Smart driving new front in China car wars despite fatal crash
Advanced driver-assistance systems (ADAS) help with tasks ranging from cruise control to parking and collision avoidance, with the ultimate aim being a fully self-driving car.
Automakers are pouring investment into their development, especially in the world's biggest car market China, which skews young and tech-savvy.
"Ten years ago, only 15 percent of customers said they would change car because of an intelligent cockpit - today it's 54 percent," Giovanni Lanfranchi of EV firm Zeekr said.
Almost 60 percent of cars sold in China last year had level-two ADAS features - where the driver is still in control but there is continuous assistance - or above, according to an AlixPartners report released last week.
The features "are emerging as a key competitive tool", said the consultancy's Yvette Zhang.
Some firms use their own proprietary technology, like start-up Xpeng and consumer electronics-turned-car company Xiaomi, while others are cooperating with tech giants such as Huawei.
Such software is being developed in Europe and North America too.
AFP | Hector RETAMAL
But in a survey of hundreds of global auto executives surveyed by AlixPartners, two-thirds said they believed China led the world in the field.
"The collection and processing of data, and the availability of software and machine-learning talent" is difficult to replicate, the report said.
The technology is not immune from the price wars that are a key feature of the Chinese market.
In February, domestic EV giant BYD announced it would release its "God's Eye" driving system on nearly all its cars, including on some models priced below $10,000.
- Over-promising? -
Then came a fatal accident in March involving a Xiaomi SU7 that had been in assisted driving mode just before it crashed.
The accident, in which three college students died, raised concerns over safety and the advertising of cars as being capable of "autonomous driving".
The issue is an industry-wide one - Tesla's US-released "Full Self-Driving" capability, for example, is still meant to be used under driver supervision.
AFP | Hector RETAMAL
"The price war has just been so brutal, companies are desperate to find any way to set themselves apart," said Tom Nunlist, associate director for tech and data policy at Trivium China.
"So the question is have they been over-promising on features and releasing things as quickly as possible, for the purposes of fighting this commercial battle."
China's Ministry of Industry and Information Technology seems to share those concerns.
After the crash, it held a meeting with leading automakers and other key players in which it made clear that safety rules would be more tightly enforced.
It warned automakers to test systems rigorously, "define system functional boundaries... and refrain from exaggerated or false advertising".
Reports said it will also crack down on the practice of improving ADAS via remote software updates.
- 'Sharp U-turn' -
As the massive industry show Auto Shanghai kicked off last week, the shift in gear was obvious.
"In a sharp U-turn from just two months ago, carmakers have taken a low profile in terms of autonomous driving functions, but are emphasising safety instead," said UBS' Paul Gong in a note.
AFP | Hector RETAMAL
"Safety is the ultimate premium of new energy vehicles," a sign at BYD's booth read.
At the bustling Xiaomi booth, information boards touted the SU7's colour choices, chassis and hardware - but AFP saw no mention of ADAS at all.
"The autonomous driving function marketing race seems to have halted, at least temporarily," wrote Gong.
Zhang Yu, managing director of Shanghai-based consultancy Automotive Foresight, told AFP that he thought the crash was "only a setback in marketing terms, which is helpful for a healthy development" of the area.
"This accident was not related to tech or the system itself, it more concerns the ignorance of ADAS and boundary of autonomous driving," he added.
The technology itself continues to progress.
"That's why this is becoming a pressing issue because car companies are going to be wanting to release these features," Trivium's Nunlist said.
However, a truly autonomous car - level five on the scale - is "certainly not imminent", he added, predicting "very hard last-mile problems".
