JoeyBike

Man, am I happy I no longer mix it up with highway traffic on my bikes.

And THEN, I saw THIS!!

Godspeed John Glenn cyclists! I sure wish you the best.

They will ROCK you!

livedarklions

Uh, it's showing it has automated crash avoidance. This is a good thing for cyclists. Something is really the matter with you.

rumrunn6

& that kind of technology has worked out so well for Tesla ...

Daniel4

I hope this technology will stop drivers of pickups from bullying other road users.

Bald Paul

I take issue with the way the manufacturers (and in particular, GM) are advertising the technology. Showing people with no hands on the wheel, playing patty-cake to music? What's next, a Caddy driving itself down the road while the owner is in the back seat with a 'companion'? Go to a dealer and ask the salesperson how well it works, and then ask to read the owner's manual where it will say in bold print that the driver must maintain control at all times, and is ultimately responsible for any accident or collision. I'll bet that's not what the salesperson told you.

As a now retired automotive professional (I was an instructor and regional troubleshooter for an import manufacturer and worked extensively with these technologies) I can tell you this - there are NO SYSTEMS that are foolproof. The current technology is there to help drivers who may be momentarily distracted, but it has its limitations. And, unfortunately, bicycles are often times included in that "limitations" list. So are back roads that may not have white painted lines, the type many of us seek out to ride. The list goes on and on, depending on the type of system used.

It is unfortunate that automotive advertising tends to imply that smart technology means it's okay to be a stupid driver. It's not.

Iride01 

To take exception to them driving with no hands in a vehicle made for no hands driving seems to ignore the reality that many a teen, young adult and maybe even older adult has done similar in vehicles that are not made for no hands driving.

Surely there are others of you that as a teen tried to see how far you could go with no hands on the wheel. I did. And that was back in the 70's. Was it safe? No. But none the less I and others have done such stupid things in the past and it's not going to stop regardless of what laws are made. People do stupid stuff as part of their learning process.

Personally I look forward to completely autonomous vehicles and steps like this are probably necessary to get us there to help prove out some of the technology and also find unexpected consequences and unintended situations.

I have more faith that if electronics and sensors can be made to detect cyclist, pedestrians and other such, then those will be looking for me all the time and not get distracted by a text or video they were just sent by a friend.

rumrunn6

the point is to sell the vehicles. everything else takes a back set. no pun intended

livedarklions

Just looked this up--this system will only engage on a very limited set of roads, few if any of which are likely to have any serious volumes of bicycle traffic. The roads out east are all restricted roads, interstates and the like, and the system will not go online if you're not on one of the "compatible" roads. There's also a lot of technological fixes in there to make sure the driver is remaining attentive to the road ahead. I don't think this is going to be prone to the obvious tampering that the Tesla system facilitated.

https://www.gmc.com/connectivity-tec...y/super-cruise


I'm a hell of a lot more annoyed by the "you're all doomed" taunting in the OP than any "message" in the commercial.

JoeyBike

My favorite part in the commercial is where the GM passes a semi hands free! Notice that the VEHICLE actually used a turn signal indicator!! (00:23)

livedarklions

What's your point? It's a demonstration of what the device is supposed to do--lane change on demand.

blacknbluebikes 

I'm trying to think what I am going to do with two hands while driving with full attention.
ummmm... no, I can do that with one hand.
ahhh... no, definitely not that...
errrr... oh! tie my shoes. that's really tricky one-handed. Now I can tie my shoes while I drive. Cooooool. Anything else? Anyone? Buehler?
.
Funny, this commercial unintentionally undermines the feature. "There's not much you can do with this, so we'll tie it to a Queen song that invigorates our demographic target audience." It's like, some advertising creatives scratched their heads raw trying to come up with a way to market this not-really-very-useful feature. "What will our delighted GMC Owners DO with the hands-off but stay fully engaged steering feature?" "Actually, we don't know. I'll bet they rock out and do hand-dancing." I mean, honestly, I would feel pretty stupid just sitting there with my hands on my thighs. Like, Mom said "Don't you touch that wheel, young man!" While it is truly very cool technology, and quite an engineering accomplishment, I really don't see what problem it's solving for me at the current stage of introduction. And, yeah, I know how to park the car, too.

JoeyBike

My dad would have loved it. Chain smoker always had to spark up while merging on the Interstate. Or driving some twisty back country road over the limit. Or "Don't make me stop this car" would have never been uttered - he could just turn around and smack every kid in the back seat without slowing down. I see women putting on eye liner in the rear-view, or primping their hair. Lipstick while looking at a compact mirror. Drop your cellphone under the seat? No problem. Engage hands-free setting and go diving for it. Or just got that hot cup of McDonald's coffee in hand? Or handS. Now you can flip the lid and add cream and sugar without being late for work.

How many times have I tried to open a bag of chips or a PowerBar while driving with one hand. Impossible. Now I can!

My main gripe with autonomous self driving cars is: What IF i really want to run that person over? Like someone trying to car-jack me. They jump out into my path and the danged truck STOPS?? WTF?. Now I'm scrood.

And without getting too explicit here, just imagine the X-Rated implications. Hmmmm. Can they please bring back bench seats as well!

livedarklions

If you go to the website, it's really only useful on limited access highways and won't even engage on much of anything else. It's almost like they just want to show it can do a pass to get people used to the fully automated vehicles that are supposedly coming soon.

But, yeah, this isn't really freeing the driver from much of anything except maybe a sense of instant control.

At least in my neck of the woods, I don't think this has anything to do with bicycling as none of the roads involved here allow bicycling. Maybe some of the interstates in the empty western states do, but I'm not seeing this as having much of an impact of that safety. I assume these things are pretty good at keeping the vehicles off the shoulder.

livedarklions

OK, so you really aren't going to bother to look at what this thing actually does, right?

