• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Siri vs. Xbox

NobleSavage

Veteran Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2003
Messages
3,079
Location
127.0.0.1
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
This if from 1/3 of a post on Slashdot:

Siri aims to be completely conversational: Do you think the freshman Congressman from California's Twelfth deserved to sit on HUAC, and how did that impact his future relationship with J. Edgar? Xbox One is basically an oral command line interface, of the form: Xbox (direct object). ...it's these inconsistencies that are frustrating as you jump back and forth between devices. And we're only going to scale this up."

Which direction do you think is correct? I like the Xbox approach.
 

bilby

Fair dinkum thinkum
Joined
Mar 7, 2007
Messages
26,783
Location
The Sunshine State: The one with Crocs, not Gators
Gender
He/Him
Basic Beliefs
Strong Atheist
The only time I want to talk to technology is to curse and swear at it. I do not want it to respond or answer back. If I want my technology to do something I will press the appropriate button, or click on a menu item in a GUI.

Shit, I don't even like talking to other humans very much. Why the fuck would I want to talk to a machine?

This is technology looking for a problem to solve that doesn't exist; but the dumbass marketing and sales fuckwits think it is 'cutting edge' and 'cool', so we get to replace systems that work perfectly well with new ones that work (at best) most of the time, and that as a result are fucking annoying.

No thanks.
 

NobleSavage

Veteran Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2003
Messages
3,079
Location
127.0.0.1
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
The only time I want to talk to technology is to curse and swear at it. I do not want it to respond or answer back. If I want my technology to do something I will press the appropriate button, or click on a menu item in a GUI.

Shit, I don't even like talking to other humans very much. Why the fuck would I want to talk to a machine?

This is technology looking for a problem to solve that doesn't exist; but the dumbass marketing and sales fuckwits think it is 'cutting edge' and 'cool', so we get to replace systems that work perfectly well with new ones that work (at best) most of the time, and that as a result are fucking annoying.

No thanks.

I like talking to people. Machines, I don't care. I generally like using the command line over pointing and clicking for admin tasks. I like learning a little to do it easier. However, saying, "Google where is XYZ" comes in handy when I'm driving. It has come in handy other times as well.
 

Underseer

Contributor
Joined
May 30, 2003
Messages
11,413
Location
Chicago suburbs
Basic Beliefs
atheism, resistentialism
The only time I want to talk to technology is to curse and swear at it. I do not want it to respond or answer back. If I want my technology to do something I will press the appropriate button, or click on a menu item in a GUI.

Shit, I don't even like talking to other humans very much. Why the fuck would I want to talk to a machine?

This is technology looking for a problem to solve that doesn't exist; but the dumbass marketing and sales fuckwits think it is 'cutting edge' and 'cool', so we get to replace systems that work perfectly well with new ones that work (at best) most of the time, and that as a result are fucking annoying.

No thanks.

On a smartphone, the voice command feature is a huge convenience, especially when driving.
 

bilby

Fair dinkum thinkum
Joined
Mar 7, 2007
Messages
26,783
Location
The Sunshine State: The one with Crocs, not Gators
Gender
He/Him
Basic Beliefs
Strong Atheist
The only time I want to talk to technology is to curse and swear at it. I do not want it to respond or answer back. If I want my technology to do something I will press the appropriate button, or click on a menu item in a GUI.

Shit, I don't even like talking to other humans very much. Why the fuck would I want to talk to a machine?

This is technology looking for a problem to solve that doesn't exist; but the dumbass marketing and sales fuckwits think it is 'cutting edge' and 'cool', so we get to replace systems that work perfectly well with new ones that work (at best) most of the time, and that as a result are fucking annoying.

No thanks.

On a smartphone, the voice command feature is a huge convenience, especially when driving.

Interacting with technology that is not essential to the operation of the vehicle while driving is stupid and dangerous.

Being able to do this via voice commands gives a false impression of safety; which is great for smartphone manufacturers, but not so good for that fraction of their customers - or those unfortunate enough to encounter their customers - who end up dead or seriously injured.