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
eNCA
39 minutes ago
- eNCA
Australian court fines Qantas US$59 million for illegal layoffs
AUSTRALIA - An Australian court fined Qantas Aus$90 million (US$59 million) on Monday for illegally laying off 1,800 ground staff during the Covid-19 pandemic, ending a five-year legal battle over the workers' rights. Federal Court Justice Michael Lee said he wanted the penalty to be a "real deterrence" to firms that might be tempted by the financial rewards of breaching employment law. Qantas decided to sack the workers and outsource their jobs in August 2020, a period of lockdowns and border closures when no Covid-19 vaccine existed. Australia's Federal Court subsequently found that Qantas had acted illegally despite its stated "commercial imperatives" and later dismissed an appeal by the airline. It said the carrier had prevented staff from accessing their rights to collectively bargain or take industrial action. Long-dubbed the "Spirit of Australia", 104-year-old Qantas has been on a mission to repair its reputation, which was hit in recent years by the illegal sackings, soaring ticket prices, claims of sloppy service, and the selling of seats on already-cancelled flights. Qantas chief executive Vanessa Hudson took over in 2023, promising to improve customer satisfaction. She replaced Alan Joyce, who stepped down earlier than planned as Qantas endured heavy criticism over its treatment of workers and passengers, despite delivering bumper profits for shareholders. - 'Move on' - Qantas' fine is to be paid in two parts, the court said, with Aus$50 million going to the Transport Workers Union and Aus$40 million being held for future payments to the former workers. The penalty is in addition to a compensation payment of Aus$120 million for affected former employees that Qantas agreed to last year. "It has been five long years. Today is a victory, not just for our colleagues but for all Australian workers," said Anne Guirguis, who worked at Qantas for 27 years cleaning aircraft before being laid off. "We can close this chapter and move on now," Guirguis told reporters outside court. Transport Workers' Union National Secretary Michael Kaine described Monday's decision as a "final win" for the Qantas workers. "Qantas was not sorry to workers when it illegally outsourced these workers, many finding out they'd lost their jobs over a loudspeaker in the lunch room," Kaine said. "Qantas is only sorry now that it has to pay the largest penalty fine of any employer in Australian corporate history."
TimesLIVE
an hour ago
- TimesLIVE
Robots race, play football, crash and collapse at China's ‘robot Olympics'
China kicked off the three-day long World Humanoid Robot Games on Friday, looking to showcase its advances in artificial intelligence and robotics with 280 teams from 16 countries. Robots competed in sports such as track and field and table tennis and tackled robot-specific challenges from sorting medicines and handling materials to cleaning services. Teams came from countries including the US, Germany and Brazil, with 192 representing universities and 88 from private enterprises such as China's Unitree and Fourier Intelligence. Competing teams used robots from Chinese manufacturers such as Booster Robotics. "We come here to play and win, but we are also interested in research," said Max Polter, a member of the HTWK Robots football team from Germany, affiliated with Leipzig University of Applied Sciences. "You can test a lot of interesting new and exciting approaches in the contest. If we try something and it doesn't work, we lose the game. That's sad but it is better than investing a lot of money into a product which failed." At the robot games in Beijing, which charged 128 to 580 yuan (R313.19 to R1,419) for tickets, humanoids crashed into each other and toppled over repeatedly during football matches, while others collapsed mid-sprint during running events. During one football match, four robots crashed into each other and fell in a tangled heap. In the 1,500m running event, one robot collapsed while running at full speed, drawing gasps and cheers from spectators. Despite frequent tumbles requiring human assistance to help robots stand, many managed to right themselves independently, earning applause from audiences. Organisers said the games provide valuable data collection opportunities for developing robots for practical applications such as factory work. Football matches help train robots' coordination abilities, which could prove useful for assembly line operations requiring collaboration between many units, commentators said. China is investing billions in humanoids and robotics as the country grapples with an ageing population and growing competition with the US over advanced technologies. It has staged high-profile robotics events in recent months, including what it called the world's first humanoid robot marathon in Beijing, a robot conference and the opening of retail stores dedicated to humanoid robots. Morgan Stanley analysts in a report last week noted a surge in attendance at a recent robot conference from the general public compared to years before, saying this showed "how China, not only top government officials, has embraced the concept of embodied intelligence".
