Smart Shift

“How¹ bout’ it out there DX land, Big Red down here in Nevada looking for conditions…”

On a desert highway, a convoy of trucks drives from dawn to dusk. Even as drivers are talking on shortwave CB radio, the engines are also conversing, comparing notes on the road situation. When one vehicle changes gear, they all change gear to account for the change in incline. When one brakes due to a slow-moving vehicle or an obstacle on the road, they all brake. When one starts to veer due to high winds, the others adjust their steering to compensate. This is not some futuristic scenario but reality, at least in Nevada where semi-autonomous vehicles are now legal transportation; it is reasonably clear that automation will not stop with such ‘core’ features. “It’s not a matter of if we’ll have autonomous vehicles on the road, it’s when,” remarked² Jules Moise, vice president of transportation technology for United Parcels Service.

Co-ordination between our forms of transport have a long heritage: in 300BC use of the heliograph — a mirror mounted on a stand — extended to the sea as well as land, continuing well into medieval times, supported by “The manipulation of sails, the location of national ensigns or other flags or shapes upon the masts, lanterns and gunfire,” according³ to Captain Linwood S. Howeth. The invention of the telescope in the 1600s triggered the creation of systems of maritime flags, as described⁴ in the British Fighting Instructions of 1665, for example:

“If the admiral put up a jack⁴-flag on the flagstaff on the mizen topmast-head and fire a gun, then the outwardmost ship on the starboard side is to clap upon a wind with his starboard tacks aboard, and all the squadron as they lie above or as they have ranked themselves are presently to clap upon a wind and stand after him in a line. And if the admiral make a weft with his jack-flag upon the flagstaff on the mizen topmast-head and fire a gun, then the outwardmost ship on the larboard side is to clap upon a wind with his larboard tacks aboard, and all the squadrons as they have ranked themselves are presently to clap upon a wind and stand after him in a line.”

One can only surmise that the term ‘flagship’ came about as a central point to enable such co-ordination to take place. As the versatility of such system became understood, the actions it described became more complex, first⁵ by Captain Frederick Marryat's Code of Signals for the Merchant Service in 1817 which evolved (after several revisions) into the International Code of Signals, drafted in 1855. As all true seamen know, blue and red indicates “I am altering my course to starboard,” while a black spot on a yellow background shows “I am altering my course to port.”

Such visual signals are still in use today, on sea and on land (for example the railways). As technology advances however, the need for line-of-sight based mechanisms diminishes, with the advent of more ‘advanced’ techniques such as radio transmission and of course, data communications. In the main these are still primarily used to provide information to a driver or pilot; but, as we have seen, this is interchange is moving between the vehicles themselves. We saw in Chapter 2 just how sensors are changing the transport systems upon which we depend. As planes, trains and automobiles gain processing capabilities, they become better able to make sense of the signals they are receiving. As a result, the notion of the smarter, ‘connected’ vehicle has moved very quickly from futuristic articles to the design rooms of manufacturers.

Indeed, traditional vehicle manufacturers such as BMW are all over it, even if they admit their current efforts are more to showcase the potential of the new capabilities, rather than to deliver viable products. Most recent attention on how cars and therefore drivers can share information — for example, cab drivers in Boston have been testing setups to record and share information about potholes, so they can be given advance warning of danger areas.

Right now, there’s a bit of a land grab as car manufacturers look to engender brand loyalty among drivers. BMW has its drivers community for example, and there are others. This goes beyond the manufacturers, indeed, we are bringing our own sensing technology into cars. Even as our GPS-enabled mobile phones and TomTom navigation devices tell us the most appropriate route (using a tried and tested Travelling Salesman algorithm), they are broadcasting our collective speeds, information which is read and interpreted to update potential journey times. As Mihir Parikh, digital consultant at BearingPoint has noted, “With the way we share information about our own locations when we look at Google Maps, we are doing more than looking at a map. We are the map.” This involvement of people in the context of mapping is profound. But does it actually need a person at all, to own the phone that sits in the car and provides a GPS indicator? Indeed, is whole concept of the driver already becoming moot?