'Hands free' systems are demonstrably NOT safe to use while driving; but the mobile phone industry has successfully persuaded people that they are; a job made easy by the fact that people want to communicate and drive simultaneously.

People also want to smoke cigarettes and remain healthy. But that too turned out not to be actually possible.

Still, as long as Apple have record profits, and as long as the majority of incidents are rendered expensive rather than fatal by advances in collision mitigation technologies like crumple-zones and airbags, it's all fine, right?

Driving while distracted is not rendered safe by having ones hands on the steering wheel; if one's brain doesn't command appropriate and timely movement of that steering wheel (or the brake), then the physical positions of the driver's hands and feet are irrelevant.

The most important body part used for driving is the brain. If it isn't doing the right thing and concentrating on driving, then it is endangering others.

If you are not sure how to get from where you are to where you are going, pull over in a safe place while you check. If you want to program a destination into your GPS, do it while stationary. While driving, your one and only job is to drive. Most people think that they can do other things simultaneously with no loss of ability, but this is an illusion; the science says otherwise.

http://trid.trb.org/view.aspx?id=733342

http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/xap/9/1/23/

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0001457599000184
 
Last edited:

Warpoet

Veteran Member
Joined
Dec 23, 2006
Messages
1,065
Location
Murrica
Basic Beliefs
foff
Interacting with technology that is not essential to the operation of the vehicle while driving is stupid and dangerous.

Being able to do this via voice commands gives a false impression of safety; which is great for smartphone manufacturers, but not so good for that fraction of their customers - or those unfortunate enough to encounter their customers - who end up dead or seriously injured.

'Hands free' systems are demonstrably NOT safe to use while driving; but the mobile phone industry has successfully persuaded people that they are; a job made easy by the fact that people want to communicate and drive simultaneously.

People also want to smoke cigarettes and remain healthy. But that too turned out not to be actually possible.

Still, as long as Apple have record profits, and as long as the majority of incidents are rendered expensive rather than fatal by advances in collision mitigation technologies like crumple-zones and airbags, it's all fine, right?

Driving while distracted is not rendered safe by having ones hands on the steering wheel; if one's brain doesn't command appropriate and timely movement of that steering wheel (or the brake), then the physical positions of the driver's hands and feet are irrelevant.

The most important body part used for driving is the brain. If it isn't doing the right thing and concentrating on driving, then it is endangering others.

If you are not sure how to get from where you are to where you are going, pull over in a safe place while you check. If you want to program a destination into your GPS, do it while stationary. While driving, your one and only job is to drive. Most people think that they can do other things simultaneously with no loss of ability, but this is an illusion; the science says otherwise.

http://trid.trb.org/view.aspx?id=733342

http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/xap/9/1/23/

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0001457599000184

I would imagine that this all depends on what you are actually using the phone for. Trying to get it to give you directions, hands-free or not, would be a huge distraction, but I don't see any logic to suggest that verbally commanding it to call someone, and then talking to that person, is any more distracting than if they were sitting in the passenger seat.
 

Underseer

Contributor
Joined
May 30, 2003
Messages
11,413
Location
Chicago suburbs
Basic Beliefs
atheism, resistentialism
On a smartphone, the voice command feature is a huge convenience, especially when driving.

Interacting with technology that is not essential to the operation of the vehicle while driving is stupid and dangerous.

Being able to do this via voice commands gives a false impression of safety; which is great for smartphone manufacturers, but not so good for that fraction of their customers - or those unfortunate enough to encounter their customers - who end up dead or seriously injured.

'Hands free' systems are demonstrably NOT safe to use while driving; but the mobile phone industry has successfully persuaded people that they are; a job made easy by the fact that people want to communicate and drive simultaneously.

People also want to smoke cigarettes and remain healthy. But that too turned out not to be actually possible.

