Apple Wins Patent for Crowd-Sourced Traffic Navigation

The envisioned system would help you plan your route by
analyzing stop lights, stop signs, and obstacles that can slow
your trip.

As reported by C/NET: Imagine a navigation system that can guide you based on the number of stop lights, stop signs, and obstacles along the way. A new Apple patent describes just that.

Granted by the US Patent and Trademark Office on Tuesday, an Apple patent called "Routing based on detected stops" takes the concept of crowd-sourced navigation a few steps further than usual.

Current products such as Waze combine traffic data collected from multiple drivers to suggest the quickest way for you to reach your destination. Crowd-sourcing the information provides more accurate and real-time information than can be achieved through standard navigation apps, such as Google Maps and Apple's Maps app. But even today's crowd-sourced systems can only go so far in taking into account every possible interruption or slowdown along your route. A smarter system that could truly find the best route would be a boon to every driver.

In Apple's patent, such a smart navigation system would use the GPS in your mobile device to collect any detected stops of your car and determine how long each stop lasts. The information could even be analyzed to distinguish between stop lights and stop signs. The data itself would be sent to a remote server and then shared with the vehicles tapped into the system via a regular navigation app, such as Google Maps or Apple Maps.

As a driver, you could then use that information to determine the quickest route to your destination. You could also more accurately estimate the duration of your trip based on the data and even determine the best time to leave to reach your destination without being late.

Over time, the server could also collect and collate the data to predict specific traffic patterns based on the location of stop lights, time of day, and other factors.

As always, even an approved patent doesn't mean this technology will make its way into the real world. But a driver can always hope.

Cruising the High Seas; Engineers Detect Fake GPS Signals

As reported by Physics.org: Cruising the Mediterranean aboard a superyacht, a Cornell professor and grad student took their Global Positioning System (GPS) research to the high seas. For four days in late June, they tested the newest version of their GPS "spoofing" detector, which allows them to differentiate between real or fake GPS signals – a technology that could lead to protection strategies against insidious GPS hackers.

Mark Psiaki, professor of mechanical and aerospace engineering, and graduate student Brady O'Hanlon spent a week aboard the White Rose of Drachs, a privately owned luxury superyacht, testing their second-generation detector as the boat set out from Monaco, cruised around Italy, and eventually landed in Venice.
Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2014-07-cruising-high-seas-fake-gps.html#jCp

Mark Psiaki, professor of mechanical and aerospace engineering, and graduate student Brady O'Hanlon spent a week aboard the White Rose of Drachs, a privately owned luxury superyacht, testing their second-generation detector as the boat set out from Monaco, cruised around Italy, and eventually landed in Venice.

A spoofer, a device that produces false GPS signals that a receiver mistakes for real ones, was invented at Cornell by Todd Humphreys, Ph.D. '08, now an assistant professor of the University of Texas at Austin. Humphreys tested his latest spoofer aboard the same yacht last year; this year, Psiaki and O'Hanlon joined for a follow-up experiment to see if they could outsmart the spoofer.

Humphreys' spoofer and Psiaki's detector have drawn interest from the public as well as federal government officials, who in 2012 allowed a GPS spoofing demonstration involving a "hijacked" mini drone at White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico.

Aboard the yacht in international waters, the Cornell and UT Austin teams were free to conduct their research unhindered; on land, it's very difficult to get permission to hack a GPS signal, even for research purposes, Psiaki said.

Stationed in different areas of the boat, Humphreys' team initiated a planned "attack" of the boat's GPS receiver, overlaying a disguised false signal on top of the real one, and attempting to send the boat off-course without generating any obvious warning signs.

Psiaki and O'Hanlon's job was to detect these false signals, through real-time analysis of their properties, and to provide protection against a would-be attack by issuing a definitive warning whenever false signal characteristics were uncovered.

The experiments proved the functionality of their second-generation detector and allowed them to pinpoint areas in need of improvement.

In one dramatic test, the yacht's GPS receiver was spoofed into believing that it was veering off course to Venice and heading to Libya at a very high speed. The Cornell detector was able to warn the White Rose's bridge crew about the attack before the yacht was 20 meters off course.

