U.S. motor vehicle deaths see biggest two year jump in over 50 years, per NSC • Hacker News Board

Re: U.S. motor vehicle deaths see biggest two year jump in over 50 years, per NSC

#71

Post by closeparen » Thu, Feb 16, 2017, 4:01 AM UTC

joezydeco wrote: post #65

mindslight wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly let's not refer to the problem as cellphone usage, but touchscreen usage . I can't fathom how builtin touchscreens on center consoles are even blessed by the DOT (especially with the horrendous input lag "modern" implementations generally have), but for their being "hip".

My 2016 Mazda disables the touchscreen when the car is in motion. I thought perhaps that was a NHTSA rule, but given cars like the Tesla S (where the screen operates everything not just the IVI) I guess it's not a firm requirement.

2016 Mazdas have the screen in your line of sight rather than down, and a non-touch input device (a click wheel in the center armrest).

Unfortunately Mazdas are the only economy cars that seem to care about this. For many others, it's a laggy touchscreen well below the vents.

Very happy with the old fashioned tactile controls on my 2012 VW.

Re: U.S. motor vehicle deaths see biggest two year jump in over 50 years, per NSC

#72

Post by mildbow » Thu, Feb 16, 2017, 4:06 AM UTC

tzs wrote: post #67

mildbow wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think GPS is secondary: you can easily get a mount for it. Based on experience, the most likely explanation is texting or voice calls. When I got a new car with bluetooth calling, all of a sudden I was fumbling a lot less. A call is now about the same level of distraction as having a passenger or 2. Texting however, I have no idea. Maybe something that moves texting to voice, but I haven't seen anything actually ma…

> When I got a new car with bluetooth calling, all of a sudden I was fumbling a lot less. A call is now about the same level of distraction as having a passenger or 2. Most studies that have actually tested it have found that talking with someone on a phone, even if hands free, is much more distracting than talking to a passenger. A big factor is that a passenger is much more likely to be aware of road and traffic co…

Sounds plausible that it's more distracting, but I'm not convinced that the difference is more varied than found among different types of passengers (back-seat driver/kids/dumb friends/audiobook(?) etc)

If you have a few studies that show more than that, I would be glad to check it out.

Re: U.S. motor vehicle deaths see biggest two year jump in over 50 years, per NSC

#73

Post by closeparen » Thu, Feb 16, 2017, 4:09 AM UTC

stronglikedan wrote: post #53

oconnore wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Automated enforcement of speed limit violations would be fine, as long as our speed limits were adjusted for strict enforcement versus human enforcement. Almost everyone will drive 35-40 in a 30, but you could make a case that anyone breaking 45-50mph for more than a few seconds should automatically get a ticket. Even better, the automated enforcement could account for actual danger, using road conditions, traffic de…

> Almost everyone will drive 35-40 in a 30 I used to, until I learned this [0]: > If someone is hit by a car at 40 mph they are 90% likely to be killed. > If someone is hit by a car at 30 mph they are 50% likely to be killed. > If someone is hit by a car at 20 mph they are 10% likely to be killed. [0] http://www.safespeed.org.uk/killspeed.html

This is a great reason not to speed in residential or downtown areas where there are pedestrians around.

We're most likely to get speed cameras on major roads and freeways, where pedestrians are rare to nonexistent and have no expectation of being yielded to, as you might with a crosswalk on a 25mph road.

Re: U.S. motor vehicle deaths see biggest two year jump in over 50 years, per NSC

#74

Post by closeparen » Thu, Feb 16, 2017, 4:15 AM UTC

revelation wrote: post #59

oconnore wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're talking about something else, because we should be designing for pedestrians to not be hit by cars, not making sure that pedestrians might survive the impact. At the same time, limiting modern cars to 25 mph everywhere is ridiculous. In some high density locations, that might mean strictly enforcing a 15mph limit instead of loosely enforcing a 10mph limit, building bike lanes, public transport, pedestr…

I'm sure we can do both . It was you who suggested being lenient on people going 35-40 mph in a 30 zone; 30 suggests the likelihood of encountering pedestrians, hence the mention of the survival rate. I'm quite with you on what we can do in high density locations, but I think you have not quite thought it through. In high density locations, there should simply not be any cars. The huge compromises are not justified w…

Let's be clear that what you're saying is, "In high density locations, there shouldn't be anyone who won't pay the rent to live within walking distance."