Still, as long as Apple have record profits, and as long as the majority of incidents are rendered expensive rather than fatal by advances in collision mitigation technologies like crumple-zones and airbags, it's all fine, right?

Driving while distracted is not rendered safe by having ones hands on the steering wheel; if one's brain doesn't command appropriate and timely movement of that steering wheel (or the brake), then the physical positions of the driver's hands and feet are irrelevant.

The most important body part used for driving is the brain. If it isn't doing the right thing and concentrating on driving, then it is endangering others.

If you are not sure how to get from where you are to where you are going, pull over in a safe place while you check. If you want to program a destination into your GPS, do it while stationary. While driving, your one and only job is to drive. Most people think that they can do other things simultaneously with no loss of ability, but this is an illusion; the science says otherwise.

http://trid.trb.org/view.aspx?id=733342

http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/xap/9/1/23/

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0001457599000184

If I have to change destinations mid-route, I will always use voice commands to start/change the navigator app.

Other than that, I don't do much of anything with my phone while I'm driving with voice commands or without. I can simply say "Ok Google, navigate to [insert place here]" without taking my eyes off the road. If I tried doing that without voice commands, I would have to keep my eye on the phone and occasionally poke the screen.

I don't know what you think I'm doing with my phone, but I can't possibly see how it isn't better than what I would have to do without voice commands. Would it be safer to pull off to the side of the road before setting/changing the destination in the navigator app? Sure, but realistically, who would actually do that, especially when I can just say a single sentence and have my phone do that crap for me?
 

bilby

Fair dinkum thinkum
Joined
Mar 7, 2007
Messages
26,783
Location
The Sunshine State: The one with Crocs, not Gators
Gender
He/Him
Basic Beliefs
Strong Atheist
Interacting with technology that is not essential to the operation of the vehicle while driving is stupid and dangerous.

Being able to do this via voice commands gives a false impression of safety; which is great for smartphone manufacturers, but not so good for that fraction of their customers - or those unfortunate enough to encounter their customers - who end up dead or seriously injured.

'Hands free' systems are demonstrably NOT safe to use while driving; but the mobile phone industry has successfully persuaded people that they are; a job made easy by the fact that people want to communicate and drive simultaneously.

People also want to smoke cigarettes and remain healthy. But that too turned out not to be actually possible.

Still, as long as Apple have record profits, and as long as the majority of incidents are rendered expensive rather than fatal by advances in collision mitigation technologies like crumple-zones and airbags, it's all fine, right?

Driving while distracted is not rendered safe by having ones hands on the steering wheel; if one's brain doesn't command appropriate and timely movement of that steering wheel (or the brake), then the physical positions of the driver's hands and feet are irrelevant.

The most important body part used for driving is the brain. If it isn't doing the right thing and concentrating on driving, then it is endangering others.

If you are not sure how to get from where you are to where you are going, pull over in a safe place while you check. If you want to program a destination into your GPS, do it while stationary. While driving, your one and only job is to drive. Most people think that they can do other things simultaneously with no loss of ability, but this is an illusion; the science says otherwise.

http://trid.trb.org/view.aspx?id=733342

http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/xap/9/1/23/

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0001457599000184

I would imagine that this all depends on what you are actually using the phone for. Trying to get it to give you directions, hands-free or not, would be a huge distraction, but I don't see any logic to suggest that verbally commanding it to call someone, and then talking to that person, is any more distracting than if they were sitting in the passenger seat.

That's the big problem. Most people agree with your commonsense assessment. But the research shows that it is wrong.

Most people perceive various optical illusions in such a way as to see things that are not real too.

As Feynman said, "The most important thing is not to fool yourself, and you are the easiest person to fool".

Almost nobody thinks that talking 'hands free' is more distracting than chatting with a passenger. But it is, as the research I linked above shows. The cognitive load is higher. Perhaps because a passenger has an awareness of when to shut up that a person not present does not; perhaps because of consciously undetectable but important degradation of the sound of speech after transmission via a phone, that makes understanding it more difficult; perhaps for some other reason. The observed result is undeniable, even if the mechanism is uncertain.

