Communicating a few bits over radars is a possibility, like the way TCAS works for aircraft. There's a simple fixed-format message, agreed upon internationally, which is used to negotiate "I go up, you go down" decisions to avoid collisions. One advantage of data over radar is that you have range and bearing info on who's talking to you. At least you know where the info is coming from.
None of that information can be trusted, so maybe it's better to not even bother.
Neither can be turn signals, yet we still use them
Information that can't be trusted can still be useful.
Re:Self-Crashing Cars
by mindslight on Monday January 29, 2018 @02:13PM
(#16259880)
Neither can brake lights.
Re:Self-Crashing Cars
by marcosdumay on Monday January 29, 2018 @04:36PM
(#16260828)
Self-driving cars can work without trusting brake lights, and I think they should. It's humans that can1t use anything better.
If only it wasn't for those pesky humans, all of this wouldn't be an issue. [blocky 8-bit lightbulb appears over robot's head]
Seriously, "let's have everyone jump on the bandwagon all at once, and we shall be redeemed by $TECHNOLOGY_DU_JOUR" is a very brave proposal.
ehhh, cars shouldn't be communicating with cars they can't see. but i'd like to them to communicate over free space optical, aimed at the level of other vehicles. brake lights could be modulated to contain current braking force, and reason for braking. turn signals could contain the destination lane. head/tail lights the current speed, and target speed.