A car for blind people? I find the idea more than a little disturbing...

[paladin]

Yep, you read that right. I just learned that the National Federation of the Blind here in the US is partnering with Virginia Tech to try and develop a car that they claim a blind person will be able to drive totally indipendently. Ok, those of you here on the forum who've known me for any length of time will know that i happen to be one of the target audience, so to speak. Even so I, like many other blind folks, am extremely skeptical about the whole business. They claim you'll be able to be made aware of hazzards on the road via sensor technology, but to be quite frank I don't think this feedback, whatever form it takes, can realistically be received in time for the person to act. You're generally driving at 55 miles an hour or whatever the speed limit, assuming of course we're talking about a responsible driver, of which there seem to be fewer and fewer these days. Even setting that aside, we still can't see traffic lights so the car itself would have to be able to alert you to a red, green or yellow light, again in time for you to be able to stop. They talk big but they really don't explain how they propose to pull this off. But there's an article with a link to it right there on the NFB's main page. If you're curious you can check it out at www.nfb.org. It'd be hard to miss the right link once you get there.

[Lightwielder]

Yep, you read that right. I just learned that the National Federation of the Blind here in the US is partnering with Virginia Tech to try and develop a car that they claim a blind person will be able to drive totally indipendently. Ok, those of you here on the forum who've known me for any length of time will know that i happen to be one of the target audience, so to speak. Even so I, like many other blind folks, am extremely skeptical about the whole business. They claim you'll be able to be made aware of hazzards on the road via sensor technology, but to be quite frank I don't think this feedback, whatever form it takes, can realistically be received in time for the person to act. You're generally driving at 55 miles an hour or whatever the speed limit, assuming of course we're talking about a responsible driver, of which there seem to be fewer and fewer these days. Even setting that aside, we still can't see traffic lights so the car itself would have to be able to alert you to a red, green or yellow light, again in time for you to be able to stop. They talk big but they really don't explain how they propose to pull this off. But there's an article with a link to it right there on the NFB's main page. If you're curious you can check it out at www.nfb.org. It'd be hard to miss the right link once you get there.

Not at all to belittle your concerns for safety, but there's also the fact that they're spending likely millions (if not billions) of dollars in the middle of an economic recession.

It doesn't sound smart. Blind people HAVE methods of transport. I was out on a walk, and I saw a blind person get off a bus. I know that they can (AT THE VERY LEAST) use the bus. I'm certain that many more options are still available to them. This is dangerous, risky, and just plain stupid.

Like the idea of Labor Unions, the IDEA sounds great, but how well will it work once you throw PEOPLE into the mix. Too many people are irresponsible and stupid for this to work on such a grand scale. Even many people who can see are still not responsible enough to drive safely.

I agree wholeheartedly with you, Paladin.

[texlaw1992]

I have an easier solution - use an ordinary car, but hire a chauffeur at $10/hour or so. A heck of a lot cheaper.

[thingirl]

Like the idea of Labor Unions, the IDEA sounds great, but how well will it work once you throw PEOPLE into the mix. Too many people are irresponsible and stupid for this to work on such a grand scale. Even many people who can see are still not responsible enough to drive safely.

Agreed.

Now, if the car could drive itself and you could set it where to go via GPS... But, no, that's even more frightening...

[Andras]

Even if they do manage to create a method of alerting the blind driver to the lights, how consistent will it be? If it uses a camera of sorts to pick up the color, will it still be able to if it is raining or there is some other obstruction?

[paladin]

Even if they do manage to create a method of alerting the blind driver to the lights, how consistent will it be? If it uses a camera of sorts to pick up the color, will it still be able to if it is raining or there is some other obstruction?

