Vehicle-based networks get sexy names, remain impractical

While the idea of the networked car has been simmering on the back burner for years now, the farthest we've gotten is niche single-vehicle products like AutoNet -- but a pair of new proposed systems could actually get past the drawing aboard before flaming out and failing like all the rest. The first is a collision-avoidance system being developed in Europe called Vehicle2Vehicle (or V2V), which uses GPS and wireless networking to constantly analyze the speed, position and trajectory of nearby cars and alert drivers to impending collisions. The developers say the tech is simple enough to be deployed relatively rapidly, but that the mess of different in-car integration standards is keeping costs high and interest low -- which is the same problem faced by the developers of a different system called CarTorrent at UCLA. CarTorrent is more about getting cars connected, and it's pretty much what the name implies -- distributed networking across cars. The system is based on something called digital short range communication over the 5.9GHz spectrum, and it allows cars to transmit and receive navigation, media, and telemetry information -- and what's more, it's based on a proposed IEEE car-to-car networking standard called 802.11p, which should speed adoption by automakers when it's finally approved. Even still, we've been burned too many times in the past to keep our hopes alive -- guess it's back to eBay for that KITT auction.

Read - V2V
Read - CarTorrent

[Superprime @ Jan 22nd 2008 5:38AM]

I'd like you to explain why you consider it impractical

[Dougal @ Jan 22nd 2008 7:25AM]

Because they will only work if there is a critical mass, you need a lot of other cars to use it before it's worth having it in your car - catch 22. Competing standards mean it's really hard to see it ever working.

[John @ Jan 22nd 2008 8:53AM]

You know, interestingly enough, this has a benefit as being somewhat of a radar detector. I was speeding down the local roads the other day and my girlfriend was playing with my iPhone when she said, "Hey, why did this connect to 'Sheriff' network come up?" I immediately slowed down and sure enough, the bastard set up shop the next road down. I wonder if they even realize that happens?

[deedeedee @ Jan 22nd 2008 10:21AM]

and even if this thing one day comes alive, its just saving the lives now for kills later. I mean it will definitely avoid collisons, but if the system has a glitch or hacked by evil genius, it will kill us all...

[sila332 @ Jan 28th 2008 2:43AM]

Just a comment on the critical mass concern. I agree that in the open environment of todays roads it would require a high level of participation to get the powerful advantages of telematics(car to car communication). In a more restricted, dedicated roadway (say an isolated lane on the freeway) the benefits could be developed much more quickly.

[Scott Smith @ Jan 22nd 2008 8:02AM]

You've touched on one very important factor: keeping costs for consumers low, as well as complexity. This is why GPS has done well recently, costs have come down and consumers can access the technology relatively cheaply and put it in their vehicle easily, all while being able to take advantage of the global GPS network.

More about that here:

http://www.changeist.com/changeism/2008/1/21/torrents-in-traffic.html

[Jason @ Jan 22nd 2008 8:40AM]

I can see this system, should it ever come to fruition, being abused by law enforcement....

[Tyler @ Jan 22nd 2008 10:41AM]

I could see this system being used to more effectively enforce the law. The only "abuse" I see is people abusing the vulnerabilities of law enforcement.

[David Roberts @ Jan 22nd 2008 8:51AM]

What is to stop you hacking the GPS / position data? You could fake the data to make it look like you were about to collide with another car, and they'd move out of the way. Great way to clear up space on the highway.

[lars @ Jan 27th 2008 1:09PM]

Just because your car is receiving information through the network doesn't mean it couldn't develop a picture of what's going on using its own sensors. It could then report back to the net that someone(you) is screwing around.

[Mr. Picklesworth @ Jan 22nd 2008 2:22PM]

Warning:

Collision in T- 3 seconds.
Automated avoidance system will save your bacon.

Cancel or Allow?


(That dialog is modal, of course...)

[Ed @ Jan 23rd 2008 8:31AM]

I had a similar idea years ago. PorkNet.

Devices that used CB radio transmissions to relay information on exactly where the cops were at a given moment. Much better then a simple radar detector, since it transmitted a GPS location of the cop, along with a vector. It could detect radar guns and laser guns on automatically transmit the information, along with a manual entry button. Entries would have a short life span, so information could not accumulate and bog the system down. Entires would also "Hop" from device to device with a maximum distance of 50 miles. There would be unique IDs associated with each device, so spamming, DDOS of the network would be difficult since you could apply algorithms to detect devices like those and block their information.

The display would show distance to the last signal with a progressive decay based on the time of the entry. So entries that were older, would show up as a weaker "dot".

Truck Drivers would make up the bulk of the network obviously. The cops would be forced to completely jam the CB radio frequencies to stop these devices and I never saw any real effective countermeasures.

If enough of these devices were distributed in a given area, the information would be updated in near real time.

I got the idea from the nature channel watching animals that would communicate danger to each other and relay the information very quickly :)

[lars @ Jan 27th 2008 1:12PM]

cool! Make it so.