Whatever the mechanism, the effect is measurable, and sufficient to be a major risk - on the order of driving while drunk.
 

bilby

Fair dinkum thinkum
Joined
Mar 7, 2007
Messages
26,783
Location
The Sunshine State: The one with Crocs, not Gators
Gender
He/Him
Basic Beliefs
Strong Atheist
Interacting with technology that is not essential to the operation of the vehicle while driving is stupid and dangerous.

Being able to do this via voice commands gives a false impression of safety; which is great for smartphone manufacturers, but not so good for that fraction of their customers - or those unfortunate enough to encounter their customers - who end up dead or seriously injured.

'Hands free' systems are demonstrably NOT safe to use while driving; but the mobile phone industry has successfully persuaded people that they are; a job made easy by the fact that people want to communicate and drive simultaneously.

People also want to smoke cigarettes and remain healthy. But that too turned out not to be actually possible.

Still, as long as Apple have record profits, and as long as the majority of incidents are rendered expensive rather than fatal by advances in collision mitigation technologies like crumple-zones and airbags, it's all fine, right?

Driving while distracted is not rendered safe by having ones hands on the steering wheel; if one's brain doesn't command appropriate and timely movement of that steering wheel (or the brake), then the physical positions of the driver's hands and feet are irrelevant.

The most important body part used for driving is the brain. If it isn't doing the right thing and concentrating on driving, then it is endangering others.

If you are not sure how to get from where you are to where you are going, pull over in a safe place while you check. If you want to program a destination into your GPS, do it while stationary. While driving, your one and only job is to drive. Most people think that they can do other things simultaneously with no loss of ability, but this is an illusion; the science says otherwise.

http://trid.trb.org/view.aspx?id=733342

http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/xap/9/1/23/

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0001457599000184

If I have to change destinations mid-route, I will always use voice commands to start/change the navigator app.

Other than that, I don't do much of anything with my phone while I'm driving with voice commands or without. I can simply say "Ok Google, navigate to [insert place here]" without taking my eyes off the road. If I tried doing that without voice commands, I would have to keep my eye on the phone and occasionally poke the screen.

I don't know what you think I'm doing with my phone, but I can't possibly see how it isn't better than what I would have to do without voice commands. Would it be safer to pull off to the side of the road before setting/changing the destination in the navigator app? Sure, but realistically, who would actually do that, especially when I can just say a single sentence and have my phone do that crap for me?

Realistically, very few people would do that. This does not make it safe to do it while moving though. Safety is not subject to popular vote.

The ultimate solution is to have a computer do all the driving. Until that is possible, the smart move is not to interact in any way with a phone while moving, not to smoke, not to drive drunk, and not to eat a high-fat, high-sugar diet. Of course lots of people choose to do these dangerous things, but you can decide for yourself whether to be one of them.

If you kill someone because of your unsafe choice, then only you have to live with that fact and its consequences.

If you think twice about driving drunk, you should also think twice about interacting with your phone while driving.
 

Underseer

Contributor
Joined
May 30, 2003
Messages
11,413
Location
Chicago suburbs
Basic Beliefs
atheism, resistentialism
If I have to change destinations mid-route, I will always use voice commands to start/change the navigator app.

Other than that, I don't do much of anything with my phone while I'm driving with voice commands or without. I can simply say "Ok Google, navigate to [insert place here]" without taking my eyes off the road. If I tried doing that without voice commands, I would have to keep my eye on the phone and occasionally poke the screen.

I don't know what you think I'm doing with my phone, but I can't possibly see how it isn't better than what I would have to do without voice commands. Would it be safer to pull off to the side of the road before setting/changing the destination in the navigator app? Sure, but realistically, who would actually do that, especially when I can just say a single sentence and have my phone do that crap for me?

Realistically, very few people would do that. This does not make it safe to do it while moving though. Safety is not subject to popular vote.

