NHTSA Suggestion Would Cripple In-Car GPS Displays 516
bricko writes "The recently issued National Highway Transportation Safety Agency guidelines for automakers to minimize distraction for in-vehicle electronics included a proposal to freeze maps on navigation systems. No more scrolling maps...just static pictures. 'Every current installed navigation system uses the car as a fixed point, and shows the map moving around it. NHTSA wants that changed so as to keep the map fixed. Even showing the position of the car moving on the map could be considered a dynamic image. The recommendation seems to suggest that the position of the car could only be updated every couple of seconds. Likewise, the map could be refreshed once the car has left the currently displayed area. This recommendation would essentially make navigation unusable. The system could still give an auditory warning for the next turn, but without being able to glance down at the map and see how close the next street is would likely lead to a lot of missed turns and resultant frustration.'"
This Is A Bad Idea (Score:5, Insightful)
People will just realize they are about to go the wrong way and change lanes even later than they already do.
Re:This Is A Good Idea (Score:3, Insightful)
GPS laws
Re:This Is A Good Idea (Score:5, Insightful)
I'd rather have my wife using a GPS then call me frustrated while trying to describe where she is while actually having no idea and just becoming more and more angry.
Re: (Score:3)
My Ex recently borrowed a GPS device to go to a wedding for some friends. The location was in a city with which she was almost completely unfamilar except for the main interstate route. She told me how this machine gave her instructions like:
"There's been an accident a few blocks ahead - Turn left at the movie theater"
"Drive around behind the theater and find the 1 lane concrete bridge - look for a green trash dumpster next to it."
"Cross the bridge and turn right - the speed limit is 25 - you are in a resid
Re:This Is A Good Idea (Score:5, Insightful)
I am wasteing my previous mod points but oh well I do not have a in car navagation system or gps or even smart phone with internet, but you say that people do not need gps nav because most people do not go all that many places that they do not the way to all that often. That may be true for you but if for people like me who go trying out new hiking and camping and fishing places way out in the middle of nowhere on back roads a nav system would be a God send. I hate trying to read a map while driving and no reading it before hand is not always enough. If I am driving clear across Washington state to go fishing with freinds just glancing at a map before leaving is not enough. Just because you do not have a use for it does not mean others do not have a use for it.
Re: (Score:3)
You're making the following groundless assumptions:
Do people really need a GPS? No. But that doesn't mean GPSs aren't a net benefit.
Re:This Is A Bad Idea (Score:4, Insightful)
If you want to change people's behavior give them something that is a qualitatively better experience rather than just trying to restrict what already exists. This will only drive them to (pun intended) to work around the system with unforeseen and in this case dangerous consequences.
Re: (Score:3)
The GPS I have kinda tried to do the whole voice activated thing.. but it's so klunky and slow to use that I think it would actually be more dangerous to attempt using it on the road.
To weight in on the general subject.. like anything else, there is a correct way and an incorrect way to use a GPS:
The correct way is to look at the map before hand, listen to the audio directions, and make occasional glances to see how close a turn is / which lane you want to be in / other navigation clues. You glance down and
Re:This Is A Bad Idea (Score:4, Insightful)
Unfortunately most brains aren't good at multitasking. Well, speaking for myself: Mine isn't. The good thing about a navigation system is that I can pay attention to the road and spend very little time worrying about where to go. I need an occasional glance at the screen to resolve an issue (Navigon isn't very good; TomTom is pretty good), other than that it isn't really a distraction. I've to spend less time watching road signs for directions as the information comes in audio form to me. The info also also always repeated, so I can ignore it if it doesn't suit me because of a complicated traffic situation that deserves my immediate attention.
Bert
Re:This Is A Bad Idea (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Very good point. It's an odd example, but kind of applies. In the game Angband (a roguelike), there is an option to keep the map centred on the player. Normally I don't use this, because it slows things down on slower hardware, and the game has my full attention. If however I get teleported somewhere, I do fine myself needing to spend time trying to locate myself, as it's not immediately obvious. It seems silly to place drivers in the situation where they must spend time scanning the map for their car.
Ideal
Re: (Score:3)
Ideally though maybe it's best that devices are required to blank the map when the car is traveling above a certain speed
Speed doesn't really correlate with distractions. Travelling at 30 miles per hour in a narrow road in a built-up area with pedestrians stepping out into the road requires a lot more concentration than cruising along at 70 on a straight motorway. Having the GPS display the map for the former but not for the latter wouldn't make sense. A better solution would be to remove driving licenses from people who stare at the map when they should be looking at the road - irrespective of whether the map is on a HUD,
Re: (Score:3)
Ideally though maybe it's best that devices are required to blank the map when the car is traveling above a certain speed, relying only on audio prompts.