All excellent points, and ones which most blind folks with few exceptions seem willing to consider. Blowing all this money during an economic recession on a project that won't produce results for years if ever, not to mention the practical aspects such as the rain interfering with whatever monitors the lights. As for hiring a driver, that's "depending on others for help," which the NFB is very firmly against. The same would be true if they developed a fully automated car which the blind person could just tell where to go. They want us to actually be able to drive the car since in their words "Driving has wrongly been assumed to be a privillege available only to the sighted." And there are a disturbing number of sighted folks who can't seem to see what's right in front of them when driving. Heck, the NFB doesn't even allow the use of folding canes if you attend their training programs. According to them, using a folding cane is "attempting to hide your blindness," whatever that means. They don't even really support the use of guide dogs, although I've never been able to get a straight answer as to why. Not only that but getting back to the car, even if by some miracle this turns out to work exactly as the folks at Virginia Tech and the NFB expect it will (they already claim to have had some small successes), chances are that like everything else for the blind..well almost everything else, it's going to be far too expensive for the average blind schmoe to afford. And not every company that makes assistive technology allows time payments, which would be the only realistic way for a blind person, particularly one who's unemployed like myself, to afford something like this. And they'd need to have access to the car during that period in order to make it worthwhile. So no, I don't see this taking off, least of all during my lifetime. And I'm already thirty. Sure blind people have made major progress and will doubtless continue to do so but I stand by the belief that driving is and will forever be beyond us. As much as I hate public transportation it's still cheaper and generally less risky.

[paladin]

Well I did some more research and there are actually a few videos on YouTube about this already since the first prototype of this blind drivable vehicle is supposedly going to be demonstrated in Daytona, Florida on January 29, 2011. One video is done by a blind girl who just read the article on the NFB's web site and another was uploaded by The Auto Channel and actualy takes the form of one of those spot news stories or whatever that they might use to fill up the corners. And you wouldn't believe how excited those blind people, assuming of course they weren't just actors playing parts, were to hear about this car. I wanted to tell them don't get too excited, folks. It may not be in your lifetime if ever.

[Oldschool]

Here's the links to the YouTube vids Paladin mentions.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fj8zlvK35LA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wf-zNYu7V68&feature=related


Well the technology is probably here or close. But I'm inclined to agree with Paladin - the practical application is farther away than it is closer.

And I'm sure the insurance companies, public opinion, and so on would have their own views which could affect the various regulatory agencies decisions on such vehicles and drivers.

Plus the plain truth in my opinion is that often technology is often rushed without enough testing. Plus often we are depending on too much techno stuff in vehicles nowadays. Look at all the recent ACKNOWLEDGED problems occurring with system failures in vehicles recently.

After all, I couldn't agree with Paladin more when he says that "...there are a disturbing number of sighted folks who can't seem to see what's right in front of them when driving...".

A little off topic warning...

Still and not to make light of the issue or blindness I couldn't help but think of a scene in "If You Could See What I Hear". This is the autobiography of blind musician/actor/author/etc... Tom Sullivan played by Beastmaster's Marc Singer. The scene I'm thinking about is when Sullivan is driving a car and they get pulled over. When the cops ask him why he's driving after being told that he's blind the reason he gives is that everyone else is drunk. Don't know if that has any basis in truth or is just pure Hollywood fluff added but it should put things into perspective.

As with distracted drivers there are other reasons sighted folks shouldn't be on the road. Given the right technology and application of it blind drivers should be able to share the road.

[paladin]

Here's the links to the YouTube vids Paladin mentions.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fj8zlvK35LA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wf-zNYu7V68&feature=related


Well the technology is probably here or close. But I'm inclined to agree with Paladin - the practical application is farther away than it is closer.

And I'm sure the insurance companies, public opinion, and so on would have their own views which could affect the various regulatory agencies decisions on such vehicles and drivers.

Plus the plain truth in my opinion is that often technology is often rushed without enough testing. Plus often we are depending on too much techno stuff in vehicles nowadays. Look at all the recent ACKNOWLEDGED problems occurring with system failures in vehicles recently.

After all, I couldn't agree with Paladin more when he says that "...there are a disturbing number of sighted folks who can't seem to see what's right in front of them when driving...".

A little off topic warning...