A couple of years ago, Google started testing what has become known as a ‘driverless’ car. So far it has been quite successful, tested on regular roads and in cities. While Google’s efforts require a human co-driver, they have logged up many thousands of miles of driving time to date. Initial forays have been so successful that US legislators have recently changed the law to make the vehicle, not the passenger liable should there be an accident. And in 2016 a pilot project will be rolled out across Milton Keynes’ walkways to use driverless cars for late night commuters.

The heritage of the driverless car has some elements in common with both the restricted world of airport narrow-gauge railways. But look beyond the clunky repurposing, and we can start to see that the driverless car is much, much more than that. Consider the component parts: we have a mechanism that enables a vehicle to move; we have a series of sensors to ensure it understands its environment; we have a data interchange mechanism to enable it to co-ordinate with the wider world; and we have a central processing capability to interpret the data it receives, and make decisions; and we have electric servo motors that can adjust speed, steering and gears automatically. The car’s wheel-based limitations still gives them broad application. The ‘car’ concept only exists because of its use at transporting people. As soon as it extends beyond this relatively limited role, a variety of other kinds of transport could be considered — which do not need to consider the need to incorporate a driver. Vans of the future could be tall and thin, or short and squat, or run around like the annoying little droids in Star Wars. They could be used exclusively to transport apples — bringing a whole new meaning to ‘upsetting the applecart’. Or, we could imagine pizza boxes with built-in transport mechanisms. Or we are already seeing minesweepers⁶ and roadside bomb detectors.

In other words, ladies and gentlemen, we have a wheel-based robot. Too much, you say? Surely robots are humanoid? Sensor-based robots have ‘arrived’ in limited forms in a variety of shapes and sizes, such as vacuum cleaners and lawnmowers. And what are these but devices that can follow pre-defined routes while avoiding obstacles? Indeed, it could also be argued that semi-autonomous cars share a number of similarities with that incoming wave of handy, fun, highly useful and sometimes dangerous airborne devices known as drones. As we saw in an earlier chapter with their use in vineyards, is the drone. Drones are little more than pilot-less planes — they still need to be remote controlled. And, like many technologies, they are being seen both as benign — Amazon is talking about them for parcel drops, for example; equally they are finding a use in film making and sports, and to go where it is unsafe for people to go in oil fields⁷; and they can also be seen as downright scary, particularly when considered⁸ in the military context.

This is not without some controversy. One of the main uses of drones is to carry camera equipment, enabling a birds-eye view of virtually anything from⁹ fireworks displays and rock concerts to the neighbour’s house, a sports match or a government building. The number of conflicts of use make for a complex array of legal issues, so it is no wonder that organisations such as the US Federal Aviation Authority is still getting its legal head around drone use. “If a realtor films buildings for fun using a remote controlled quadcopter that’s legal. But if she takes that same quadcopter and films buildings as part of her job, that is illegal. If a farmer flies a model aircraft over his cornfield doing barrel rolls and loops, that’s legal. But if he uses the same model airplane to determine how to conserve water or use less fertilizer that’s illegal. This is government regulation at its worst,” wrote Gregory S. McNeal in Forbes¹⁰.

As we are already seeing, the threshold of affordability is dropping to such a point that drones become quite common. In addition, drones can become very small. The mosquito drone may still¹¹ be a proof of concept but that will not be the case for ever. But still, if you were thinking they are no different to model aeroplanes, you would be right. The difference is that they can incorporate satellite links and, potentially, some primitive intelligence to evade obstacles. From remote-controlled drones we shall start to see increasing smartness, until self-flying drones become practical. Companies like TOR Robotics¹² (whose software does not distinguish between cars and flying objects) and the Lily¹³ “personal cameraman in the sky” are investigating the potential — the latter follows its subject via GPS, and it’s not hard to see both the fun to be had, say as a camera follows you down a ski slope, nor the potential disaster if everyone starts having one.

