Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Lawmakers seek to ban Google Glass on the road

news.cnet.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 58 posts

Re: Lawmakers seek to ban Google Glass on the road

#41

Post by cbhl »

jonknee wrote: post #26
johneth wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Some cars already project information onto the windshield. Yes - information such as speed. Driving related things which the driver would normally need to know while operating the vehicle. Google Glass is a distraction in much the same way a mobile phone is while driving - it's removing your attention from the road to do things such as texting. So you can't compare the two.

> Google Glass is a distraction in much the same way a mobile phone is while driving - it's removing your attention from the road to do things such as texting. Google Glass could be a distraction in much the same way as a mobile phone is while driving, it also could be a huge help in driving. A driving app could display speed, navigation, highlight pedestrians, provide blind spot assistance, etc etc. It's really too…

Keep in mind that Glass doesn't provide a full overlay of a person's vison -- you need to adjust both focus and look in the corner of your field of vision.

Re: Lawmakers seek to ban Google Glass on the road

#42

Post by cromwellian »

The reaction to Glass is somewhat ridiculous for people who have no idea how they work and have never used them. Even more ridiculous is the government trying to ban or regulate something that isn't even available yet, and might never be available, or, as the naysayers say, be a complete market failure.

Re: Lawmakers seek to ban Google Glass on the road

#43

Post by mistercow »

waterlesscloud wrote: post #34
saulrh wrote: post #30

As I've said before, maybe people should actually try one of these things before they assume they know how they work. I've seen them before. I've used them. One of my professors does research with them. In particular: A person displaying contextual task information - like GPS navigation - with a head-mounted display spends less time switching contexts, is less distracted by context switches, and is generally more foc…

There's no reason to believe that contextual task information would be the only (or even primary) use of Glass while driving. It's certainly not the only way other mobile devices are used while driving.

There's also no reason to believe that following directions is the only reason someone would read while driving, but it's not illegal to have newspaper sitting on the passenger's seat.

Re: Lawmakers seek to ban Google Glass on the road

#44

Post by mistercow »

darkchasma wrote: post #32
saulrh wrote: post #30

As I've said before, maybe people should actually try one of these things before they assume they know how they work. I've seen them before. I've used them. One of my professors does research with them. In particular: A person displaying contextual task information - like GPS navigation - with a head-mounted display spends less time switching contexts, is less distracted by context switches, and is generally more foc…

Politicians don't use facts to make laws, they use irrational fear. If they used facts, we would all have healthcare, no guns, prostitution and marijuana would be legal, but high fructose corn syrup, and diet soda would be illegal. And we certainly wouldn't have to take off our shoes to board and airplane.

>but high fructose corn syrup, and diet soda would be illegal

Might want to check those facts.

There's very little evidence that sucralose and aspartame are in any way harmful, despite a considerable search effort spanning decades. Sugar alcohols and sweeteners like acesulfame potassium have a clean record too, excepting some digestive discomfort until you build a tolerance to them. Xylitol is actually good for you.

As for HFCS, research suggests that it's only a problem because of how much of it is used. There's no good evidence that it's actually more harmful than any other simple sugar. HFCS is a problem because it's about the cheapest way to make food tastier, and eating loads of sugar is bad for you.

Re: Lawmakers seek to ban Google Glass on the road

#45

Post by derefr »

ahallock wrote: post #37
darkchasma wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Politicians don't use facts to make laws, they use irrational fear. If they used facts, we would all have healthcare, no guns, prostitution and marijuana would be legal, but high fructose corn syrup, and diet soda would be illegal. And we certainly wouldn't have to take off our shoes to board and airplane.

Sarcasm? All you've done with your example is trade one set of authoritarian, capricious rules with another. How about we just stop dictating people's lives?

> How about we just stop dictating people's lives?

But then what would politicians do all day?

Seriously, "making laws that dictate people's lives" are the things they can point to to say they're doing any job at all. They have a strong incentive to make those kinds of laws. What is needed more than anything is to remove that incentive.