Still and not to make light of the issue or blindness I couldn't help but think of a scene in "If You Could See What I Hear". This is the autobiography of blind musician/actor/author/etc... Tom Sullivan played by Beastmaster's Marc Singer. The scene I'm thinking about is when Sullivan is driving a car and they get pulled over. When the cops ask him why he's driving after being told that he's blind the reason he gives is that everyone else is drunk. Don't know if that has any basis in truth or is just pure Hollywood fluff added but it should put things into perspective.

As with distracted drivers there are other reasons sighted folks shouldn't be on the road. Given the right technology and application of it blind drivers should be able to share the road.

Probably Hollywood fluff. Hollywood can never let a good story rest on its own merits. Look at the Lord of the Rings films as an example, despite its being a fantasy. As much as I love those movies there are definitely somethings that Peter Jackson added that in my opinion contribue nothing to the story and, more to the point, contract things Tolkien himself states explicitly at various points. At no time in the novels did I recall Aragorn trying to renounce his birthright, even if he did feel some guilt for Isildur's failure. Not only that but the scenes between Frodo and Faramir, when Tolkien stated that Faramir would never have taken the ring even if rejecting it meant the end of Gondor, even if the ring were lying abandoned by the wayside. Hollywood generally shows just as little respect to true stories as far as I'm concerned. So I somehow doubt that Tom Sullivan was driving a car since he would have had no way of knowing where he was going, much less what might have been in his way. And I agree that not only is the NFB overreaching itself as far as I'm concerned but even if they might be right they're rushing. Of course I've never had much respect for the NFB for various reasons so that admittedly does tend to make me even more skeptical. And as Lightwielder said the fact that they'd spend this much money on something this farfetched, much less during an economic down time, speaks volumes about them. THey should be working on getting more audio walk signals put in, particularly at some of the busier streets. I actually tried to get one put in near the house I lived in in Portland, Oregon some thirteen years ago. It was an intersection that had been proven dangerous since not long before two young children were killed. And yet a lot of orientation instructors who work with the blind are against such systems since they think we depend on them too much. Wel I spent I don't know how many years trying to get one installed and it wasn't until after i'd moved out that my mother learned that they were working on installing one. And the NFB is one of those organizations that are against such things along with folding canes, guide dogs and, well just doing things your own way. I won't deny that the idea they're tossing around is intriguing and nor could I deny the fact that I do wish I could drive, but I've accepted the fact that I'll never be able to do so, since not only is this blind drivable car not likely to appear during my lifetime if ever, but I wouldn't have an operation to restore my vision even if there was one. I can't miss something I've never had after all. And I don't doubt that a lot of blind people, the ones who seem more sensible at any rate, aren't going to take to this car business either since they've learned to get where they need to go in a manner they're content with.

[Doolipalally]

I'm fascinated by the view you're giving us of the NFB. I can appreciate the idea that they want to encourage blind people to be independent, but it does seem odd that they're not keen on things like canes and blind dogs, since when I knew a man who used a guide dog he used to talk about how the dog was what gave him independence.

I also smiled at the idea that hiring a driver is 'depending on other people', since I know a lot of expats here in Moscow who do just that. It's not just blind people who don't have their own car! I don't either, at the moment, and while I don't hire a driver I don't see it as making myself dependent if I use a taxi. It would be a shame if the NFB stance led to blind people feeling that they shouldn't do things which sighted people do without a qualm.

[Lightwielder]