As someone who regularly crosses Germany at legal speeds, 200-250 kmh or up to 150 mph, I call this idea nonsense.
No one in his right mind is going fast on roads where he is in immediate need of a navigator.
A good navigator like a TomTom is at any speed safer then having the old map on your knees.
One of the best novelties on such a navigator is the display of the preferred lane ahead of an intersection, such an intersection likely has a speed restriction of 100 - 120 kmh.
An other issue is this story is
Re:This Is A Bad Idea (Score:5, Interesting)
... our stand-alone GPS has the option to either orient the map in direction of travel or orient the map towards North. The latter is bloody confusing and not preferred.
That seems to vary from person to person. I have a GPS gadget that also has that option. I tried the "up is forward" scheme for a while, and found it confusing, so I switched back to "up is north", which I personally find much easier to understand. This is probably related to my wife's observation that I almost always seem to know which direction I'm going, and she doesn't understand how I do that. I don't either, but at least I don't try to impose my preferred method on others who don't have an innate sense of direction.
There are a number of other such sensual differences among people. Among musicians, for example, some people hear the absolute pitch of notes ("perfect pitch"), while others don't, but hear musical intervals well ("relative pitch"). There's a long-running debate over which is better. Perfect pitch means you can pick up your instrument and join in without needing to ask (or experiment to determine) the key. But people like that tend to be really confused if someone plays something in a "wrong" key; the relative-pitch people don't hear anything unusual about this, and often routinely play things in whatever key is best for the others. This can come in really handy if you're backing up singers.
The best conclusion is that there are advantages and disadvantages to either approach, and you should learn to take advantage of whichever works for you. I'd consider a GPS that only does "up is forward" to be a crappy, annoying product, and I wouldn't buy it. And in general, I'd want one that implements both schemes, for situations where I'd like someone else to use it (e.g. as the navigator while I drive).
Actually, the idea of a passenger doing the navigating is one of the best ways of shooting down all the schemes such as this one. A good GPS system is one that the navigator can easily jigger to match their preferred way of doing things (including things like changing font size for different visual acuities), and then change them again quickly when someone else takes over the navigation task. We should be pushing for GPS gadgets that are good at this, with many modes of operation that are easy to change, and not for limitations that decrease their usefulness.
(I recently was driving with a passenger from China who wasn't very good at English. I quickly changed my Garmin Nüvi to speak Mandarin, handed it to him, and the trip went well. I left it that way for a few days afterward, to get more familiar with Mandarin direction words, but this really annoyed my wife when she used the car for something. So she got even by setting it to speak Arabic. Then I changed it to Dutch, just for fun. But not all of its settings are so easy to find and change. ;-)
Re: (Score:3)
And that is why any time you get automated directions, be it google on the desktop or GPS in the car, you should review them step-by-step prior to starting the journey. This takes all of 2 minutes and identifies any tricky tur
Re: (Score:3)
It is very confusing to have to rotate the map in your head even when you are walking, not to mention the effort for doing it real-time while you are driving a vehicle.
No it's not. It's completely disorienting to me when someone rotates a map around like that (i.e., my wife). She says it helps her keep left/right straight in her head. But for me, I'd rather have the map be a fixed reference and I'll just swap left/right in my head.
We argue about who's right and who's wrong and what each preference suggests about the person's spatial brain, but the point is...neither solution works well for everyone. I think forcing GPS displays down any single path is going to be fine
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Sure, but if I'm going in the same direction for many miles I don't need a map anyway. If I'm going to turn left, then right, then left, left again, veer right, go straight for a bit then turn right, the roads in front of me right now aren't all that much use.
If I want a 2D or 3D visualisation of the road in front of me then I'm not using a map, I'm using a navigation aid. Many GPS systems offer this and it's a great feature, but it's not a map.
Re:Screen (Score:2)
Glancing at a screen from time to time, while listening to the audio directions is really not much of a distraction. I am stuck delivering pizza at the moment, and I completely *rely* on my GPS. We deliver over a massive area, and the GPS cuts down the time to find a particular address, and the fastest route to it, by a considerable margin.
If you want to eliminate distractions, make handheld cellphones inoperable while moving. I see more people chatting with their cellphone held to one ear than anything els
Re:Screen (Score:5, Funny)
Glancing at a screen from time to time, while listening to the audio directions is really not much of a distraction. I am stuck delivering pizza at the moment...
But posting to Slashdot while driving a car is downright dangerous!
Re:Screen (Score:5, Insightful)
If you want to eliminate distractions, make handheld cellphones inoperable while moving.