The ultimate solution is to have a computer do all the driving. Until that is possible, the smart move is not to interact in any way with a phone while moving, not to smoke, not to drive drunk, and not to eat a high-fat, high-sugar diet. Of course lots of people choose to do these dangerous things, but you can decide for yourself whether to be one of them.

If you kill someone because of your unsafe choice, then only you have to live with that fact and its consequences.

If you think twice about driving drunk, you should also think twice about interacting with your phone while driving.

Do you think I should pull over and come to a complete stop before saying "OK Google, navigate to [place]"?
 

bilby

Fair dinkum thinkum
Joined
Mar 7, 2007
Messages
26,783
Location
The Sunshine State: The one with Crocs, not Gators
Gender
He/Him
Basic Beliefs
Strong Atheist
Realistically, very few people would do that. This does not make it safe to do it while moving though. Safety is not subject to popular vote.

The ultimate solution is to have a computer do all the driving. Until that is possible, the smart move is not to interact in any way with a phone while moving, not to smoke, not to drive drunk, and not to eat a high-fat, high-sugar diet. Of course lots of people choose to do these dangerous things, but you can decide for yourself whether to be one of them.

If you kill someone because of your unsafe choice, then only you have to live with that fact and its consequences.

If you think twice about driving drunk, you should also think twice about interacting with your phone while driving.

Do you think I should pull over and come to a complete stop before saying "OK Google, navigate to [place]"?

Yes. But of course you won't, because you firmly believe that it isn't dangerous to do it while driving. Your belief is so certain that you think the very idea that it might be dangerous is laughable. So do most people. Some of whom will kill as a result - and will then be assured by their friends that it wasn't their fault.

That's humans for you.
 

fast

Contributor
Joined
Nov 10, 2004
Messages
5,293
Location
South Carolina
Basic Beliefs
Christian
I pride myself on my ability to multi-task while driving. Getting to my skill level may have been dangerous and wreckless, but now I have a certain quality to my experience that no trained professional stuntman could ever hope to achieve. That's not just my perception of the truth. I'm one of the few that could put even the toughest of critics in shock and awe over what this ole boy is capable of when behind the wheel of a vehicle.

None of that justifies putting others in danger, so even if some of the hot shot guys out there think they can text with one hand and drive with the other without losing too much concentration, then whether you just might so happen to be right regardless of what others say, you still lack the justification and what you're doing is wrong and dangerous. Also, if you so happen to think you're the hottest thing to hit the highways since the advent of the yellow line, you're wrong, both objectively and subjectively. I am.

Now, back to your regularly scheduled thread, I hate that my phone talks to me when I put it in my pocket. It's friggin' locked! I like that "it's locked" feature. It helps out tremendously when in the car with a women. See, I know what it's like to have called someone and not hung up and the person you were on the phone with hasn't hung up either--or similar such situations.

Technology can be dangerous enough as it is. No voice activated internal to stereo system gadget-driven monstrosity of a home wrecking technical marvel, I don't want you doing anything to help me!!! I can get my own self into trouble without your help, thank you very much.

I need mechanical control, not just electrical control. I need immediate fast acting flip-of-a-toggle kind of control. If you're going to better my life by installing gadgetry than can get me in trouble with the women--whether it be girlfriend activated gps man tracking technology or wife eavesdropping cellular I-got-your-ass wizardry buttons, then I want a man friendly means of ignorance proof switches that work!
 

Warpoet

Veteran Member
Joined
Dec 23, 2006
Messages
1,065
Location
Murrica
Basic Beliefs
foff
Almost nobody thinks that talking 'hands free' is more distracting than chatting with a passenger. But it is, as the research I linked above shows. The cognitive load is higher. Perhaps because a passenger has an awareness of when to shut up that a person not present does not; perhaps because of consciously undetectable but important degradation of the sound of speech after transmission via a phone, that makes understanding it more difficult; perhaps for some other reason. The observed result is undeniable, even if the mechanism is uncertain.