"We want to progress to the point where not only can we tell it's a false signal, but we can also say, 'Here is the true signal; here is the true position,'" Psiaki said.

The owner of the White Rose of Drachs, an anonymous businessman with whom Humphreys became connected through a conference in Austin, allows the boat to be used for scientific purposes during off seasons.

Psiaki will share results about the superyacht experiments at the Institute of Navigation's GNSS+ conference in September in Tampa, Fla.

Mark Psiaki, professor of mechanical and aerospace engineering, and graduate student Brady O'Hanlon spent a week aboard the White Rose of Drachs, a privately owned luxury superyacht, testing their second-generation detector as the boat set out from Monaco, cruised around Italy, and eventually landed in Venice.

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2014-07-cruising-high-seas-fake-gps.html#jCp

Mark Psiaki, professor of mechanical and aerospace engineering, and graduate student Brady O'Hanlon spent a week aboard the White Rose of Drachs, a privately owned luxury superyacht, testing their second-generation detector as the boat set out from Monaco, cruised around Italy, and eventually landed in Venice.
A spoofer, a device that produces false GPS signals that a receiver mistakes for real ones, was invented at Cornell by Todd Humphreys, Ph.D. '08, now an assistant professor of the University of Texas at Austin. Humphreys tested his latest spoofer aboard the same yacht last year; this year, Psiaki and O'Hanlon joined for a follow-up experiment to see if they could outsmart the spoofer.
Humphreys' spoofer and Psiaki's detector have drawn interest from the public as well as federal government officials, who in 2012 allowed a GPS spoofing demonstration involving a "hijacked" mini drone at White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico.
Aboard the yacht in international waters, the Cornell and UT Austin teams were free to conduct their research unhindered; on land, it's very difficult to get permission to hack a GPS signal, even for research purposes, Psiaki said.
Stationed in different areas of the boat, Humphreys' team initiated a planned "attack" of the boat's GPS receiver, overlaying a disguised false signal on top of the real one, and attempting to send the boat off-course without generating any obvious warning signs.
Psiaki and O'Hanlon's job was to detect these false signals, through real-time analysis of their properties, and to provide protection against a would-be attack by issuing a definitive warning whenever false signal characteristics were uncovered.
The experiments proved the functionality of their second-generation detector and allowed them to pinpoint areas in need of improvement.
In one dramatic test, the yacht's GPS receiver was spoofed into believing that it was veering off course to Venice and heading to Libya at a very high speed. The Cornell detector was able to warn the White Rose's bridge crew about the attack before the yacht was 20 meters off course.
"We want to progress to the point where not only can we tell it's a false signal, but we can also say, 'Here is the true signal; here is the true position,'" Psiaki said.
The owner of the White Rose of Drachs, an anonymous businessman with whom Humphreys became connected through a conference in Austin, allows the boat to be used for scientific purposes during off seasons.
Psiaki will share results about the superyacht experiments at the Institute of Navigation's GNSS+ conference in September in Tampa, Fla.


Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2014-07-cruising-high-seas-fake-gps.html#jCp