As a bus and train passenger, I thank you for that suggestion. Not only will I be unable to use a cellphone even if I'm not endangering anyone, as I'll have to waste all my battery to keep the GPS always-on, in order to ensure that restriction.
Re:This Is A Bad Idea (Score:5, Insightful)
I always find it amazing that electronic gadgets are a "distraction" yet non-electronic ones are not. You don't see legislation to outlaw paper maps, coffee cups, makeup, food, etc from vehicles. Yet we see state after state as well as the feds weighing in on the rush to make electronic devices illegal or unusable while driving.
Look, it is all about the revenue these laws and regulations generate from the tickets they issue. It has very little to do with safety. If it had something to do with safety they would stiffen the law that covers distracted driving (reckless driving) more and leave the reason for the reckless driving out of it.
In my home state of West Virginia this year they just passed a law making use of a cell phone illegal while driving. That isn't the part that shows it is about revenue. The revenue generator is it was made a primary offense with a stiff fine attached to it. Meanwhile that law does very little for any other form of distracted driving.
Outlaw coffee and food and drink in the car... (Score:3)
Outlaw coffee and food and drink in the car, and you will find more accidents from sleepy people.
Helpful Disclaimer: this is not based on empirical evidence, but just out of a desire to be able to have food or drink in the car. It is a rationalization in which I assume empirical evidence will bear out anecdotal observations which fit with post-hoc rationalizations that accord with my existing (though only occasional) habits.
Re: (Score:3)
I always find it amazing that electronic gadgets are a "distraction" yet non-electronic ones are not. You don't see legislation to outlaw paper maps, coffee cups, makeup, food, etc from vehicles. Yet we see state after state as well as the feds weighing in on the rush to make electronic devices illegal or unusable while driving.
I can't speak for the laws in the US, but in Britain "driving without due care and attention" is an offence. So the question changes from "why don't we have laws against electronic distractions?" to "why do we need laws against electronic distractions?".
But, as you say, such superfluous laws might simply be yet another source of revenue.
Re:This Is A Bad Idea (Score:5, Insightful)
Now whether or not these laws actually DO make the roads safer is something else... but get out of here with your ultra-libertarian nonsense.
is the presumption that it is the job of nanny/father government to take care of every little thing in life
It is NOT a presumption to expect the government to protect me from reckless drivers.
Re:This Is A Bad Idea (Score:5, Insightful)
So because it's not 100% effective, it's useless? What a ridiculous position.
Re: (Score:3)
Your rights end when mine begin. Your right to use your phone ends when you become a risk to others. I have the right to be safe on the road, and I would value that right higher than your right to talk about banal crap with uninterested parties. Also laws apply to everyone, just because someone can (or at least claims to) multitask well and not be a threat, that doesn't mean that 99.9% of everyone else isn't.
That said, this restriction would be rather stupid, without even digging into the cliche "nanny s
Re:This Is A Bad Idea (Score:5, Insightful)
It should be illegal for any screen of any type to be visible to the driver of the vehicle.
What's the difference between a screen displaying operational data (like navigation) or any of the various gauges that you use to operate the vehicle?
For instance, I find myself very distracted by constantly looking down to my speedometer when going through some of the areas around my home where the local police will nail you for 35 in a 25. I'm so (necessarily) fixated on the speedometer, I can't actually *drive*.
GPS devices are FAR safer than the alternatives. I don't know if you remember what the world was like pre-GPS, but it wasn't at all uncommon to have a map unfolded on a seat next to you that you consult from time to time when navigating through unfamiliar territory. A quick glance at a GPS which shows me a 3D representation of the route I need to take hands-down beats several seconds of scanning a map to figure out where I am and where I need to be.
Re:This Is A Bad Idea (Score:5, Insightful)
Or people will just move back to using portable devices instead of ones that are part of the car.
I pipe the audio output of my smartphone through my car's speakers. I also use it to listen to music on occasion: the music is automatically paused while the GPS is talking so there is no confusion. As it happens, I normally use Google Nav, and the voice works well enough that I rarely need the display. So well, in fact, that I usually just leave the phone in my pocket. If you do need to constantly look at the screen, it probably means your navigation system is poorly designed, or perhaps you are just a very insecure person. My girlfriend has dedicated GPS from Magellan, and it's turn-by-turn likewise works very well (somewhat better than Google's system in many cases.)
I agree with some other posters: get the units with low-quality software off the market. The government would do better mandating improved functionality rather than imposing arbitrary (and fundamentally dangerous) restrictions, restrictions which serve only to demonstrate how out-of-touch that particular bureaucracy is with this technology.
