MANHASSET, NY -- In a recent example of leaving your diving to your smartphone, consumer marketer Picitup has launched a visual radar app for high-end Android handsets, which when attached to a car’s windshield, warns the driver of potential collisions.
The iOnRoad app uses the smartphone’s native camera and sensors to detect vehicles in front of the vehicle, alerting drivers when they are in danger. iOnRoad’s VisualRadar maps objects in front of the driver in real time, and sensors calculate the user’s current speed. As the vehicle approaches danger, an audio-visual warning pops up to warn the driver of a possible collision.
iOnRoad uses a visual radar by combining real-time day/night machine vision with sensor fusion and then calculates the time gap and collision potential with other vehicles and warns of high risk events.
Several new features help drivers are also helpful in the long run.. It allows drivers to share their driving achievements with others through Facebook and Twitter, such as taking a snapshot of a hazard or reckless driver and automatically posting it to Facebook.
It also allows users to improve their driving skills by viewing their latest drives and alerts.
The iOnRoad app can run in a “background mode,” allowing users to use the navigation app or take phone calls, while driving.
“The iOnRoad app could only have been developed for Android,” said Alon Atsmon, CEO of Picitup, the developers of iOnRoad. “Google was quick to embrace our app’s comprehensive use of Android and recently invited iOnRoad to present at the Google Developer’s Day in Tel Aviv.”
“This launch is just the beginning of an entirely new user experience being enabled with smartphone technology, sensors and accelerometers,” said Roger C. Lanctot, senior analyst, global automotive practice, Strategy Analytics, in a statement.
People do have a strong tendency to become dependent on technology aids. That can be a very good thing if the technology has enough coverage and is reliable enough. Take auto pilots in airplanes. Yes it does increase the risk of pilots losing some flying skills, but the safely level of commercial flying is much improved because of autopilots.
Some people might say that traction control or anti-lock breaks make drivers too dependent on technology and reduce their driving skills, but those systems do improve car safety.
Those systems are highly regulated and designed and built under very controlled conditions. Assist technology needs to cover enough of the job and be very reliable. For example, if a collision warning system detects most objects, but misses bicyclists. That's not good. Or if the software crashes periodically, that isn't good.
This piece of software may be good and reliable enough, but there's no way of really knowing. With a phone in general, that's not a problem. But when you get into life-critical systems. I want assurance that it's going to work and always work.
I am deadly serious.
You are comparing safety related real-time embedded control systems developed by teams of dedicated engineers following industry standards to a phone and some Android code. Sure both will have failures but at vastly different rates.
Look at the furor over sudden unintended acceleration.
I'm not saying that it is right but some people have forgotten the concept of personal responsibility and the lawyers are fanning the flames while laughing all the way to the bank.
I hate to say it, but give it time and some litigation happy lawyer will sue in hopes of making a quick buck. We've seen it happen many times before, sue everyone and hopefully somebody will silently settle out of court. Remove the blame from the guy asleep behind the wheel and make the 3rd party liable.
I wish you all the success in this product, as it's a great idea. Just be wary that people will become too dependant on this product and in turn, forget basic driving skills. This will ultimately lead to a crash and some lame excuse about how the app didn't beep loud enough or not at all. And before you know it, the lawyers use the shotgun approach for remedy (i.e. sue everyone). If only human nature would be as predicatble as a program.
Get serious... has anyone sued Google or Nokia for causing distracted driving?!
Furthermore, FCW and HMW are reported to reduce the crash rate by at least 5%. These systems have been in the market for several years and nobody sued BMW or ME to date though no system is 100%...
As an automotive software engineer I must say I'm flummoxed by human psycology. People sue automakers for putting the brake pedal too close to the gas pedal when they use the wrong one and then are willing to use their phone for collision avoidance. This is like suing your neighbor for slipping on ice on their sidewalk and then going skating on a pond...with thin ice...and sharks in the water...while juggling flame throwers...
I suppose the lawyers are already drafting the lawsuits naming the phone maker, Google and probably the automaker just because they have deep pockets.
I really hope this thing doesn't catch on.
David Patterson, known for his pioneering research that led to RAID, clusters and more, is part of a team at UC Berkeley that recently made its RISC-V processor architecture an open source hardware offering. We talk with Patterson and one of his colleagues behind the effort about the opportunities they see, what new kinds of designs they hope to enable and what it means for today’s commercial processor giants such as Intel, ARM and Imagination Technologies.