Re: Lawmakers seek to ban Google Glass on the road

#46

Post by derefr »

uptown wrote: post #39
Evbn wrote: post #4

Because this thing that they have never used and isn't yet on the market is the most pressing threat to public safety? Methinks they just want an excuse to subpoena some devices to play with. Or are they going to ban dashboards next, since they distract drivers from the road?

Which is it? Do we want laws that are so archaic they test their own relevance ... or do we want laws that adapt to the changing world in which they're designed to apply? More often than not, we see the legal system trail far behind the technological realities of the society they're intended to regulate. While I'm no fan of legislation for the sake of legislation, I'm happy to see a more forward-thinking approach to…

I would think that we want laws that react to real problems that come up, as they come up, once enough data has been collected to prove they're problems. Then, the law is enacted, the data is measured again, and we see whether the law solved the problem. :)

Re: Lawmakers seek to ban Google Glass on the road

#47

Post by mistercow »

ahallock wrote: post #37
darkchasma wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Politicians don't use facts to make laws, they use irrational fear. If they used facts, we would all have healthcare, no guns, prostitution and marijuana would be legal, but high fructose corn syrup, and diet soda would be illegal. And we certainly wouldn't have to take off our shoes to board and airplane.

Sarcasm? All you've done with your example is trade one set of authoritarian, capricious rules with another. How about we just stop dictating people's lives?

Even if you don't think the government should be prohibiting dangerous substances, you must surely concede that prohibiting actually dangerous substances* is still better than prohibiting safe substances.

* Leaving aside that the most common artificial sweeteners aren't actually dangerous substances

Re: Lawmakers seek to ban Google Glass on the road

#48

Post by Lost_BiomedE »

For drivers, they need to ban make-up or nail polish, shaving, brushing teeth, changing the radio station, looking through console or briefcase, not having slept 4 or more hours the previous night, cleaning the windshield, adjusting seats or mirrors, plugging in electronic devices while moving, reading a map, entering in GPS info, using your hands while talking to a passenger, turning to address a passenger, fixing or brushing hair, opening packaging, lighting a cigarette, laughing, the sorting of papers, wearing heels or prohibitive boots, removing dust or sleep from eye, coughing or sneezing, stretching, talk radio, excessive emotion, excessive seat lean, not having two hands on the wheel, reaching that causes your torso to turn, adjusting clothing, clipping of nails, wearing an eye patch, picking your nose, eating, billboards, bumper stickers, dancing, scratching, swatting at bugs, sunglasses at dusk, and google glass

Or just use existing laws that cover these things such as reckless driving.

Re: Lawmakers seek to ban Google Glass on the road

#49

Post by ahallock »

derefr wrote: post #45
ahallock wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sarcasm? All you've done with your example is trade one set of authoritarian, capricious rules with another. How about we just stop dictating people's lives?

> How about we just stop dictating people's lives? But then what would politicians do all day? Seriously, "making laws that dictate people's lives" are the things they can point to to say they're doing any job at all. They have a strong incentive to make those kinds of laws. What is needed more than anything is to remove that incentive.

They have a huge incentive to sell their political power; it's their 'product'. I really don't have much hope for reforming the current system. It's too entrenched and has too much momentum.

Re: Lawmakers seek to ban Google Glass on the road

#50

Post by darkchasma »

mistercow wrote: post #44
darkchasma wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Politicians don't use facts to make laws, they use irrational fear. If they used facts, we would all have healthcare, no guns, prostitution and marijuana would be legal, but high fructose corn syrup, and diet soda would be illegal. And we certainly wouldn't have to take off our shoes to board and airplane.

>but high fructose corn syrup, and diet soda would be illegal Might want to check those facts. There's very little evidence that sucralose and aspartame are in any way harmful, despite a considerable search effort spanning decades. Sugar alcohols and sweeteners like acesulfame potassium have a clean record too, excepting some digestive discomfort until you build a tolerance to them. Xylitol is actually good for you.…

Agreed, I inserted my own bias from correlative studies and imposed anecdotal observations from my friends and family. I have read some convincing rat studies, but it's absolutely too soon to say that these are facts. My apologies.
Post reply on HN