Is it possible to get all the auto manufacturers in the world to adhere to a common protocol for exchanging real-time planning information?

I believe the next step in humanless driving should be a hybrid approach where cars in the local vicinity share their immediate planning data. For example, Car A following a GPS plan needs to exit in 1.5 miles. Letting all cars in the immediate vicinity know that means that drivers can better anticipate that driver's next moves better than the old fashion turn signal. Knowing this, drivers can react appropriately and potentially avoid collisions. To accomplish this goal and then facilitate the sharing of this information by the automobiles themselves in a humanless driving situation would require a protocol for announcements.

Topics

Information Technology

Auto Industry

Humanless Driving

Manufacturing

Answer This Question

JP Morgenthal

asked on Jan. 30, 2012

Art van Bodegraven

President, Van Bodegraven Associates

Posted on Jan. 31, 2012

It is a minimum requirement for actualization of the concept. We have a lot to master in personal transportation before this issue rises to the top.

Barry Schaeffer

Principal Consultant, Content Life Cycle Consulting

Posted on Jan. 31, 2012

Simple answer: yes, it is possible.
Adherence to standard means of exchanging data has, in the many industrial communities in which it has evolved, typically succeeded when the community settled on a common syntax and lexicon. In retail and supply chain industries, we saw EDI and (in Europe) EDIFACT; in building and other mechanical systems, we saw the MIMOSA machine reporting standards (based on XML); in automated test (ATE, BIT and BITE), we saw the development of partial standards based on the ATLAS programming environment, and so on across a number of communities.

The rub, in each of these communities, is that common adherence to a single standard, of any kind, is based on some combination of two factors:
1. Adherence has to be perceived as in the company's best interests, either technically or in its marketing..
2. Failure to adhere places the non-adhering firm at some disadvantage against its competitors who do adhere.

Without those two factors in play, standards tend to be developed, enable a whole bunch of meetings, conferences and cocktail parties... and go nowhere. A good example is the DoD CALS logistics exchange standards. Promulgated in 1985, they rattled around without much adherence by the defense community until several years later when one service (happened to be Navy) put language in its RFPs that proposals demonstrating an ability and commitment to meet the CALS standards would be given extra credit in procurement decisions, that the defense community sat up and took notice. From there, although not always smooth, CALS adherence evolved to a workable level of adherence. In this case, the buyer, while not going to the extreme of disqualifying non-adherents, made it advantageous to proposers to meet the standards, proviing that the carrot is probably more effective than the stick in such cases.

Show 1 more reply

Mel Kleiman Replied on Jan. 31, 2012

Only if someone can prove to them that it is in their best interest to do so and that is going to be very difficult. You are dealing with national and international interest.

Barry Schaeffer Replied on Feb. 1, 2012

JP and Mel; My intent, perhaps poorly set forth, is that adherence to standards is, in fact possible, having been successfully accomplished in more that a single industrial community. The sub-text, for me and all-important, is that there are major impediments (I listed two): 1) the firm's perceptions that adherence is in its best interests (here, I would caveat that "perceived best interest" is not always what outsiders would agree with, but the firm's internal perceptions, sometimes driven by very parochial thinking, and 2) external incentives, most effective are positive incentives, for the firm to take some action... to focus on the question rather than, as so often happens, merely ignoring it.

The new drug market is a good example: FDA attempted, for nearly 15 years, to "mandate" a common format for NDAs (New Drug Applications) but put no incentives, neither positive nor negative, into their actions. Only when FDA indicated that adherence to a common format for new drug standard labeling (only a part of the overal process) would speed the approval process did the industry begin to move toward adherence. Before that, in virtually every area of the NDA process, the industry players went their own ways, perceiving no value in adopting the various standard formats proposed by FDA.

Belldon Colme

Owner, Human Nature Management

Posted on Feb. 1, 2012

History would suggest this is only possible if a single, extremely powerful and successful entity takes the helm, and the rest of the players, as Barry said, have a financial interest in utilizing the same platform. Examples include Microsoft's domination of the office (even venerable Apple had to include MS Office compatibility and Power PC), and Apple's successful iPhone (what third party developer doesn't want iPhone compatibility).

In the example of Microsoft, Bill Gates made a brilliant strategic move by providing DOS (and Windows, in turn) free as the OS on a myriad new machines from all makers. Users were then locked into other MS products in order to gain best functionality.

Google is making moves toward the very application you are talking about, even working on a car that can drive itself (think Will Smith's car in the movie I, Robot). Do they have the infrastructure, vision and clout to pull it off as a world-wide protocol? Time will tell.

Together, let's out the fun back into work!
Belldon Colme
belldoncolme@gmail.com