Which of the studies you linked to uses a passengerside conversation as a basis for comparison? Unless I'm reading them wrong, all I see is a comparison to the effects of intoxication in the first study. Although those results are pretty disturbing on their own merit.
 

Underseer

Contributor
Joined
May 30, 2003
Messages
11,413
Location
Chicago suburbs
Basic Beliefs
atheism, resistentialism
Do you think I should pull over and come to a complete stop before saying "OK Google, navigate to [place]"?

Yes. But of course you won't, because you firmly believe that it isn't dangerous to do it while driving. Your belief is so certain that you think the very idea that it might be dangerous is laughable. So do most people. Some of whom will kill as a result - and will then be assured by their friends that it wasn't their fault.

That's humans for you.

Do you converse with people while you drive? Or do you pull over and come to a complete stop before responding to something a passenger has said to you?

Of course you won't do that. Your belief is so certain that you think the very idea that it might be dangerous is laughable. So do most people. Some of whom will kill as a result - and will then be reassured by their friends that it wasn't their fault.

That's humans for you.
 

NobleSavage

Veteran Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2003
Messages
3,079
Location
127.0.0.1
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
You do realize that professional drivers aka truckers basically have to do this? If they get caught talking on a phone they lose their license, but the entire system would jam up if they were not on bluetooth.
 

bilby

Fair dinkum thinkum
Joined
Mar 7, 2007
Messages
26,783
Location
The Sunshine State: The one with Crocs, not Gators
Gender
He/Him
Basic Beliefs
Strong Atheist
Yes. But of course you won't, because you firmly believe that it isn't dangerous to do it while driving. Your belief is so certain that you think the very idea that it might be dangerous is laughable. So do most people. Some of whom will kill as a result - and will then be assured by their friends that it wasn't their fault.

That's humans for you.

Do you converse with people while you drive? Or do you pull over and come to a complete stop before responding to something a passenger has said to you?

Of course you won't do that. Your belief is so certain that you think the very idea that it might be dangerous is laughable. So do most people. Some of whom will kill as a result - and will then be reassured by their friends that it wasn't their fault.

That's humans for you.

Read the research.

Talking on a hands-free mobile is demonstrably more distracting than conversing with a passenger, and is as dangerous as driving while over the legal alcohol limit.

Your dislike for this fact does not render it false.
 

bilby

Fair dinkum thinkum
Joined
Mar 7, 2007
Messages
26,783
Location
The Sunshine State: The one with Crocs, not Gators
Gender
He/Him
Basic Beliefs
Strong Atheist
You do realize that professional drivers aka truckers basically have to do this? If they get caught talking on a phone they lose their license, but the entire system would jam up if they were not on bluetooth.

Really? I wonder how we got stuff delivered before the 1994 when Bluetooth was invented then. Or before cellular phones were introduced in the 1980s.

I must have been imagining all those trucks on the road back when I was a kid. :rolleyesa:
 

NobleSavage

Veteran Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2003
Messages
3,079
Location
127.0.0.1
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
You do realize that professional drivers aka truckers basically have to do this? If they get caught talking on a phone they lose their license, but the entire system would jam up if they were not on bluetooth.

Really? I wonder how we got stuff delivered before the 1994 when Bluetooth was invented then. Or before cellular phones were introduced in the 1980s.

I must have been imagining all those trucks on the road back when I was a kid. :rolleyesa:

I'm talking about now, not the past. The logistics on these fleets would not be nearly as efficient if we went back to the old way and I'm fairly certain that total accidents are going down. Granted, those variables are probably not related.

I wasn't trying to say you were wrong... just pointing out something.
 

bilby

Fair dinkum thinkum
Joined
Mar 7, 2007
Messages
26,783
Location
The Sunshine State: The one with Crocs, not Gators
Gender
He/Him
Basic Beliefs
Strong Atheist
Really? I wonder how we got stuff delivered before the 1994 when Bluetooth was invented then. Or before cellular phones were introduced in the 1980s.