Mark Psiaki, professor of mechanical and aerospace engineering, and graduate student Brady O'Hanlon spent a week aboard the White Rose of Drachs, a privately owned luxury superyacht, testing their second-generation detector as the boat set out from Monaco, cruised around Italy, and eventually landed in Venice.
A spoofer, a device that produces false GPS signals that a receiver mistakes for real ones, was invented at Cornell by Todd Humphreys, Ph.D. '08, now an assistant professor of the University of Texas at Austin. Humphreys tested his latest spoofer aboard the same yacht last year; this year, Psiaki and O'Hanlon joined for a follow-up experiment to see if they could outsmart the spoofer.
Humphreys' spoofer and Psiaki's detector have drawn interest from the public as well as federal government officials, who in 2012 allowed a GPS spoofing demonstration involving a "hijacked" mini drone at White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico.
Aboard the yacht in international waters, the Cornell and UT Austin teams were free to conduct their research unhindered; on land, it's very difficult to get permission to hack a GPS signal, even for research purposes, Psiaki said.
Stationed in different areas of the boat, Humphreys' team initiated a planned "attack" of the boat's GPS receiver, overlaying a disguised false signal on top of the real one, and attempting to send the boat off-course without generating any obvious warning signs.
Psiaki and O'Hanlon's job was to detect these false signals, through real-time analysis of their properties, and to provide protection against a would-be attack by issuing a definitive warning whenever false signal characteristics were uncovered.
The experiments proved the functionality of their second-generation detector and allowed them to pinpoint areas in need of improvement.
In one dramatic test, the yacht's GPS receiver was spoofed into believing that it was veering off course to Venice and heading to Libya at a very high speed. The Cornell detector was able to warn the White Rose's bridge crew about the attack before the yacht was 20 meters off course.
"We want to progress to the point where not only can we tell it's a false signal, but we can also say, 'Here is the true signal; here is the true position,'" Psiaki said.
The owner of the White Rose of Drachs, an anonymous businessman with whom Humphreys became connected through a conference in Austin, allows the boat to be used for scientific purposes during off seasons.
Psiaki will share results about the superyacht experiments at the Institute of Navigation's GNSS+ conference in September in Tampa, Fla.


Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2014-07-cruising-high-seas-fake-gps.html#jCp

Mark Psiaki, professor of mechanical and aerospace engineering, and graduate student Brady O'Hanlon spent a week aboard the White Rose of Drachs, a privately owned luxury superyacht, testing their second-generation detector as the boat set out from Monaco, cruised around Italy, and eventually landed in Venice.
A spoofer, a device that produces false GPS signals that a receiver mistakes for real ones, was invented at Cornell by Todd Humphreys, Ph.D. '08, now an assistant professor of the University of Texas at Austin. Humphreys tested his latest spoofer aboard the same yacht last year; this year, Psiaki and O'Hanlon joined for a follow-up experiment to see if they could outsmart the spoofer.
Humphreys' spoofer and Psiaki's detector have drawn interest from the public as well as federal government officials, who in 2012 allowed a GPS spoofing demonstration involving a "hijacked" mini drone at White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico.
Aboard the yacht in international waters, the Cornell and UT Austin teams were free to conduct their research unhindered; on land, it's very difficult to get permission to hack a GPS signal, even for research purposes, Psiaki said.
Stationed in different areas of the boat, Humphreys' team initiated a planned "attack" of the boat's GPS receiver, overlaying a disguised false signal on top of the real one, and attempting to send the boat off-course without generating any obvious warning signs.
Psiaki and O'Hanlon's job was to detect these false signals, through real-time analysis of their properties, and to provide protection against a would-be attack by issuing a definitive warning whenever false signal characteristics were uncovered.
The experiments proved the functionality of their second-generation detector and allowed them to pinpoint areas in need of improvement.
In one dramatic test, the yacht's GPS receiver was spoofed into believing that it was veering off course to Venice and heading to Libya at a very high speed. The Cornell detector was able to warn the White Rose's bridge crew about the attack before the yacht was 20 meters off course.
"We want to progress to the point where not only can we tell it's a false signal, but we can also say, 'Here is the true signal; here is the true position,'" Psiaki said.
The owner of the White Rose of Drachs, an anonymous businessman with whom Humphreys became connected through a conference in Austin, allows the boat to be used for scientific purposes during off seasons.
Psiaki will share results about the superyacht experiments at the Institute of Navigation's GNSS+ conference in September in Tampa, Fla.


Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2014-07-cruising-high-seas-fake-gps.html#jCp

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2014-07-cruising-high-seas-fake-gps.html#jCp

Cruising the Mediterranean aboard a superyacht, a Cornell professor and grad student took their Global Positioning System (GPS) research to the high seas. For four days in late June, they tested the newest version of their GPS "spoofing" detector, which allows them to differentiate between real or fake GPS signals – a technology that could lead to protection strategies against insidious GPS hackers.

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2014-07-cruising-high-seas-fake-gps.html#jCp

Cruising the Mediterranean aboard a superyacht, a Cornell professor and grad student took their Global Positioning System (GPS) research to the high seas. For four days in late June, they tested the newest version of their GPS "spoofing" detector, which allows them to differentiate between real or fake GPS signals – a technology that could lead to protection strategies against insidious GPS hackers.