Probably Hollywood fluff. Hollywood can never let a good story rest on its own merits. Look at the Lord of the Rings films as an example, despite its being a fantasy. As much as I love those movies there are definitely somethings that Peter Jackson added that in my opinion contribue nothing to the story and, more to the point, contract things Tolkien himself states explicitly at various points. At no time in the novels did I recall Aragorn trying to renounce his birthright, even if he did feel some guilt for Isildur's failure. Not only that but the scenes between Frodo and Faramir, when Tolkien stated that Faramir would never have taken the ring even if rejecting it meant the end of Gondor, even if the ring were lying abandoned by the wayside. Hollywood generally shows just as little respect to true stories as far as I'm concerned. So I somehow doubt that Tom Sullivan was driving a car since he would have had no way of knowing where he was going, much less what might have been in his way. And I agree that not only is the NFB overreaching itself as far as I'm concerned but even if they might be right they're rushing. Of course I've never had much respect for the NFB for various reasons so that admittedly does tend to make me even more skeptical. And as Lightwielder said the fact that they'd spend this much money on something this farfetched, much less during an economic down time, speaks volumes about them. THey should be working on getting more audio walk signals put in, particularly at some of the busier streets. I actually tried to get one put in near the house I lived in in Portland, Oregon some thirteen years ago. It was an intersection that had been proven dangerous since not long before two young children were killed. And yet a lot of orientation instructors who work with the blind are against such systems since they think we depend on them too much. Wel I spent I don't know how many years trying to get one installed and it wasn't until after i'd moved out that my mother learned that they were working on installing one. And the NFB is one of those organizations that are against such things along with folding canes, guide dogs and, well just doing things your own way. I won't deny that the idea they're tossing around is intriguing and nor could I deny the fact that I do wish I could drive, but I've accepted the fact that I'll never be able to do so, since not only is this blind drivable car not likely to appear during my lifetime if ever, but I wouldn't have an operation to restore my vision even if there was one. I can't miss something I've never had after all. And I don't doubt that a lot of blind people, the ones who seem more sensible at any rate, aren't going to take to this car business either since they've learned to get where they need to go in a manner they're content with.

Blind people? This goes way beyond just blind people. Society as a whole is too dependent on technology for one little group to decide that they're above that. THINK ABOUT IT! They're trying to solve technology dependence with...technology. They have, through and through, negated there own intention. After the good intentions are eliminated, what remains? Let me tell you, it's rarely good. If they want blind people to be independent, encourage them to walk. How else would you really be "independent" to the extent at which they're trying?

*sigh* Sorry, I sound cynical, don't I... Sadly, the line between cynicism and realism is so thin that they seem identical.

[Young Ned]

This conversation reminds me of a <collection of stories by Ray Bradbury (http://www.amazon.com/Driving-Blind-Ray-Bradbury/dp/0380789604/)> I read a couple of years ago.

I don't remember much about the book, or its title story, but I do recall liking both. And yes, the title story was about exactly what we're talking about here -- it's not a metaphor or anything like that...

[paladin]

I'm fascinated by the view you're giving us of the NFB. I can appreciate the idea that they want to encourage blind people to be independent, but it does seem odd that they're not keen on things like canes and blind dogs, since when I knew a man who used a guide dog he used to talk about how the dog was what gave him independence.

I also smiled at the idea that hiring a driver is 'depending on other people', since I know a lot of expats here in Moscow who do just that. It's not just blind people who don't have their own car! I don't either, at the moment, and while I don't hire a driver I don't see it as making myself dependent if I use a taxi. It would be a shame if the NFB stance led to blind people feeling that they shouldn't do things which sighted people do without a qualm.

Oh the NFB is only against canes that fold up. They consider them as ways of trying to hide your blindness, whatever the heck that means. It's ironic really since they're all for the telescopic canes, which I've used and hate with a passion for the simple reason that they collapse on you at the most inconvenient moments. But you should hear the high and mighty tone the president of the NFB uses in that article when he talks about how driving has "wrongly been assumed to be beyond blind people." or whatever he actually says. Something to that effect definitely.

[thingirl]

OK. Sorry if I sound rude, I'm not trying to show disrespect to anyone (well, except maybe the President of the NFB).

"Driving has wrongly been assumed to be beyond blind people." Umm, isn't the definition of blind that the person can't see? And if they can't see, it's just not safe for them to drive! The only possible way would be a self-driving car.

Although, if I had my pick of driving with a teenage driver in a hurry, a drunk driver, or a blind driver in a car specially designed for them with extra safety precautions (that is, assuming that it's actually viable); then I'd chose the blind driver. All three are dangerous, but the special car is the least so. Probably.