Daily Maverick
12 hours ago
- Daily Maverick
Competition Commission and international banks to square off in ConCourt over rand price-fixing accusations
The case stems from allegations that the banks were manipulating the foreign exchange rate between the US dollar and the rand over several years by sharing information on messaging platforms. The Constitutional Court is due to hear four days of legal argument in a matter involving the Competition Commission and more than two dozen banks from across the world, which the commission has accused of 'the most egregious form of anti-competitive conduct'. The case stems from allegations that the banks were manipulating the foreign exchange rate between the US dollar and the rand over several years by sharing information on messaging platforms. Three cases, one brought by the commission and the other two brought by the French bank BNP Paribas and US-based Credit Suisse Securities, have been combined into a single massive hearing at which the court will determine whether all or some of the banks should be held liable for colluding. Years of legal battles The case has its origin in a 2017 referral by the Competition Commission to the Competition Tribunal, in which the commission alleged that international traders were using the Bloomberg instant messaging service to discuss the pricing of the US dollar to rand exchange rate. The commission eventually included 28 banks in its case referral. 'The traders shared competitively sensitive information and made arrangements to assist each other by coordinating their trading activities. The traders would regularly agree on the bid-offer spread or spot rate for buying and selling of the USD/ZAR currency paid,' said the commission. The traders would also make arrangements to manipulate the bid-offer prices on the Reuters trading platform by agreeing on the order of transacting, withholding their trades, or posting 'fake bids and offers', said Makgale Mohlala, the manager of the cartels division of the Competition Commission, in an affidavit before the ConCourt. Various banks filed appeals and exceptions to the case, alleging that the commission did not have the jurisdiction to refer the case. The Competition Appeal Court heard the matters and found that the commission had no jurisdiction with regard to 17 of the international banks. Just four international banks were retained in the case: BNP Paribas, Credit Suisse Securities, JPMorgan Chase and Co, and HSBC Bank PLC. South African banks Standard Bank, Nedbank Limited and FirstRand Bank Limited had also appealed against the initial referral, but the court dismissed their cases. 'Single overarching conspiracy' Mohlala said the commission 'cannot accept this outcome in a case involving the most egregious form of anti-competitive conduct'. The commission had said that there was a 'single overarching conspiracy' among the banks. 'The manipulation impacted on the exchange rate of the South African rand, which in turn affected various parts of the South African economy — including imports and exports, foreign direct investment, public and private debt, companies' balance sheets, with the attendant implications for the prices of goods and services and financial assets,' said Mohlala. The commission also alleges that the Competition Appeal Court (CAC) erred in several conclusions of its judgment, saying it created new requirements for jurisdiction and contradicted itself. No constitutional issue Some of the banks that were listed in the initial complaint have opposed the commission's application, criticising the way the commission handled the initial complaint and subsequent litigation. Standard Bank of South Africa is among these, saying the commission ignored important information when formulating its complaint. In an affidavit, Ian Sinton, the former general counsel and current consultant for Standard Bank, said the bank was opposing the commission because 'there is no constitutional issue implicated' and 'it is not in the interests of justice' that leave to appeal be granted. He claimed that the bank had raised several factual issues during the Competition Tribunal phase that were ignored. 'Numerous opportunities have been afforded to the commission to plead a sustainable case against [Standard Bank], and it has failed to do so. Contrary to its obligation of impartiality imposed by section 20 of the Competition Act, the commission has shut its mind to relevant information furnished to it by Standard Bank, including easily verifiable facts which dispose of the case,' said Stinton in court papers. The bank also argues that the commission didn't have jurisdiction to prosecute it because the alleged misconduct did not take place in its local office. 'The commission made out no case at all linking the activities of the Johannesburg branch to any cause of action, and so the deficiencies in alleging subject matter jurisdiction remain exactly as before,' said the bank through its lawyer Martin Versfeld. The lawyer for Bank of America and Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Shawn van der Meulen, has criticised the commission for raising new legal issues that were not brought up during the initial appeal. JPMorgan Chase has also criticised the commission's decision to approach the ConCourt, saying the case 'does not legitimately raise a constitutional issue'. Banks appeal Two of the banks whose tribunal referral was ruled as valid, BNP Paribas and Credit Suisse Securities, have launched their own cases. BNP alleges that the commission has not properly pleaded its revised case. 'By failing to properly plead its case, the commission has fallen short of the requirements imposed on it by the CAC. This raises a constitutional issue in that this court is called on to decide whether the rule of law, enshrined in section 1 of the Constitution, can accommodate a situation in which the commission can exercise its prosecutorial powers in contravention of an order of the CAC, which binds the commission,' said Rudolph Labuschagne, BNP's attorney. Credit Suisse Securities has also taken issue with how the commission initiated its investigation. The commission 'exceeded [its] statutory power and thereby violated the principles of legality and the rule of law. These are quintessential constitutional matters,' said Paul Cleland, the attorney for Credit Suisse Securities. Credit Suisse also takes issue with the appeal decision, saying the CAC failed 'to treat like parties alike in the same proceedings — for no good reason whatsoever'. It believes it should have got an exception, like several other international banks. The bank says this action is 'patently arbitrary and irrational'. 'The CAC order violates the right to equal treatment before the law under section 9 (1) of the Constitution, which 'entitles everybody, at the very least, to equal treatment by our courts of law'.' Due to the similarity of issues being dealt with, the ConCourt has combined all three cases into one hearing. Argument will be heard from 19-22 August. DM