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2014-07-cruising-high-seas-fake-gps.html#jCp

Cruising the Mediterranean aboard a superyacht, a Cornell professor and grad student took their Global Positioning System (GPS) research to the high seas. For four days in late June, they tested the newest version of their GPS "spoofing" detector, which allows them to differentiate between real or fake GPS signals – a technology that could lead to protection strategies against insidious GPS hackers.

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2014-07-cruising-high-seas-fake-gps.html#jCp

Urban Jungle a Tough Challenge for Google’s Autonomous Cars

As reported by MIT Technology Review: After catching the world and the auto industry by surprise with its progress with self-driving cars, Google has begun the latest, most difficult phase of its project – making the vehicles smart enough to handle the chaos of city streets.

But while the company describes its work with its typical tight-lipped optimism, academic experts in robotics are cautious about the prospects of fully autonomous vehicles. They estimate it will be decades until they can perform as well as human drivers in all situations – if they ever do at all.

Google’s cars make extensive use of detailed maps that describe not only roads and restrictions such as speed limits, but the 3-D location of stop lights and curbstones to within inches. The company is now working to make its vehicles capable of seeing and understanding the kind of unexpected obstacles that don’t appear on those maps and are particularly common in urban areas, said Chris Urmson, the director of the project, last week.

“Obviously, the world doesn't stay the same,” said Urmson, speaking at a conference bringing together academics and auto-industry engineers working on autonomous driving. “You need to be able to deal with things like temporary construction, and so we've been putting a lot of effort into understanding the semantic meaning of the world.”

For example, an autonomous car should be capable of recognizing that a school bus is different from other vehicles of a similar size and may behave differently, said Urmson.

Urmson showed video of a prototype Google car navigating through a real-life construction zone marked by flashing yellow arrow signs, and even stopping when a “construction worker”—actually a Google employee—waved a hand-held stop sign.

Having cars understand those types of hazards is crucial to Google because of a recent change in the direction of its project. The company’s original prototypes were based on conventional vehicles, and a human passenger could use the steering wheel and brake pedal to intervene in the event of a glitch. But in May, Google said that humans couldn't be counted on to stay focused enough on the road (see “Lazy Humans Shaped Google’s Autonomous Car”). It unveiled a new prototype without a steering wheel or pedals and said research would now focus on making vehicles that are 100 percent autonomous—leaving no room for error.

Academic experts at the conference say Google is taking on some of the hardest problems in artificial intelligence and robotics, essentially trying to replicate the ability of humans to effortlessly make sense of their environment. That’s because driving safely relies on much more than just knowing to avoid big objects, such as people or other cars, or being able to recognize symbols such as a stop sign.

Humans make use of myriad “social cues” while on the road, such as establishing eye contact or making inferences about how a driver will behave based on the car’s make and model, Alberto Broggi, a researcher at Italy’s Universita di Parma, told MIT Technology Review.

Even if a computer system can recognize something, understanding the context that gives it meaning is much more difficult, said Broggi, who has directed several major European Research Council grants in autonomous driving. For example, a fully autonomous car would need to understand that someone waving his arms by the side of the road is actually a policeman trying to stop traffic.

When surveyed by the conference organizers, the 500 experts in attendance were not optimistic such problems would be solved soon. Asked when they would trust a fully robotic car to take their children to school, more than half said 2030 at the very earliest. A fifth said not until 2040, and roughly one in 10 said “never.”

Several of them told MIT Technology Review they wouldn't be surprised if self-driving cars were, for many decades, limited to specific, well-controlled settings, such as construction sites and campus-like environments with low speed limits and minimal traffic.

Most big auto companies are exploring self-driving cars. One of them, Nissan, caused a stir last year when it predicted it would be selling them by 2020. Last week, though, Nissan used the conference to dial back that forecast, saying instead that cars by the end of the decade will be able to handle selected tasks, such as parking and freeway driving. Despite being bullish about its technology, Google doesn’t make predictions about when fully autonomous vehicles might arrive.

