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

Drone believed to have hit British Airways flight 'may have been a plastic bag'

telegraph.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 176 posts

Re: Drone believed to have hit British Airways flight 'may have been a plastic bag'

#161

Post by emodendroket »

pmarreck wrote: post #160
emodendroket wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wouldn't it be safer to pay attention to the road and notice someone swerving your way than to get an alert, look over your phone to read it, then look up to catch the swerving car?

What if the vehicle is around the next bend? Are you actually arguing that drivers should have less information available to them? Disclaimer: I use Waze and think it's fucking fantastic and do not understand this stupid brouhaha in this thread.

> Are you actually arguing that drivers should have less information available to them?

I'm arguing that drivers should be paying attention to operating their cars instead of their phones.

Re: Drone believed to have hit British Airways flight 'may have been a plastic bag'

#162

Post by Karunamon »

emodendroket wrote: post #150
enzanki_ars wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are encouraged to use the "hands free" option of reporting in the app by waving your hand over your phone.

"Hands free" technology is intuitively appealing but in reality it's about as distracting as regular operation.

At some point we've moved into the point of diminishing returns and pointlessness. Carrying on a full conversation might be one thing - barking the words "acknowledge alert" or similar at your phone probably doesn't cause a measurable or significant distraction.

Re: Drone believed to have hit British Airways flight 'may have been a plastic bag'

#163

Post by emodendroket »

Karunamon wrote: post #162
emodendroket wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Hands free" technology is intuitively appealing but in reality it's about as distracting as regular operation.

At some point we've moved into the point of diminishing returns and pointlessness. Carrying on a full conversation might be one thing - barking the words "acknowledge alert" or similar at your phone probably doesn't cause a measurable or significant distraction.

> It takes drivers up to 27 seconds to return to full attention after using voice commands to make a hands-free call, turn on the radio or perform other tasks, according to two studies released Thursday by the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety. Traveling at 25 miles per hour, that would equal the length of three football fields.

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/8135f446be2e4922b27dc3881155e...

Re: Drone believed to have hit British Airways flight 'may have been a plastic bag'

#164

Post by MertsA »

cpncrunch wrote: post #50
amelius wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about its weight?

30g. http://www.alibaba.com/product-detail/wholesale-price-1575-4...

That's just the antenna. Also, you can't get an actual GPS receiver for under a $1, around $10 is a bit more reasonable for a low price.

Re: Drone believed to have hit British Airways flight 'may have been a plastic bag'

#165

Post by astrange »

holyoly wrote: post #114
astrange wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The alert I see the most with Waze is "Vehicle stopped on shoulder", which is not only distracting when the yellow sign pops down and animates out, but can't possibly be relevant to my life when I'm driving in the left lane. Most of the rest are fine.

You can turn on and off each individual notification. And it also has voice commands built in to control the app. You don't even need the phone's screen on. It can be in your pocket while driving. And it is relevant to you no matter what lane you are in. If there is a car on the shoulder, someone in the right lane could be not paying attention, and swerve into you to avoid that car. Though you should be always on hig…

> If there is a car on the shoulder, someone in the right lane could be not paying attention, and swerve into you to avoid that car.

Then on 101 they'd still be a lane or two away from me, so most of the time it doesn't matter. But someone's car is guaranteed to be broken down somewhere every day, so it just comes up all the time.

BTW, you actually can't turn it off without disabling all Hazards, but the rest of them like "object in lane" seem pretty good.

Re: Drone believed to have hit British Airways flight 'may have been a plastic bag'

#166

Post by Karunamon »

emodendroket wrote: post #163
Karunamon wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At some point we've moved into the point of diminishing returns and pointlessness. Carrying on a full conversation might be one thing - barking the words "acknowledge alert" or similar at your phone probably doesn't cause a measurable or significant distraction.

> It takes drivers up to 27 seconds to return to full attention after using voice commands to make a hands-free call, turn on the radio or perform other tasks, according to two studies released Thursday by the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety. Traveling at 25 miles per hour, that would equal the length of three football fields. http://bigstory.ap.org/article/8135f446be2e4922b27dc3881155e...

No link to the actual study, not even so much as a DOI. Never mind "make a hands free call" implies carrying on the call...

I'm calling shenanigans anyways. What on earth is the driver doing for those 27 seconds? How are they determining "full attention"?

Re: Drone believed to have hit British Airways flight 'may have been a plastic bag'

#167

Post by fabulist »

ryanlol wrote: post #155
fabulist wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Normally I would agree with you, I often chide people for inventing problems to solve. But it is a little different when it isn't a hypothetical as much as an inevitable future occurrence. As for refrigerators, I am just as worried about people trying to fly drones around my house as I am about people flying drones around planes, yes. I have it on good authority that anyone with the funds can purchase access to 3D dr…

https://www.google.com/maps/streetview/

Now imagine that without Google Privacy, better cameras, and shot from the air.

Re: Drone believed to have hit British Airways flight 'may have been a plastic bag'

#168

Post by tamana »

fabulist wrote: post #167
ryanlol wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://www.google.com/maps/streetview/

Now imagine that without Google Privacy, better cameras, and shot from the air.

That's a public website, no Google privacy is relevant.

Re: Drone believed to have hit British Airways flight 'may have been a plastic bag'

#169

Post by fabulist »

tamana wrote: post #168
fabulist wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Now imagine that without Google Privacy, better cameras, and shot from the air.

That's a public website, no Google privacy is relevant.

Google Privacy is the program which blurs (things that looks like) faces and license plates.

Re: Drone believed to have hit British Airways flight 'may have been a plastic bag'

#170

Post by tamana »

Jtsummers wrote: post #36
hirsin wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's actually good precedent to bring up - has e.g. Google Maps or more infamously, Apple Maps, ever been held liable for bad directions? I believe it's still seen as the end user's responsibility to obey the laws, especially when the safeguards fail.

A friend recently (several months ago) was fined because he trusted Google Maps to be accurate and drove into an otherwise unmarked (by the route he took into it) wilderness protection area. He got the minimal fine because he demonstrated that he'd tried to obey the law (showed that Google Maps marked the areas, but marked them incorrectly), but he was still fined.

Surely even without maps the problem is the same: the route is unmarked.
Post reply on HN