[paladin]

OK. Sorry if I sound rude, I'm not trying to show disrespect to anyone (well, except maybe the President of the NFB).

"Driving has wrongly been assumed to be beyond blind people." Umm, isn't the definition of blind that the person can't see? And if they can't see, it's just not safe for them to drive! The only possible way would be a self-driving car.

Although, if I had my pick of driving with a teenage driver in a hurry, a drunk driver, or a blind driver in a car specially designed for them with extra safety precautions (that is, assuming that it's actually viable); then I'd chose the blind driver. All three are dangerous, but the special car is the least so. Probably.

Well a self-driving car is exactly what the NFB is trying to avoid since we would still be "depending on others," even if just the car. Apparently that's still not acceptable. Supposedly the way this is going to work, at least part of it, is that the driver wears slecial gloves with vibrating motors inside them not unlike what video game controllers use. Somehow these gloves will tell you when to turn. It still doesn't explain how you'll know where the other cars are, nor how you'll monitor the traffic lights. And that's not even including monitoring gas and oil levels and whatnot. I've mentioned this to all the blind people I know from the net and while a few of them do seem to see sense you should hear most of them. "I'm gonna be able to drive!" Or in the case of those who lost their sight later in life, "I'll be able to drive again!" Sorry folks, try not to get your hopes up. Even if the folks at Virginia Tech have indeed stumbled on something (they're the ones actually doing the research), it's likely going to take years before it's been prefected for blind folks' use. Then as folks like Oldschool and Young Ned have pointed out they'll have to get approval from folks in the publice and whatnot. What I want to know, even if they're right, is what they're going to do about a drivers' test for us since we can't read the chart from various distances.

[Doolipalally]

Well a self-driving car is exactly what the NFB is trying to avoid since we would still be "depending on others," even if just the car. Apparently that's still not acceptable.

I still find their attitude odd. I appreciate that teaching blind people independence is extremely important, and that independence needs to be mental as well as practical. But I find it odd that they don't want blind people to do things that I as a sighted person would do quite happily - like hire a driver, or ride in a self-driving car (well, I'd do it happily if I knew it worked!). It seems that they're imposing a double standard, which defeats the object of the exercise. Surely blind people should be able to choose what services they want to use, just as sighted people do?

[paladin]

I still find their attitude odd. I appreciate that teaching blind people independence is extremely important, and that independence needs to be mental as well as practical. But I find it odd that they don't want blind people to do things that I as a sighted person would do quite happily - like hire a driver, or ride in a self-driving car (well, I'd do it happily if I knew it worked!). It seems that they're imposing a double standard, which defeats the object of the exercise. Surely blind people should be able to choose what services they want to use, just as sighted people do?

Exactly. Nor should they be taught only one method for doing things, which is what NFB training centers are famous or perhaps infamous for. And this one size fits all mentality is the biggest reason I don't like the NFB. If you've discovered that a folding cane works for you you should never be denied the option of using it even in an instructional setting. And since they're the ones who challenged Virginia Tech to develop a blind friendly car I wouldn't be surprised if they tried to impose their own rules on driving it, at least if they were the ones teaching you its operation.

[thingirl]

So, in other words, the NBF is saying it's trying to help the blind, but really it's just trying to dictate their every move?

[Lightwielder]

So, in other words, the NBF is saying it's trying to help the blind, but really it's just trying to dictate their every move?

Which, of course, is not independence. Excellent point, TG.

It still doesn't explain how you'll know where the other cars are, nor how you'll monitor the traffic lights. And that's not even including monitoring gas and oil levels and whatnot.

And the fact that there are so many different (and variable) driving situations once you're actually ON the road that they don't explain in the book, and many of them don't need fancy technology, but simply proper judgement.

How is Virginia Tech going to work THAT into the equation, I wonder?

[paladin]

Which, of course, is not independence. Excellent point, TG.



And the fact that there are so many different (and variable) driving situations once you're actually ON the road that they don't explain in the book, and many of them don't need fancy technology, but simply proper judgement.

