"Technology That Could Change Our Lives"

Sydney M. Williams

Thought of the Day

“Technology That Could Change Our Lives”

October 12, 2010

No American born after December 19, 1972 has witnessed a man walk on the moon. That was a startling revelation to me when I realized how distanced that time was. A dozen years earlier, in 1960, the idea of anyone walking on the moon seemed incredible – science fiction. Then, on May 25th President Kennedy spoke before a joint session of Congress. The concern at the time was the Soviets, that they were beating us in the race to space. The new President decided to throw down the gauntlet. Toward the end of the speech he said: “I believe that this nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man on the moon and returning him safely to earth.” It was a heady time when anything and everything seemed possible.

As a country we seem to have moved away from that “can do” attitude that allowed a man or woman born in the 19th century to have watched televised images of Neil Armstrong taking man’s first steps on the moon, a spectacle denied to virtually everyone under forty. Technology has continued to make great strides, albeit in terms of communication, access to data, social networking and game technology.

We have all dreamt of technological advances that will alter our world and our lives irrevocably. Beginning in the late 1930s and proceeding into the early 1950s, Robert Heinlein wrote a series of short stories that were collected and published in 1967 in a volume entitled, The Past Through Tomorrow. In those stories he wrote of personal helicopters, nuclear energy, smart roads, rocket ships and other futuristic concepts, many of which never appeared. In 1962, Hanna-Barbera, producers of The Flintstones, created The Jetsons, a space age counterpart to their earlier sitcom. Technology has always been fascinating, feeding the imagination of the young and creative.

Having a home one hundred miles up Interstate 95, I am acutely conscious of the growing urban-suburban problem of traffic congestion and reckless motorists. I have often speculated as to whether at some future point the Interstate might be automated, so that a car would only have to drive to the entrance ramp, the system would then take control, depositing the car at a pre-determined exit. So, it was with excited anticipation that I read the Sunday’s New York Times article headlined, “Look Officer, No Hands: Google Cars Drive Themselves”. The story and the vehicles seemed to emerge from the pages of Mr. Heinlein, suggesting the possibility of a life-altering technology, more impactful, in a practical sense, than the mission to the moon forty years ago.

The article describes how Google has altered seven cars, each of which has driven a thousand miles with no human intervention, on highways and city streets, including the steep and curvy Lombard Street in San Francisco. Collectively the cars have driven 140,000 miles with only occasional human control. The one accident, thus far, occurred when one of the cars was stopped at a red light; he was back ended. As John Markoff, the reporter on the story writes: “Robot drivers react faster than humans, have 360-degree perception and do not get distracted, sleepy or intoxicated, the engineers argue.” Lives could be saved and the capacity of the roads would double.

Of course, there are legal issues, and the technology appears ahead of the law. Mr. Markoff adds: “Under current law, a human must be in control of a car at all times, but what does that mean if the human is not really paying attention as the crosses through, say, a school zone, figuring that the robot is driving more safely than he would.?”

As the Times points out, even the most optimistic predictions would put commercial production of automated vehicles a decade into the future. Autonomous vehicles, however, are nothing new. At least once a week we read of a Drone attack on some Taliban hideaway in a cave along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border. Engineers have been working with automobiles for over forty years. The technology in some of today’s high end cars have the ability to anticipate problems, for example alerting the driver if he appears to be drifting. The technology is here, but the costs must come down to convert the concept to a commercially viable product.

I am not much of a technologist. I have trouble with my integrated TV/PC system at home. In fact, it has always been the past that has fascinated and intrigued me. Nevertheless, I was excited to read of the “Googlemobile”; for it seems a product that is timely. Roads are congested and the possibilities of adding new lanes along the northeast corridor are virtually nil. Ill-mannered drivers travel recklessly, with little regard to others. One does not drive on I-95, one attacks. Mass transportation should be a viable alternative, but what we have is often dirty, uncomfortable and inconvenient. Besides which, most Americans value the independence a car provides. Google’s tests indicate that the cars can even be programmed for different driving personalities – from cautious to aggressive.

Google, according to reports this morning, is investing, alongside a transmission and energy companies, in a wind farm off the East Coast of the U.S. Perhaps that will become their focus. Energy independence is a worthy goal. And perhaps robotic drivers will remain a dream, tilting at windmills, no more than a will-o’-the-wisp; but to me the prospect is exciting: a practical technology that would help solve innumerable problems – highway deaths, transportation woes, energy conservation. I read the article and thought (and hoped) I saw the future.