John Leonard, an MIT expert in autonomous driving who attended the conference, says that he and other academics find themselves constantly battling the assumption that all of the technology challenges associated with robotic cars have been solved, with only regulatory and legal issues remaining. “It’s hard to convey to the public how hard this is,” he says.

Leonard stands by a comment that earned him some online criticism in an MIT Technology Review story last year, when he predicted that he wouldn’t see a self-driving Manhattan taxi in his lifetime (see “Driverless Cars Are Further Away Than You Think”).

The Giants Are Putting the G in GPS

As reported by the Wall Street Journal: The culture around Giants football is about as new or modern as their head coach, Tom Coughlin.

Their stadium and practice facility are younger than most, but both are filled with memorabilia and banners dating back to the team's inception in 1925. Likewise, Coughlin—the NFL's oldest coach at age 67—began his career back in 1970, before anyone was too concerned with hydration or soft-tissue injuries.

But to watch the Giants practice now, with their heat breaks and global-positioning devices, you might accuse Coughlin of being forward-thinking—perhaps even cutting edge.

"Coughlin is definitely on the forefront of the GPS," right tackle Justin Pugh said Sunday.

The team has outfitted its players with GPS devices strapped to their backs under their uniforms. The technology can provide the team with information such as top speed, burst and how long the player has run in terms of time and miles.

"We're getting all kinds of information," Coughlin said after Sunday's practice. "It's player related so we have information coming every day on every player."

The Giants aren't eager to discuss the specifics of that information. The team declined a request to make someone available who could speak knowledgeably about the program, which is now in its second year.

The players, on the other hand, are willing to talk about the GPS devices and other gadgets aimed at measuring recovery and preventing injuries.

There are those, such as defensive tackle Cullen Jenkins, who admittedly give the training staff a hard time. Jenkins likened the experience of strapping a GPS device on his back to being a "test subject." But at this time of year, when jobs are won or lost over health concerns, many players are eager to digest the data.

"I've never done the GPS," said left tackle Charles Brown, who signed with the Giants as a free agent after four years in New Orleans. "I like it, though. It's a way to monitor everything we're doing…heart rate, how much running you've done and at what speed and what angles."

The information gleaned from the GPS can be used in any number of ways.

As Coughlin explained last week, the data can help the coaches structure practices so they know when to do extra stretching or potentially cut down on reps. And with the temperatures soaring during training camp, the Giants have been taking breaks during practice to get out of the sun and hydrate.

Some of the players are even using the information as a means of competition.

"We always look around: 'Who had the most burst? Who had the highest top speed? The workload?'" explained Pugh. "Obviously, the more reps you get, the higher your workload is gonna be. And it definitely helps. The one day we had the recovery day and regeneration, and it helped us with the next practice the next day.

"I always have the top mile per hour," he continued, "so I always hold that over everybody."

Pugh even spoke of a watch that can measure players' sleeping habits. The team only has "like 10," he said, so not everyone has tried it, but the overall purpose is clear: The Giants want to know how much players are working and how they're recovering afterward.

Kicker Josh Brown doesn't wear the GPS or the watch, but he has spent years studying the effects of heart rate and recovery on his own game. As a rookie in Seattle back in 2003, Brown said, he kicked around "50 balls a day." Now he might attempt as few as 18 kicks, as long as they all "look exactly the same," to avoid fatigue and muscle issues.

The Giants are still mastering the GPS technology.

Back in May, after drafting LSU wideout Odell Beckham Jr. in the first round of the NFL Draft, general manager Jerry Reese boasted about the intensity with which the Louisiana native practiced.

"All of the teams use the GPS like we use, and early in camp, they said his GPS registered from Baton Rouge to New Orleans," Reese said. "That is how hard he works. Because he does all of the special-teams stuff as well, he gets a lot of mileage on his GPS."

Perhaps that mileage could have served as a warning. Beckham has been battling hamstring issues since the spring, and while the direct cause of the injury is unknown, the team will likely look at his workload through a different lens going forward.

