivity/car-to-x-2.html https://group.mercedes-benz.com/innovation/case/connectivity... ) I look forward to the old trite HN comment of "I don't want my car to be calling home, I drive a 1980's fully mechanical car and I like it that way!"

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

calciphus 3y ago

You mean like the traffic monitoring and road hazard reporting of Waze, Google maps Apple maps, etc? Having a car directly implement that protocol instead of software on an internet connected phone is of limited additional value but adds massive complexity.

carlyfan 3y ago

Is that protocol called the brake and signal lights? Up until Silicon Valley got their hairy hands into self driving tech, there was never a need for such data to be communicated to other *cars* (not drivers).

konschubert 3y ago
I wonder if the families of the 19 000 who died in traffic last year in the US alone also consider this a solved problem...

fiatpandas 3y ago

Qualcomm developed a tech for this: https://www.qualcomm.com/products/automotive/c-v2x/overview https://www.qualcomm.com/products/automotive/c-v2x/overview

orev 3y ago

They already tried this probably 20 years ago. The frequencies were allocated to car companies for inter-vehicle communication for exactly this purpose, and the car companies promptly did nothing with the technology except sit on it. Finally the FCC took it back because they clearly had no intention of doing anything with it. I can’t find a source, but I’m fairly sure it has now been allocated as the 6GHz WiFi band.