How is Virginia Tech going to work THAT into the equation, I wonder?

That, of course, is what I haven't been able to get a straight answer about. As for Thingirl's question it certainly does seem that the NFB wants to dictate the blind's every move. They want to help the blind find independence but on their terms. About the only thing I've ever agreed with the NFB on was their outrage over the film Blindness, which was released a few years back. THe entire population of a city went blind mysteriously and it turned into a sort of Lord of the FLies situation. Unfortunately there are plenty of folks who'll see that movie and judge every blind person they meet by that film. It's hard enough for us to find meaningful work as it is. This film portrays us all in an extremely negative manner, and never mind that it's a mass hysteria thing.

[Lightwielder]

I haven't seen that movie, so I wouldn't know, I suppose.

[paladin]

I haven't seen that movie, so I wouldn't know, I suppose.

Well I've been in a heated Comment argument on Youtube with Cinderellascene924, the girl who uploaded the first car for the blind! video. She thinks I have a negative attitude and that I'm "sittin' on my ass feelin' sorry fo myself." And that was pretty much ow she wrote it. I explained to her as politely as I could that I was in fact looking for a job but that due to the economy people just weren't hiring, much less hiring blind folks. Getting back on topic to our discussion, which had up to that point been reasonably civil (I don't know what I said to upset her so much), I tried to point out to her that even setting aside the financial concerns involved in getting such a vehicle even if one is someday developed and proven beyond all doubt to be accessible, there are just too many variables involved in driving. And how is the nonvisual interface supposed to handle changes in the environment, whether physical or weather-related? I've been trying to explain to her that while I am indeed intrigued by the concept I'm not willing to let myself get excited as a lot of other blind people are, at least until I know a lot more. FOr one thing I want to know how this car is supposed to handle changes in the environment that might interfere with it monitoring and interacting with traffic lights. And how is it supposed to show us what's around us? They said something about forcing air through small holes in a plastic or metal grill (I forget exactly what it was), but I don't see how forced air is going to show blind people a map of the surrounding area.

[Lightwielder]

I commend your passion for this subject, Paladin. You've certainly thought this whole thing through.

[paladin]

I commend your passion for this subject, Paladin. You've certainly thought this whole thing through.

Well I've had my whole life to do so. That isn't to say that if I ever had the chance to drive one of these cars I might not change my views but that's probably the only thing that might convince me. But as I said even if it does prove viable technically I don't believe it'll ever be financially feasible.

[texlaw1992]

This discussion reminded me of the movie "Blind Fury" starring Rutger Hauer as a blind ninja / samurai type character. He winds up driving at high speed down a road in a van and of course cuts off the guy driving next to him. This scene ensues:

Other Driver: What are you, blind?

Rutger Hauer: Yeah!

Other Driver: (Goes off in the opposite direction with fear on his face).

[paladin]

This discussion reminded me of the movie "Blind Fury" starring Rutger Hauer as a blind ninja / samurai type character. He winds up driving at high speed down a road in a van and of course cuts off the guy driving next to him. This scene ensues:

Other Driver: What are you, blind?

Rutger Hauer: Yeah!

Other Driver: (Goes off in the opposite direction with fear on his face).

Except that with this new car you'll supposedly be able to avoid situations like that. I don't understand how it's supposed to work, well except that it supposedly uses vibrating gloves and forced air, but how these are supposed to give you a map of your surroundings and tell you when to turn I don't know. But as I probably said earlier I've been having a heated argument with Cinderellascene924, she of the first car for the blind! video, and she seems to refuse point blank to consider the possibility that this might not prove viable, much less the sorts of problems that could arise. And then of course there's the problem of persuading your local voc rehab agency, or rather their superiors, to assist with the cost of getting such a vehicle if it does prove viable. Although I suppose if we're allowed to make payments on it the way sighted folks are that part at least might be manageable. But first we have to get there, and there's no guarantee that we will.