Vehicle Technology Disruptors: BMW Vs. Tesla

As reported by TechCrunch: Jill Lepore generated quite a fracas in Silicon Valley with her New Yorker article that questions disruptive innovation and posits that large incumbent companies often survive and subsume disruptive technology with small incremental gains. Fortunately, we have a live Petri dish: BMW’s new electric i3 is an ongoing case study of a legacy manufacturer facing an innovator’s dilemma in the face of Tesla, a very aggressive new competitor with next-generation technology.

Elon Musk has defined the standard for a future mass-produced electric car – it must cost around $40,000, have a range of 200 miles, and be comparable to a BMW 3 series. In order to achieve that audacious goal, Tesla is embarking on a plan to build a “Gigafactory” capable of producing batteries at an efficient and lower cost that would make such a dream car feasible. Investors are betting that Tesla will be able to dominate the electric car market when it achieves scale, continuing a growth rate that values Tesla at $28 billion even though it only produces 35,000 vehicles a year. It is interesting that Musk directly compared the Tesla’s upcoming mass market Model 3 directly to the BMW 3 series, given that BMW is now delivering its new i3 to the US market in accessible volumes.

There are lots of great lessons for entrepreneurs to learn from watching the BMW versus Tesla battle since cars are so tangible and manufacturer sales tactics are so transparent.

Brand

Even though it has a “3” in its name, the i3 is decidedly not a 3 series BMW. It is two feet shorter, and should instead be in the BMW 1 series product family. The i3’s electric range of 80-100 miles makes it more similar to electric cars like the Nissan Leaf and the Chevrolet Volt and nowhere close to a technological wonder like the Tesla Model S.

Despite its limitations, the i3 is clearly resonating, with rave reviews and a price that is spiking over the last month on TrueCar, indicating high initial demand in the United States. BMW has (mis)used the power of the 3 series brand to its benefit, and can now add features like longer length and range incrementally as battery technology improves.

Lesson: Legacy companies can mislabel their products to leverage their brand, especially if an upstart compares itself directly to a particular model.

Technology

BMW invested tremendous resources in its electric car platform to develop an all-electric vehicle platform, and it is willing to integrate legacy technology in order to deliver immediate value to its customers. Conversely, Mercedes chose a partnership route and is buying the drivetrain and battery technology for its upcoming electric car from Tesla. Both BMW and Mercedes are well ahead of Tesla in advanced vehicle technology like self-parking and cruise control that can automatically follow highway lanes and maintain distance from other vehicles.

Rather than waiting for battery technology to evolve to make an all-electric car with a 200-mile range at a mid-range price point, BMW is selling an optional “range extender” consisting of a two cylinder motorcycle engine that maintains the batteries at a 5 percent power level and extends the car’s range an additional 80 miles. Since the range extender powers the batteries rather than a gas engine, the i3 is not a hybrid, but the range extender can be continually refilled so that the car is never stuck without power. It’s a total hack, but is well thought out and competitive. BMW’s engineers must have been giggling when they came up with this one.

With the i3, BMW has delivered a “good enough” luxury electric car for the urban driver and average commuter, who can also optionally use the car for longer trips without having to plan for supercharger stations.

Lesson: Legacy companies are often willing to hodgepodge new technology with their older technology to stave off new competitors.

Volume 

Tesla shipped its first car in 2006 and is expecting sell 35,000 Model S sedans in 2014, or roughly 17,500 units in the second half of 2014. BMW started selling i3’s in 2014 and sold 6,000 i3’s in the first half of the year, primarily in the European market, which now has 3 to 6 months waits for the car. Now that demand is spiking, BMW increased production to 20,000 units annually and is now producing 100 units a day, a run rate of over 30,000 units annually. The fact that a legacy manufacturer is on the verge of outselling Tesla in its own luxury electric segment in the first year of shipping is fascinating given Tesla’s superior product and years of market lead.

Lesson: Once legacy companies have hodgepodged technology, they can produce it at scale.

Sales

While Tesla is right in attempting to disrupt the antiquated dealership business model, BMW will be able to leverage its extensive dealer network to deliver to consumers worldwide, and consumers can use web services like TrueCar and Beepi to bypass the hassle of negotiating with dealers on the price of a new car and trade-in amount. BMW also has access to a deep well of financial incentives to drive consumers to buy cars. Auto manufacturers and their dealers are fighting Tesla with regulatory measures to slow the company down and limit market penetration.

