Doug DeMuro [1] tested that car a few hours ago and the "Super Cruise" according to him has issues with missing lines. This is a disaster waiting to happen.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NJ6jHgZIEPs

The Cadillac system requires your eyes on the road. It's harder to game than the systems which attempt to detect your hands on the steering wheel.

Eyes being on the road doesn't mean your mind is on the road. Looking for problems is an active process, and if your brain isn't engaged it won't matter where you're looking.

Playing with adaptive cruise's following distance can keep a driver engaged with driving situations while retaining the benefits of adaptive cruise. Not sure if there is an analogy for lanekeeping.

That is a problem even without this kind of technology.

This is a good point, although I do think there is an argument for a greater tendency to "mentally wander" if you aren't physically engaged somehow.

If you are long distance driving on straight empty highways, it is easy to get into the wandering state. I find these features only useful in those cases where engagement is difficult to maintain anyways.

Very true, and that situation is the only time the feature appears to work. Minimal repetitious physical engagement wouldn't change much I'm guessing.

Ya, I never use them for city driving. It is just that once a year cross country western trip where it comes in really handy.

I seriously question this kind of system. The Cadillac system seems to work by using IR light and cameras to make sure your eyes are open.

I worked with a system like this many years ago in a transportation research firm. The way it worked was that it used bright IR LEDs at two different wavelengths, pointed at the driver's face, and then cameras tuned to both wavelengths, and then subtracting the images to see if the driver's eyes were open.

I sat in front of this system some, but not for any long drives, and even then I felt very uncomfortable after 10 seconds or so. While humans can't directly see IR light, I definitely felt something there, probably from the very near-IR LEDs.

This is why I cringe at self-driving car efforts which depend on extremely high resolution maps, and the companies working on building those maps. Any such map is instantly out of date, so the car needs to have a good enough understanding of its surroundings to be able to ignore the map. Which means either the car is dangerously inadequate, or it doesn't really need the map in the first place. Today's GPS maps are good enough, since a map can only be trusted as a navigation guide anyway.

LIDAR has been the best solution to self-driving car vision for a little while now. Interesting to see Cadillac's solution - instead of paying for a LIDAR unit on each car, they pay for a few mapping devices and provide stale data to the car.

> Are there systems in place to automatically invalidate sections of freeway when the government modifies them? Does the government even know that Cadillac is trying to maintain its own map of the freeways?

Indeed, a highly non-optimal situation.

Cruise Automation, developing GMs robotaxis subjects it's human drivers to a month of training before they go on public roads. They're subject to regular safety audits. They keep 2 people in the car at all times. Human monitors take regular breaks. Because it's understood that monitoring a not-yet fully autonomous vehicle is excruciatingly boring, and it's very easy to get distracted or zone out.

The vigilance decrement is a well known and well understood condition of human nature, and Tesla and some of these other companies putting these automated, but not yet autonomous driving features in the public's hands are being willfully ignorant.

Musk may have well come out saying Walter Huang's autopilot death was his own dumb fault because he didn't have adamantium laced bones.