And why stop with wheel or wing? We are starting to see self-navigating boats, of all shapes and sizes — there is a competition for these too: “The Microtransat Challenge is a transatlantic race of fully autonomous sailing boats,” explains its web site¹⁴. The positives are numerous — for example, the US Navy is testing out autonomous autopilots¹⁵ that can run on any boat, enabling danger zones to be investigated, these have earned the title ‘swarmboats¹⁶’ which can be used either as guides, as protection, or as decoys. We can also imagine shipping containers loading themselves onto crew-less ships (or simply making their own way). But equally, of all the les salubrious thoughts of where this can go, self-navigating boats in use by drugs cartels are the most obvious. Potentially dressed up to look like typical maritime litter. Don’t be at all surprised to see a fly-float-drive delivery drone in the future.

The long and the short of all of this, however, is that we are seeing the rise of the robot. The very simple function of moving something from one place to another will more than occupy ourselves for the next few years; as they do so, we shall become more comfortable with robot-type devices extending to other tasks, from road sweeping and house sweeping, to ultimately doing the washing up and feeding the cat. Be in no doubt that robots are already among us — if not walking, they are rolling themselves around, which may be the most appropriate form of motion. Or simply standing still, such as Jibo¹⁷ which incorporates face recognition software and can interact with a person.

The rise of the robots will extend our reach still further: they will become our eyes and ears, and, potentially, offer self defence. And they are getting smaller, as illustrated by the use of pollination ‘creatures’ in agriculture. Robots will enable us to transcend our mere humanity, extending our field of vision and our capabilities way beyond what we can do currently. For good, and for ill.

Too soon? Not really, as we already see one-off examples. While it may have cost billions to build, the Mars Lander represents the shape of things to come — no doubt we shall soon see similar contraptions criss-crossing our deserts, our ice floes and our oceans, going about their business in ways and places we could not otherwise. And, indeed, flexible joints and active suspension systems are enabling robots to stand on their own two feet. Google-spin out company Boston Dynamics has been testing¹⁸ a variety of two-and four-legged mechanical beasts, partly in response to DARPA’s robotics challenge, which¹⁹ had $2 million in prize money — this was won by a robot called DRC-Hubo, which could both use wheels for efficiency, and legs for climbing. In 2014 the first robot soccer world cup took place; while this mainly involved human-form robots falling over, stumbling and otherwise failing to get a ball into a net, they indicate the shape of things to come.

For good, and potentially for ill. It is not hard to imagine controversy surrounding front-line military use of robots (in a bunker in the Mojave desert, a research centre is already creating such capabilities). Nor, for that matter, robot muggers or indeed incendiary-carrying drones threatening the safety of city streets, or robot police identifying and disarming them. Robots will generate even more data, and remain just as hackable as any other computer-based device so, we need to think about the security of data they generate, and the mechanisms to prevent them from being hacked. One has to wonder, will we see outbreaks of robot flu, if our nearest and dearest animatronic ‘catch’ a virus?

But perhaps, an even more pressing question than how robots might change the world, is how robotic-capabilities could augment our own. As with so many areas of technology, this has a long heritage — the world’s first automobiles were not called driverless carriages for nothing. But we are not that far away from the kinds of cyber-suit that have thus far remained largely in the realms of science fiction. In Bochum in Germany, for example, at the Centre for Neurorobotic Movement Training, tests are underway²⁰ of what is being called the Hybrid Assisted Limb (HAL). Originally developed in Japan, this enables paraplegic patients to control robotic legs, using weak movement signals from their damaged nerve endings. Similar initiatives are underway for damaged arms. Extrapolating these models, it isn’t hard to see a use for the kinds of cyber-vehicles currently a feature of films such as Avatar. This is yet another example of cyber-enhancement, as is the drone that maintains a steady position over an individual’s head.

So, yes, we are seeing the end of the motor industry. And of the postal service. And of pizza deliveries. And hoovering. But beyond this, these examples of cyber-enhancement are the most concrete indicators yet of our inevitable trajectory towards becoming super-human — not only all-seeing and all-knowing, but also equipped with previously unheard of physical strength and stamina. And, as we will see, new ways of dealing with each other. Enter: the blockchain.