Re: U.S. motor vehicle deaths see biggest two year jump in over 50 years, per NSC

#75

Post by tzs » Thu, Feb 16, 2017, 4:37 AM UTC

mildbow wrote: post #72

tzs wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When I got a new car with bluetooth calling, all of a sudden I was fumbling a lot less. A call is now about the same level of distraction as having a passenger or 2. Most studies that have actually tested it have found that talking with someone on a phone, even if hands free, is much more distracting than talking to a passenger. A big factor is that a passenger is much more likely to be aware of road and traffic co…

Sounds plausible that it's more distracting, but I'm not convinced that the difference is more varied than found among different types of passengers (back-seat driver/kids/dumb friends/audiobook(?) etc) If you have a few studies that show more than that, I would be glad to check it out.

I don't know of any that have looked at different types of passengers. They have usually just compared an adult passenger talking with the driver to an adult on a phone talking with the driver.

Here was a recent study that was pretty interesting: https://news.illinois.edu/blog/view/6367/204502

Here's an older one: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/12/081201081917.h...

Re: U.S. motor vehicle deaths see biggest two year jump in over 50 years, per NSC

#76

Post by Silhouette » Thu, Feb 16, 2017, 5:50 AM UTC

mindslight wrote: post #62

finid wrote: post #7

also conducted a survey that indicates some possible causes for the steady increases, including speed, texting via touch input or voice, as well as driving while under the influence. I think most of it can be attributed to cellphone usage while driving. And now that most drivers choose to use their smartphones as GPS rather than a dedicated GPS device, I think it's going to get much worse.

Honestly let's not refer to the problem as cellphone usage, but touchscreen usage . I can't fathom how builtin touchscreens on center consoles are even blessed by the DOT (especially with the horrendous input lag "modern" implementations generally have), but for their being "hip".

Sadly, they aren't mutually exclusive.

Driving while distracted is a huge problem. Denial of that problem by people who have it is in itself also a huge problem. Apparently current levels of laws and penalties aren't sufficient to deter it, so something stronger may be needed.

Awful controls and interfaces in cars are also a problem. The number of gadgets and displays and distractions of all sorts in modern vehicles is disturbing. Laggy touchscreens are a prime example. Speak-out-loud systems and voice activated systems with poor speech recognition are other weak areas. I find it amazing that when cars are probably the second most expensive thing most of us ever buy, we accept such crude and poorly designed control systems, but there seems to be little concern in the industry because they're all just about as bad as each other. Again, at some point stronger regulation may be needed.

Re: U.S. motor vehicle deaths see biggest two year jump in over 50 years, per NSC

#77

Post by bjterry » Thu, Feb 16, 2017, 6:37 AM UTC

finid wrote: post #46

maxerickson wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

More or less, yes they do need to be guaranteed to make money. At least on average anyway. Or they will stop writing insurance policies.

The insurance business is the best racket to be in, same as private prison industry. Customers are guaranteed.

That only helps as long as there aren't many insurance companies. If there are many insurance companies, competition between them drives the costs down to marginal cost plus normal profit, in theory.

Re: U.S. motor vehicle deaths see biggest two year jump in over 50 years, per NSC

#78

Post by dukeluke » Thu, Feb 16, 2017, 4:19 PM UTC

Silhouette wrote: post #76

mindslight wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly let's not refer to the problem as cellphone usage, but touchscreen usage . I can't fathom how builtin touchscreens on center consoles are even blessed by the DOT (especially with the horrendous input lag "modern" implementations generally have), but for their being "hip".