I must have been imagining all those trucks on the road back when I was a kid. :rolleyesa:

I'm talking about now, not the past. The logistics on these fleets would not be nearly as efficient if we went back to the old way and I'm fairly certain that total accidents are going down. Granted, those variables are probably not related.

I wasn't trying to say you were wrong... just pointing out something.

I don't see it; You load up a truck, and tell the driver where he should deliver it to. What further communication is needed? It seems unlikely to me that changing the destination for a shipment after the truck has left the departure point is a common occurrence, or that doing so would improve the efficiency of any logistics organisation. In fact, that sounds like a recipe for inefficiency, confusion and error.

Back in the '80s, when I was a multi-drop delivery driver, we used to have two-way radio in the vans; It was only ever used for the boss to ask 'Why aren't you there yet?'; which may have been good for his blood pressure, but did nothing for the customers. Once you leave the depot, you deliver the stuff as fast as you can and get back for the next load. No amount of colourful language on the two-way helps to clear the traffic. Those radios spent a LOT of time 'mysteriously' out of order, without any ill-effects on the business.
 

NobleSavage

Veteran Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2003
Messages
3,079
Location
127.0.0.1
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
I'm talking about now, not the past. The logistics on these fleets would not be nearly as efficient if we went back to the old way and I'm fairly certain that total accidents are going down. Granted, those variables are probably not related.

I wasn't trying to say you were wrong... just pointing out something.

I don't see it; You load up a truck, and tell the driver where he should deliver it to. What further communication is needed? It seems unlikely to me that changing the destination for a shipment after the truck has left the departure point is a common occurrence, or that doing so would improve the efficiency of any logistics organisation. In fact, that sounds like a recipe for inefficiency, confusion and error.

Back in the '80s, when I was a multi-drop delivery driver, we used to have two-way radio in the vans; It was only ever used for the boss to ask 'Why aren't you there yet?'; which may have been good for his blood pressure, but did nothing for the customers. Once you leave the depot, you deliver the stuff as fast as you can and get back for the next load. No amount of colourful language on the two-way helps to clear the traffic. Those radios spent a LOT of time 'mysteriously' out of order, without any ill-effects on the business.

I'll get one on a the phone and ask him in little bit.
 

NobleSavage

Veteran Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2003
Messages
3,079
Location
127.0.0.1
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Ok, this is coming from a trucker who drives all across the US. He said that asking Google or using the GPS is no safer than than using maps. However, he said generally if he has to look up a place it would take 15 minutes longer to use maps. This would be unexceptable to his company. He also said that today he had to talk to dispatch about 20 times because there were multiple clusterfucks involving snow, another driver, a dropped trailer, and distribution centers which were closed. Routs and deliveries to distribution centers change on the fly. He also felt that the electronic logs being pushed by the DOT make things worse not better.
 

TSwizzle

Let's go Brandon!
Joined
Jan 8, 2015
Messages
6,382
Location
West Hollywood
Gender
Male
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Do you think I should pull over and come to a complete stop before saying "OK Google, navigate to [place]"?

Yes. But of course you won't, because you firmly believe that it isn't dangerous to do it while driving. Your belief is so certain that you think the very idea that it might be dangerous is laughable. So do most people. Some of whom will kill as a result - and will then be assured by their friends that it wasn't their fault.

That's humans for you.

There are conditions where it is perfectly safe to use hand held devices. It's pretty easy to dictate a text to Siri and send or ask for directions. Sometimes, probably a lot of the time, it's not safe to do that which is why I pick and choose when I'm going to do it. I do see some people doing some dumb shit while on their phones though. Like backing out of a parking spot, steering with one hand while holding the phone to their ear with the other. That's dumb.
 

