Transcript
For many of us, automotive tech advancements have been a mixed bag. For every highly practical and helpful feature – like smart cruise control or GPS navigation – you have another that’s maybe not as useful or difficult to operate. Haptic controls, I’m looking in your direction.
There’s another category, however, and that’s the type of features that could be downright dangerous when used incorrectly, a scenario that raises the question about whether they should exist in the first place.
Most Read on IEN:
- EV Prototype Explodes, Damages Company HQ
- Podcast: Palermo's Accident; Red Bull's Stunt; Whiskey Heist
- 50-Year-Old Hits 65 MPH as He Skates Down 22-Story Building
- Distillery Reportedly Flushed 5,000 Bottles of Expensive Whisky
For an example, we take you to China – the electric car capital of the world – where a Xiaomi brand vehicle went viral recently for appearing to drive off on its own while its befuddled owner chases it.
The owner, identified as Li Xiaoshuang, parked his SU7 outside of a store, and what happened next was captured on a surveillance camera: while Li and another person conducted some business in the store, the blue vehicle began to drive away. Aware within moments, Li rushed outside to chase down the vehicle, which was reportedly stopped before any damage was done to people or surroundings.
The carmaker was contacted after the strange incident took place and it offered up a simple explanation based on its data: a command to self-park was issued by an iPhone later confirmed to be the owner’s.
And while Xiaomi shifted the blame from possible software bugs or hacks – and the owner acknowledged the device identified was, in fact, his – the scenario raises some bigger questions: is there a missing step here if a so-called “valid” command can be issued from a device completely by accident?
Theories suggest the feature was “unintentionally activated through the iPhone app or its voice assistant.”
Perhaps here we have a smart feature that could stand to be smarter.
Click here to subscribe to our daily newsletter featuring breaking manufacturing industry news.
WEBVTT
X-TIMESTAMP-MAP=LOCAL:00:00:00.000,MPEGTS:0
00:00.159 --> 00:04.030
For many of us, automotive tech advancements
have been a mixed bag.
00:04.239 --> 00:09.630
For every highly practical and helpful feature
like smart cruise control or GPS navigation,
00:09.680 --> 00:13.720
you have another that's maybe not as useful or
difficult to operate.
00:14.000 --> 00:16.840
Haptic controls,
I'm looking in your direction.
00:17.040 --> 00:20.559
There's another category, however, and that's
the type of features that could be downright
00:20.559 --> 00:25.120
dangerous when used incorrectly, a scenario
that raises the question about whether these
00:25.120 --> 00:26.736
should exist
in the first place.
00:27.146 --> 00:31.166
For an example, we take you to China, the
electric car capital of the world,
00:31.386 --> 00:36.666
where a Xiaomi brand vehicle went viral
recently for appearing to drive off on its own
00:36.666 --> 00:39.056
while its befuddled owner chases it.
00:39.306 --> 00:44.576
The owner, identified as Li Xiao Shuang, parked
his SU-7 outside of a store.
00:44.747 --> 00:47.937
And what happened next was captured on a
surveillance camera.
00:48.106 --> 00:50.547
While Li and another person conducted some
business in the store,
00:50.626 --> 00:55.863
the blue vehicle tried to drive away. Aware within
moments, Li rushed outside to chase down the
00:55.863 --> 01:00.694
vehicle, which was reportedly stopped before
any damage was done to people or surroundings.
01:00.813 --> 01:04.124
The carmaker was contacted after the strange
incident took place,
01:04.153 --> 01:07.853
and it offered up a simple explanation based on
its data.
01:08.213 --> 01:13.603
A command to move the car was issued by an iPhone,
later confirmed to be the owner's.
01:13.814 --> 01:18.191
And while Xiaomi shifted the blame from
possible software bugs or hacks,
01:18.200 --> 01:21.630
the owner acknowledged the device
identified was in fact his.
01:21.920 --> 01:24.151
The scenario raises some bigger questions.
01:24.521 --> 01:29.630
Is there a missing step here if a so-called
valid command can be issued from a device
01:30.000 --> 01:34.000
completely by accident?
Theory suggests the feature was unintentionally
01:34.000 --> 01:38.471
activated through the iPhone app or its voice
assistant.
01:38.761 --> 01:42.950
Perhaps here we have a smart feature that could
stand to be smarter.
01:43.441 --> 01:45.361
I'm Anna Wells, and this is Manufacturing Now.