Sadly, they aren't mutually exclusive. Driving while distracted is a huge problem. Denial of that problem by people who have it is in itself also a huge problem. Apparently current levels of laws and penalties aren't sufficient to deter it, so something stronger may be needed. Awful controls and interfaces in cars are also a problem. The number of gadgets and displays and distractions of all sorts in modern vehicles…

Tacking stronger legislation onto a social problem is why the War on Drugs exists, which hurts more than it helps. I'm not saying we shouldn't add stronger legislation, but maybe we should gather data on whether or not it would be more effective than an education & awareness campaign.

Re: U.S. motor vehicle deaths see biggest two year jump in over 50 years, per NSC

#79

Post by mindslight » Thu, Feb 16, 2017, 5:16 PM UTC

Silhouette wrote: post #76

mindslight wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly let's not refer to the problem as cellphone usage, but touchscreen usage . I can't fathom how builtin touchscreens on center consoles are even blessed by the DOT (especially with the horrendous input lag "modern" implementations generally have), but for their being "hip".

Sadly, they aren't mutually exclusive. Driving while distracted is a huge problem. Denial of that problem by people who have it is in itself also a huge problem. Apparently current levels of laws and penalties aren't sufficient to deter it, so something stronger may be needed. Awful controls and interfaces in cars are also a problem. The number of gadgets and displays and distractions of all sorts in modern vehicles…

Oh definitely. But my point is touchscreens add to that distraction, in an imperceptible way.

Texting while driving wasn't such an epidemic with T9, which had much societal adoption. I admit the sheer volume has gone up since then, but personally I recall it being relatively easy to enter a message only having to look at the screen occasionally to verify input.

A touchscreen requires one to look at the screen to make input. This insidiously creeps into one's OODA loop, sapping attention in a way that felt much harder to be aware of (since the "atomic task" of entering a letter now has a variable delay).

Likewise, I've done two cross country round trips with a handheld GPS unit (Garmin 60CSx), which my right hand operated just fine, including shifting. I wasn't using it for routing, but a "you are here map" with crow-flies distance. Most critical use was in denser cityish areas, that require more shifting and navigating traffic, and I still never felt distracted. Meanwhile even just starting Waze seems like a massive distraction that I'd rather only do while stopped - nevermind navigating any of its modal dialogs.

Re: U.S. motor vehicle deaths see biggest two year jump in over 50 years, per NSC

#80

Post by Silhouette » Thu, Feb 16, 2017, 8:05 PM UTC

dukeluke wrote: post #78

Silhouette wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sadly, they aren't mutually exclusive. Driving while distracted is a huge problem. Denial of that problem by people who have it is in itself also a huge problem. Apparently current levels of laws and penalties aren't sufficient to deter it, so something stronger may be needed. Awful controls and interfaces in cars are also a problem. The number of gadgets and displays and distractions of all sorts in modern vehicles…

Tacking stronger legislation onto a social problem is why the War on Drugs exists, which hurts more than it helps. I'm not saying we shouldn't add stronger legislation, but maybe we should gather data on whether or not it would be more effective than an education & awareness campaign.

I'm all for evidence-based policy-making, so I would have no objection in principle to considering alternatives like a public education campaign.

That said, in this particular case, we had plenty of campaigning when existing laws were introduced here in the UK, and that doesn't seem to have been very effective. The near-total lack of enforcement means those who find using their phone while driving convenient continue to do so, despite the mountain of evidence about how dangerous it is. Worse, because we didn't also ban hands-free use, despite the mountain of evidence that it is almost as bad as hand-held phone use in terms of impairing driver performance, vendors of hands-free kits were literally putting up six foot high stands at the entrances to major stores the week after the ban came in with captions like "Stay safe -- go hands-free!" all over them.

If we're going to solve this one, I suspect what we need is a combination of education and enforcement, both much stronger than we have seen so far. The number of people I come across online who maintain that they drive while using a phone all the time and are still perfectly safe is genuinely alarming.