Lesson: Innovators should not underestimate the power of a legacy company’s large, lumbering sales channel.

Market Entry

Tesla had to enter the market at the high-end in order to deliver batteries capable of long ranges at a margin that would deliver profits to fickle investors, years before it could deliver a mass market mid-range vehicle. BMW’s breadth enables it to enter at the mid-market and then move up into the ultra high-end next year in the U.S. with its i8 supercar. To BMW, the distinctive, urban-friendly i3 is essentially a rolling advertisement for BMW’s innovative and green future, so the company could even sell them at a loss and come out ahead.

Tesla’s high-end first approach could turn into a liability as the Tesla S is quite large and therefore not well suited for urban environments – it is wider than and almost as long as a 7 series BMW. Large, luxury four door sedans are typically purchased by upper middle class men over the age of 35 which, as a member of the demographic, I unfortunately have to admit we’re not exactly the most hip crowd. BMW examined the market thoroughly and is targeting hip, young, urban professionals with the i3’s forward design, a smaller urban-friendly size, and the brand’s proven appeal with a younger demographic.

Lesson: Legacy companies are often in numerous segments of a market and leverage their scale to beat an upstart’s roadmap.

Who Exactly Is Getting Disrupted?

The big question is what industry exactly are electric cars are disrupting? At first it seemed like the legacy auto manufacturers would not be able to step up to an electric car challenge. They have widely adopted hybrid electric cars, are now delivering somewhat competitive electric cars, and are continually experimenting with hydrogen fuel cells. From a broader view, it is possible that ExxonMobil and Chevron will be more disrupted by electric vehicles rather than BMW and Chevrolet.

Elon Musk is an entrepreneurial hero who is concurrently disrupting the passenger vehicle, space transportation and electric utility industries. Some of the legacy companies in those industries were bound to wake up at some point and respond aggressively. Fortunately, Musk can rest assured that the United Launch Alliance will not be as agile against SpaceX as BMW has been against Tesla!

Three Car Technologies That Know When You're Too Sleepy to Drive

The Internet of things won't just change your home life.  It will also affect the way you drive, by keeping you alert and
preventing you from causing accidents.

As reported by GigaOm: Driverless cars like the one above, are still quite a way off into the future, but it’s easy to understand why robots might be safer drivers than people. We do dumb things like texting while driving, driving drunk and even falling asleep behind the wheel. So it’s interesting to think about how connected cars and the quantified self might meet in ways that help keep bad behaviors off the roads.

One way to do this is to put an ECG sensor in the seat of a car, so it can can measure a driver’s heart rate to detect how alert he or she is. Researchers at the Nottingham Trent University in the U.K., backed by the Technology Strategy Board, aim to figure out how to parse the data and separate the useful bits from the noise. They also want to determine the best way to integrate sensors into the fabric of a car’s seat. If the seat detects a sleepy driver, it would alert him or her, or possibly take control of the vehicle if the person doesn't respond. It’s like a fancier lane-drift detection system.

Another similar project (hat tip GizMag), called HARKEN (heart and respiration in-car embedded non-intrusive sensors) is a European effort to implant sensors that monitor respiration and heart rate into a car’s seat and seat-belt. The sensors detect when a driver falls asleep behind the wheel. The two-year project ended in June with a working prototype and will be tested on closed roads soon.

Finally, there’s Nissan’s concept project, Nismo. It includes a watch that tracks a driver’s biometrics and integrates with the car to share information about heart rate and road conditions. The concept comes from Nissan’s racing and high-performance division, so this is less about tracking when the driver is falling asleep and more about keeping a race car driver at the peak of performance. However, the idea that such integration might one day be available to the average consumer via in-car devices like Automatic or Zubie, connected to a fitness tracker such as the Withings Pulse or Jawbone.

In fact, with Automatic and Jawbone (and Withings) channels on IFTTT, maybe there’s a amateur-hacker solution to be made sooner rather than later. All we need are the right triggers.