It actually monitors your eyes to make sure you're looking forward at the road at all times. If you did all of that stuff, the system is going to disable itself.

JW Fas

Unfortunately, the truck-driving, cyclist-hating mullets who need this technology can't afford it.

Kat12

I assumed it was the novelty of the use of the turn signal... that hit me too when I watched it, lol.

I would be interested to see how this "automatic lane change" works, though. Does the vehicle decide how and when it's going to pass? How will it handle things like that person in front of you who speeds up just as you're passing them, etc.?


Or, sitting there with my hands on the wheel doing nothing. How many people's minds are going to wander?


But, if the point is that you always have to be ready to take over, then if that kid runs out in front of you just as you're smacking whoever's in the back seat or getting that coffee just right and the car doesn't catch it, you're just as screwed... and nobody in the law enforcement or judicial community is going to be impressed by "but the car was supposed to be driving!"

The other question, of course, is: how much does the car allow you to override what it does? If it wants to make the safe move but you panic or misjudge something and decide to grab the wheel and swerve, does it let you? It would have to, if it also lets you take over if it does something incorrectly, right? So what's the use? How long will it take to train people to just let the car do its thing and trust that it knows better than possible human error?


Or won't use it.

livedarklions

If it's performing lane changes properly, those are required to be signalled, so I don't get the fascination with the turn signal. From the web page, I learned that it has a maximum speed it will not violate, so if the passed car speeds up, I would presume that the ai will either stay in the passing lane, and speed up or slow down in order to return to the "traffic" lane in front of or behind the vehicle that sped up.


Agan, this won't even function unless the GPS indicates that the vehicle is on a suitable restricted access highways. If there's a child running across one of those, there's no system that can make that child safe.

This op has really nothing to do with bicycling in any form. If you're riding a bike in a 70 mph highway lane, these are going to be the least of your problems.

OP has an agenda of promoting excessive fear of bicycling on roads. I really don't think we should humor him by acting like he had anything resembling a valid point.

Iride01 

Pretty bigotted comment IMO. Although I've never had a mullet, nor do I hate cyclists. I've seen and experienced road rage toward cyclist from people driving the very expensive models of cars.

Eventually the this technology you say can't be afforded will be in the hands of those people as used vehicles as this and other technology move down into and become dominate in the used vehicle market.

Also, as the technology matures and unit production increases, other factors will make it more inexpensive in the future.

I-Like-To-Bike

Bigoted comments and emotional rants, often including references to banal negative stereotypes about motorists and/or government officials (especially law enforcement and judicial personnel), are par for the course in A&S. This thread is a typical example of such w/o any rational content concerning bicycling safety or bicycling advocacy.

Probably is more suitable for Trollheim

livedarklions

Do you have that on a macro or do you actually have to type that out every time you repeat it?

This thread is even worse than you describe--it's actually a piece of anti-bicycling advocacy. This technology driven in a context in which literally no one is bicycling will somehow make it more unsafe for cyclists to go on the road. Or people clapping in a commercial will make people drive unsafely. Or something..... Stay off the bikes, kids! The world is a dark and dangerous place and you're going to get killed.

Daniel4

Uh, oh. Can this thread be saved? It looks like the same two people are going to turn this into an "argue over the corpse" thread.

Kat12

The point is that it's common for people not to use their turn signals, so people like the idea that a car at least would do so, unlike a fair number of human drivers.


Right. This particular vehicle, at this particular point in time. Isn't the point of autonomous vehicles, though, that they will eventually be driving themselves everywhere on every type of road? Therefore, it's not exactly inappropriate to discuss where this technology is going.


My comments weren't really about bicycling, either, so... But it seemed the thread had evolved into a discussion of autonomous vehicles in general (if it was ever even anything else to begin with).

dragoonO1

The problem with this vehicle is the size, mass, high center of the passenger cabin, inherent blind spots, and the height of the grill places human bodies and small cars with people inside them at extreme risk of grievous bodily harm and death in the event of a collision.

edit: I'm all for automated safety features, especially emergency braking systems that may trigger if the vehicle operator hasn't engaged the brake in time.

https://www.google.com/search?q=incr...isks+to+others

livedarklions

This thread is about op's hysterical attempts to scare people from riding their bikes. The ad was for a particular system that has nothing to do with cycling. The ad really isn't a good basis for a discussion of autonomous vehicles in relation to cyclists.

Bald Paul

If you did all that stuff (i.e.: pay attention to the road) you probably didn't need the system to begin with.

The concept of totally autonomous vehicles, in my humble (and professional) opinion, will only work when all vehicles on the road are autonomous. Expand the technology so that each vehicle broadcasts it's speed, direction, intended movement, etc to all the vehicles in the immediate area, so that they will all work together proactively to avoid a situation rather than reactively to one which occurs.

Think of it this way. A vehicle is on a highway entrance ramp. It broadcasts to cars on the highway that it is going to merge into traffic. It receives signals of speed and distance, and make the appropriate adjustments. At the same time, the vehicles on the highway are adjusting to allow a smooth, seamless merge. Current technology means the car on the highway with current automatic braking, side collision avoidance and lane change doesn't realize some idiot is coming up the ramp and is going to 'merge' going 25 MPH slower than traffic. It 'sees' the car as it enters the traffic lane, and immediately has to decide if it should slam on the brakes (whoops, car behind is controlled by a human, who is texting) or swing into the left lane (hopefully there's some room.)

Don't get me wrong. My wife's car has all the bells and whistles currently available, and they have helped her in some situations. However, an inattentive driver at a traffic circle recently took out her LF fender, even though she and her car did everything possible to avoid the collision.