Show HN: Identify car crash editorial anti-patterns using NLP • Hacker News Board

Re: Show HN: Identify car crash editorial anti-patterns using NLP

#31

Post by ecshafer » Tue, Oct 12, 2021, 4:39 PM UTC

JackFr wrote: post #30

whimsicalism wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, I do not think you bear responsibility if you collapse and someone strikes you with their car and then flees the scene.

Don’t be obtuse. A person collapses into the street and is struck by oncoming traffic - no one is to blame. It is an accident.

If someone collapses into the street, the driver should be able to stop in time, unless they are going to fast. Who I can think to blame here: * The auto manufacturer for not having sensors to detect this.

* The city for making car dependent areas

* The city for making roads that have cars drive so fast by pedestrians, that the pedestrian can die if hit

* The driver for not driving more reasonably

* The city for not having a barrier between the sidewalk and the road, China has these in a lot of areas, a curb with a hedge between the side walks and roads, or a fence.

The pedestrian who collapses is the last to blame in my view.

Re: Show HN: Identify car crash editorial anti-patterns using NLP

#32

Post by renewiltord » Tue, Oct 12, 2021, 4:40 PM UTC

UncleEntity wrote: post #22

> "The vehicle fled the scene" VS "The driver fled the scene" It is quite common for the driver to flee the scene while leaving behind the disabled vehicle. …one of my old coworker’s vehicle was involved in an accident with a pedestrian who ran full speed in front of her while it was dark outside and the vehicle was traveling at the legal speed limit. Said vehicle was unable to stop in time which resulted in the spee…

Are you sure it wasn’t that the road moved under the pedestrian’s feet locating her in front of the vehicle comoving with the road in one direction and along it in another?

I think you haven’t presented evidence.

Re: Show HN: Identify car crash editorial anti-patterns using NLP

#33

Post by beaconstudios » Tue, Oct 12, 2021, 4:44 PM UTC

this seems to me like it's designed to shift the blame from unilaterally on the VRU (bad), to unilaterally on the driver (also bad).

You pay lip service to systemic problems, but this is not a systemic approach to reducing crashes; it just implies that the driver is at fault, which is not always the case in these things. As another comment noted, reporters would do well to highlight the context around the crash if there's no clear fault (such as an intoxicated or negligent driver, or a pedestrian running into the road within minimum braking distance), such as lack of bike lanes, blind corners, etc that would apply pressure to authorities to make the roads safer.

Not all crashes can be default-blamed on the driver.

Re: Show HN: Identify car crash editorial anti-patterns using NLP

#34

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Oct 12, 2021, 4:45 PM UTC

jasonhansel wrote: post #15

Worth noting the history behind this issue of biased reporting: > In the late 1920s and ’30s, a consortium of automobile manufacturers, insurers, and fuel companies known as the National Automobile Chamber of Commerce funded a wire service that provided free reporting on crashes to short-staffed Depression-era newspapers. Reporters could send in a few basic details about a local collision, and the wire service would…

[deleted]

Re: Show HN: Identify car crash editorial anti-patterns using NLP

#35

Post by dash2 » Tue, Oct 12, 2021, 4:45 PM UTC

I'm afraid I find this somewhere between creepy and ridiculous.

On the ridiculous side: the idea that calling a car accident an "accident" is somehow wrong - as if, because I understand that what happened was an accident, I am somehow incapable of thinking "hey, maybe we need better road safety legislation".

On the creepy side: the general approach which is, instead of making public arguments about why cars are bad, to manipulate language so as to push people to your side, using results from behavioural science.

Of course, if you think the author is on the side of the angels, then this is great! But the techniques can be used by equally self-righteous people, with whom you may disagree.

Treating people like sheep is gross. Don't do it.

Re: Show HN: Identify car crash editorial anti-patterns using NLP

#36

Post by aerostable_slug » Tue, Oct 12, 2021, 4:46 PM UTC

briandear wrote: post #10

This could also be used for gun crime reporting as well.

That would be politically infeasible. The overwhelming narrative would be "young black male gang member kills other young black male gang member, destroying the hopes and dreams Victim A's grandmother had for him", and that already doesn't get widely reported.

https://heyjackass.com/

Re: Show HN: Identify car crash editorial anti-patterns using NLP

#37

Post by chana_masala » Tue, Oct 12, 2021, 4:50 PM UTC

I hope you can look past the negative responses here. I think this is very well intentioned and well done. It would be nice to see more rationale on the website like what you've written here

Re: Show HN: Identify car crash editorial anti-patterns using NLP

#38

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Oct 12, 2021, 4:52 PM UTC

dash2 wrote: post #35

I'm afraid I find this somewhere between creepy and ridiculous. On the ridiculous side: the idea that calling a car accident an "accident" is somehow wrong - as if, because I understand that what happened was an accident, I am somehow incapable of thinking "hey, maybe we need better road safety legislation". On the creepy side: the general approach which is, instead of making public arguments about why cars are bad,…

[deleted]

Re: Show HN: Identify car crash editorial anti-patterns using NLP

#39

Post by fn-mote » Tue, Oct 12, 2021, 4:55 PM UTC

PeterisP wrote: post #19

fermigier wrote: post #18

I like the general idea, and the use of NLP to implement it. But I am dubious about some of the principles behind it. - For example, I find it inaccurate to say "the driver hit the pedestrian", which to me suggests a collision between two people, not between a person and a vehicle. (Of course this does not apply to a phrase like "the vehicle fled the scene" - it is clear that it was the driver who fled the scene). Wh…

I find "the vehicle fled the scene" as a useful phrase that's used to distinguish this situation from the very different "the driver fled the scene" which is commonly used in the (not that rare) cases where the driver abandons the wrecked car after an accident, in some cases to hide that they were intoxicated.

I disagree. Shifting the agency to the driver is important enough to my that I recommend writers use "the driver fled the scene on foot" if that's what happened. (This particular phrase is actually used.)

It seems obvious that "the vehicle" is not doing the fleeing, so even if this is standard phrasing it should be revised.

Re: Show HN: Identify car crash editorial anti-patterns using NLP

#40

Post by Spivak » Tue, Oct 12, 2021, 4:56 PM UTC

ecshafer wrote: post #31

JackFr wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don’t be obtuse. A person collapses into the street and is struck by oncoming traffic - no one is to blame. It is an accident.

If someone collapses into the street, the driver should be able to stop in time, unless they are going to fast. Who I can think to blame here: * The auto manufacturer for not having sensors to detect this. * The city for making car dependent areas * The city for making roads that have cars drive so fast by pedestrians, that the pedestrian can die if hit * The driver for not driving more reasonably * The city for not…

Yeah, this isn't an act of god that no one could have possibly foreseen. This is system designed by humans that we have 100% control over.