[Snake]

I don't see it really happening. If it does then I feel sorry for the people that they hit because even if the car has the best tech. and there are ways of warning them of a red, yellow, and green light doesn't mean that will do what they are suppose. Or for them to make a turn. It doesn't seam possible to me. A BLIND person driving. What other crazy stuff will they come-out with.

[Lightwielder]

Possible? Yeah, it's possible. One of the things that must be realized, especially in these situations is that it IS possible. To completely shut our mind to that would be unwise.

What we're concerned is that variable human element. Whether it be what's called "human error" in the design, or stupidity in the laws and regulations, or simply irresponsibility in the driving.

The idea is too delicate to expect everything to go perfectly, something is bound to go wrong.

[paladin]

Possible? Yeah, it's possible. One of the things that must be realized, especially in these situations is that it IS possible. To completely shut our mind to that would be unwise.

What we're concerned is that variable human element. Whether it be what's called "human error" in the design, or stupidity in the laws and regulations, or simply irresponsibility in the driving.

The idea is too delicate to expect everything to go perfectly, something is bound to go wrong.

And that's what I've been trying to point out to her. But again she refuses to see it. Her response was get a positive outook about it! And yes, she forgot the L LOL.

[Draxas]

Wow
What an extremely interesting topic.
I have been driving BIG RIG for 20 plus years.
Been in just about every industry involving BIG TRUCKS, from the Haul Rd in Ak, ice roads in Yellow Knife Canada, to the Couta and Libre roads of Baha Mexico.
Learn to drive in the Colorado Mountains, was always very secure about my profession.
I figured no machine can do my job, at least not in the nears future, well I figured wrong.
A couple of years back, I was at a Big Truck competion/show.
At this show in Nashville, I watched a truck complete a very novice training course where speeds of 45 were attained, left, and right hand turns, and then finally do a back in with a 53 ft trlr.
No big deal except that no one was driving it, and now I see cars that can parallel park themselves.
Blind people who can drive down the highways, probably closer than we all think.

LA already has a system in place on certain highways, they have been working with for 5 or more years, that incorporates the use of magnets, to initiate the use of computers and sensors, thats right cars that drive themselves. I am not sure which college is doing this study with the state of California, but last I heard, once the human error is removed the possibility of car accidents drops by more than 80%.

In summary blind driving is already here, they are just un-maned, vehicles

[paladin]

Wow
What an extremely interesting topic.
I have been driving BIG RIG for 20 plus years.
Been in just about every industry involving BIG TRUCKS, from the Haul Rd in Ak, ice roads in Yellow Knife Canada, to the Couta and Libre roads of Baha Mexico.
Learn to drive in the Colorado Mountains, was always very secure about my profession.
I figured no machine can do my job, at least not in the nears future, well I figured wrong.
A couple of years back, I was at a Big Truck competion/show.
At this show in Nashville, I watched a truck complete a very novice training course where speeds of 45 were attained, left, and right hand turns, and then finally do a back in with a 53 ft trlr.
No big deal except that no one was driving it, and now I see cars that can parallel park themselves.
Blind people who can drive down the highways, probably closer than we all think.

LA already has a system in place on certain highways, they have been working with for 5 or more years, that incorporates the use of magnets, to initiate the use of computers and sensors, thats right cars that drive themselves. I am not sure which college is doing this study with the state of California, but last I heard, once the human error is removed the possibility of car accidents drops by more than 80%.

In summary blind driving is already here, they are just un-maned, vehicles

That's not what the NFB is trying to do in their work with VIrginia Tech. A self-driving vehicle would go against the NFB's general philosophy of blind people being able to do everything the sighted can do. A self-driving vehicle would in their eyes come under the heading of relying on others for something you should be able to do for yourself, even though you are not strictly speaking relying on another person. As I understand it the theory is that the blind driver will wear either a set of gloves or a vest or both, which would be equipped with vibrating motors sort of like in cell phones or even video game controllers for force feedback. The theory is that these gloves, vvests or whatever would provide tactile feedback about when to turn and in which direction. The other part of this involves some sort of small metal or plasticc grill, sort of like a speaker grill on a car stereo's speakers would be my understanding, which would force air through its holes as the car was driven. THis would supposedly, although I don't for the life of me understand how this would work, provide some sort of nonvisual map of the area around the car to warn you of obstacles and things. And supposedly it's going to be able to interact in some way with the traffic lights to warn you if they're red, green or whatever. What has me skeptical is whether or not it'll be able to provide all this feedback quickly enough for someone without vision to be able to react in time.