Loren Pechtel

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 16, 2000
Messages
35,716
Location
Nevada
Gender
Yes
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Ok, this is coming from a trucker who drives all across the US. He said that asking Google or using the GPS is no safer than than using maps. However, he said generally if he has to look up a place it would take 15 minutes longer to use maps. This would be unexceptable to his company. He also said that today he had to talk to dispatch about 20 times because there were multiple clusterfucks involving snow, another driver, a dropped trailer, and distribution centers which were closed. Routs and deliveries to distribution centers change on the fly. He also felt that the electronic logs being pushed by the DOT make things worse not better.

While I disagree about whether cell phones are inherently dangerous in cars this certainly sounds unacceptable. Trying to fix a clusterfuck while driving certainly is dangerous.

What's the problem with the electronic logs other than being harder for a driver to fake?

- - - Updated - - -

Yes. But of course you won't, because you firmly believe that it isn't dangerous to do it while driving. Your belief is so certain that you think the very idea that it might be dangerous is laughable. So do most people. Some of whom will kill as a result - and will then be assured by their friends that it wasn't their fault.

That's humans for you.

There are conditions where it is perfectly safe to use hand held devices. It's pretty easy to dictate a text to Siri and send or ask for directions. Sometimes, probably a lot of the time, it's not safe to do that which is why I pick and choose when I'm going to do it. I do see some people doing some dumb shit while on their phones though. Like backing out of a parking spot, steering with one hand while holding the phone to their ear with the other. That's dumb.

Ever hear of a stick shift? If using only one hand was actually dangerous the stick shift would have been banned long ago. Once in a long while you'll need to use two hands to drive, the phone goes in your lap in that case.
 

TSwizzle

Let's go Brandon!
Joined
Jan 8, 2015
Messages
6,382
Location
West Hollywood
Gender
Male
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
There are conditions where it is perfectly safe to use hand held devices. It's pretty easy to dictate a text to Siri and send or ask for directions. Sometimes, probably a lot of the time, it's not safe to do that which is why I pick and choose when I'm going to do it. I do see some people doing some dumb shit while on their phones though. Like backing out of a parking spot, steering with one hand while holding the phone to their ear with the other. That's dumb.

Ever hear of a stick shift? If using only one hand was actually dangerous the stick shift would have been banned long ago. Once in a long while you'll need to use two hands to drive, the phone goes in your lap in that case.

Yes, of course I have and I've actually owned a few stick shift cars, learned to drive and passed my test in a stick shift. And using two hands to steer the car while in reverse is much easier and probably safer than using one hand. I imagine it being quite awkward to hold a phone to your ear and change gear at the same time. But some stupid woman in the parking lot almost backed into me because she was not paying attention to what she was doing. She had the phone to her ear, yakking on the phone and backed out of her spot. She was totally oblivious.
 

Loren Pechtel

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 16, 2000
Messages
35,716
Location
Nevada
Gender
Yes
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Ever hear of a stick shift? If using only one hand was actually dangerous the stick shift would have been banned long ago. Once in a long while you'll need to use two hands to drive, the phone goes in your lap in that case.

Yes, of course I have and I've actually owned a few stick shift cars, learned to drive and passed my test in a stick shift. And using two hands to steer the car while in reverse is much easier and probably safer than using one hand. I imagine it being quite awkward to hold a phone to your ear and change gear at the same time. But some stupid woman in the parking lot almost backed into me because she was not paying attention to what she was doing. She had the phone to her ear, yakking on the phone and backed out of her spot. She was totally oblivious.

And you nailed the real problem here: Paying more attention to the conversation than to the driving. That's the real issue with cell phones, not whether you have a hands-free setup. Hands free doesn't keep you from getting too involved in the conversation, holding the handset doesn't matter to an experienced driver. (They have found that newbie drivers do perform worse if they're holding the handset.)
 

barbos

Contributor
Joined
Nov 12, 2005
Messages
14,035
Location
Mlky Way galaxy
Basic Beliefs
atheist
You can't do anything about people not paying attention to driving, other than automatic systems which take over in case driver is too involved with not driving.
 
Top Bottom