Biggest Spike in Traffic Deaths in 50 Years? Blame Apps

Post by hvidgaard » Wed, Nov 16, 2016, 6:57 AM UTC

farright wrote: post #114

bigethan wrote: post #49

As a cyclist in SF, Uber/Lyft drivers are the most dangerous thing going. They're driving by staring at their phone's map for directions and pickup/dropoff. Once they stop, they stare at their phone for the next ride. Very little situational awareness. It'd be nice if there was some sort of way for them to indicate they drive erratically. Perhaps by painting their cars all yellow or something...

What would be cool is using the windscreen for an AR display, with glasses for both head tracking and for stereoscopic display. I guess it would be expensive, probably too expensive for Uber drivers. Maybe it could still be used in luxury vehicles while full autonomous operation is in the works.

Post by ygra » Wed, Nov 16, 2016, 6:59 AM UTC

rat87 wrote: post #96

ux-app wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's poor design. My wife's new car has physical buttons for all the common functions that you might require to use while in motion: - Radio on/off - All radio controls on the wheel - Heating/cooling, physical knobs The touchscreen is treated as an optional, secondary interface, as it rightfully should be.

Just Radio? I'm assuming people are listening to podcasts/Pandora/spotify/audiobooks just as frequently , not to mention looking at/listening to directions. And it doesn't even have a siri/google assistant button? I'd consider that vital.

Post by roymurdock » Wed, Nov 16, 2016, 7:01 AM UTC

ramblenode wrote: post #97

apsec112 wrote: post #65

Headline: "Blame Apps" Evidence given in the article: - "Safety experts say" that it's true. The experts are not named or quoted. No evidence or reasoning is given to support the claim. - Highway fatalities are up this year. However, they're still significantly down from 2007, when the iPhone was first introduced. Mobile has been booming for almost a decade - if we should "blame apps", why hasn't it been a concern be…

I'm not sure if I've become more cognizant of bad journalism over time or simply hold journalism to a higher standard with the rise of publicly available data sets which could be used for real insight into questions like this. Whichever one, I am infrequently satisfied with the level of evidence that supports an article's conclusion. I would love to see a truly data-driven news publication that made quantifying uncer…

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Nov 16, 2016, 7:01 AM UTC

ramblenode wrote: post #97

apsec112 wrote: post #65

Headline: "Blame Apps" Evidence given in the article: - "Safety experts say" that it's true. The experts are not named or quoted. No evidence or reasoning is given to support the claim. - Highway fatalities are up this year. However, they're still significantly down from 2007, when the iPhone was first introduced. Mobile has been booming for almost a decade - if we should "blame apps", why hasn't it been a concern be…

I'm not sure if I've become more cognizant of bad journalism over time or simply hold journalism to a higher standard with the rise of publicly available data sets which could be used for real insight into questions like this. Whichever one, I am infrequently satisfied with the level of evidence that supports an article's conclusion. I would love to see a truly data-driven news publication that made quantifying uncer…

Post by kalleboo » Wed, Nov 16, 2016, 7:05 AM UTC

yk wrote: post #11

What does a journalist think when he writes something like "biggest spike in traffic death in 50 years"? The NYT even has a nice plot, that clearly shows that there are two, perhaps three significant, spikes in traffic death, and overall traffic death were reduced to a third of the late seventies. I mean I just eyeball the plot, but to me it seems the story is that there is a plateau since ~2010.