[thingirl]

This reminds me of something my cousins tried one. If forget exactly why this one didn't work, but I think it was something like the average reaction time of a Human is 4 seconds. Which increases the time to react when you have more than one person.... :)

They were both under 15 at the time.

The older: "Mom, we can drive!"

My Aunt: "No, you can not!"

Older: "Yes, we can! I'll steer and look for lights and stuff, and [his brother] can work the pedals!"

[texlaw1992]

I still remember there were people in my Driver's Ed class who insisted on driving with two feet, one for the gas and one for the brake. I pity those in front or back of them the day they used the wrong one.

[scout1idf]

I still remember there were people in my Driver's Ed class who insisted on driving with two feet, one for the gas and one for the brake. I pity those in front or back of them the day they used the wrong one.

Actually, I use both feet as you describe. I tend to jam on the break if I only use my right foot.

Strangely tough, when I (rarely) drive a stick shift, I have no trouble using my feet the "proper" way. I don't even jam on the break with my right foot. I don't know why I can do it correctly with a stick but not with an automatic.

As long as it works i guess.....

[Young Ned]

As I understand it the theory is that the blind driver will wear either a set of gloves or a vest or both, which would be equipped with vibrating motors sort of like in cell phones or even video game controllers for force feedback. The theory is that these gloves, vvests or whatever would provide tactile feedback about when to turn and in which direction. The other part of this involves some sort of small metal or plasticc grill, sort of like a speaker grill on a car stereo's speakers would be my understanding, which would force air through its holes as the car was driven. THis would supposedly, although I don't for the life of me understand how this would work, provide some sort of nonvisual map of the area around the car to warn you of obstacles and things. And supposedly it's going to be able to interact in some way with the traffic lights to warn you if they're red, green or whatever.
The more you describe this, the more "Rube Goldberg (http://blog.beliefnet.com/progressiverevival/imgs/Rube%20Goldberg.gif)" the whole thing sounds.

What has me skeptical is whether or not it'll be able to provide all this feedback quickly enough for someone without vision to be able to react in time.

Exactly.

[paladin]

The more you describe this, the more "Rube Goldberg (http://blog.beliefnet.com/progressiverevival/imgs/Rube%20Goldberg.gif)" the whole thing sounds.



Exactly.

What I'm more concerned with actually isn't so much whether or not this CAN be done as whether it SHOULD. There are a disturbing number of reasons why I believe they shouldn't be blowing all this money, much less during an economic recession. For one thing these cars, even if they are proven totally drivable and safe even in the hands of a totally blind person like myself, are bound to be far, far spendier than the average car, even the fancier ones. And between 75 and 95% of all blind people in the US alone are unemployed. Those are the two figures I've been able to find. So these cars will be well beyond their reach since not only will they themselves not have the money, but most Voc Rehab agencies are frustratingly, even if understandably, wary of spending money even on everyday assistive technology like the screen readers we use on computers. In point of fact I boughht the one I use with my own money on time payments. So I shudder to imagine asking one of them for help buying a car if this did work out in my lifetime. So no, I don't see this as catching on anytime soon if ever for the simple reason that most blind people probably won't even be able to afford it. Besides, I have a sneaking suspicion that by the time these cars had been thoroughly tested and proven safe and by the time they were completely legal the rest of the world would have abandoned landbound vehicles altogether in favor of something like the speeders from Star Wars, something which moreover would probably be healthier for the environment. And of course all this is assuming that we as a species didn't destroy ourselves before then.