So, I think the NHTSA is a barking up the wrong tree. Mandate GPS use training in driver education and be done with it. Penalizing the bulk of the population that has no problem using GPS successfully for the misdeeds of the few is just bad lawmaking. It will, however, be profitable for the locales that implement such regulation, so I have no doubt that many will.
Also, (Score:2, Funny)
In other news, picture books whose pages are turned every few seconds are set to replace current programming on several major TV stations.
While this move is being decried by futurists, it cannot be denied that it provides a greater source of intellectual stimulation than current shows.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Also, (Score:4, Interesting)
Why not....
I've driven through and watch nearly 3/4 of the original and TNG Star Trek series. It has surprisingly minimal effect on driving. The location of the viewing unit is really what's key and an understanding that you can simply rewind easily if you miss a scene of interest. No, I wouldn't do it with a high action movie like Transformers.
But the location if placed central to driver's view retains peripheral sensory perception, and thus enables you to respond to vehicle movement. The real problem here is the idiots who moved the GPS from in front of the driver, where it should be, to the side/center console, in the name of safety - and in fact created far more danger.
Re:Also, (Score:5, Informative)
So totally off topic, but prompted by your last sentence: I'm currently renting a car, a Toyota Yaris, I think. They moved the WHOLE DASH to the CENTER.
This: http://www.carid.com/dash-kit-gallery/images/dash-kits/Toyota_Yaris_2006-UP_2427BE_A04.jpg [carid.com]
Oh my god, It is the worst ever. I feel like I'm a danger on the road every time I try to check my speed. Who in their right minds thought this was a good idea?
Re: (Score:3)
If it makes you feel better it's not just the Yaris. The Saturn Ion had it in the centre, and the Yaris's predecessor the Echo had it there too (though both were turned slightly toward the driver.
I love it in my Yaris actually, but I'm probably a minority because Toyota moved it back to the more traditional location for 2012.
Re:Also, (Score:5, Insightful)
The ones who thought it was a good idea were the bean counters who figured they could save themselves a few bucks by not having two different dashboards for left or right drive cars. But you know, "safety is our first priority... right after money." (Like the airlines!)
Please tell me you don't live near me... (Score:3)
To be blunt, how would you have the least freaking clue whether or not it has a "surprisingly minimal effect on driving."? All you know is that you haven't had to swerve or stomp on your brakes in a while.
I suspect the drivers around you might have a difference of opinion on the matter.
Bunch of idiots (Score:5, Insightful)
I swear, government must be run by the lowest common denominator.
Your brain will easily tune out a smoothly scrolling picture that has minute changes one frame to the next. A change in the visual environment that is small will not trigger a threat assessment by the brain.
However, if the image is still, and then suddenly changes, that is a far more significant change in the visualized environment, and the brain will tune to it to see if that change represents a threat.
Re:Bunch of idiots (Score:4, Insightful)
It's run by the people you elect on a regular basis. At least in the country where this story is relevant...
Re:Bunch of idiots (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
The vast bulk of them are bureaucrats who stay on from administration to administration.
You make this seem bad.
The bureaucrats fill two very important rolls:
1. Institutional knowledge. Every few years, when a new political appointee shows up, the bureaucrats bring him/her up to speed.
2. Non-partisanship. If every administration brought a new batch of partisan hacks, our government would be schizophrenic
We've had this system of bureaucrats-instead-of-political-appointees for the last ~130 years,
because it is better than the alternative of each President appointing campaign donors into important
Not really (Score:3)
That's only technically true. They really work for themselves, basically trying not to be noticed as they expand empires.
A group like this can stick its neck out when they get slightly more sympathetic masters, but then turtle up anytime they get leaders who are not as sympathetic.
In that way EVERY governmental organization can simply ratchet itself larger and larger without end. They outlast any one elected official and grow without bounds until you have groups mak
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Not to mention that you may start watching the screen frequently in anticipation when a new screen is about to appear and you need the info.
Bert
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Bunch of idiots (Score:4, Insightful)
That is what democracy means!
Want a great example? (Score:5, Insightful)
Look at the dearth of numerical LCD gauges in cars. Why is that? We used analogue meters back in the day because, well, that's all we had. However in a modern car, that instrument cluster is part or all digital on the back end. It has to convert the digital signals it gets to the analogue gauges. So why not go for digital LED numbers? Cheaper to produce, and more accurate. You'd know your speed down to the MPH (presuming the unit that reads it is that accurate). In fact there were some cars with them at one point, but they seem to have gone away.
Well the reason is it is distracting. If you put a big LCD speed readout there it's abrupt changes distract the driver more than the smooth movement of a needle. Quick changes catch the eye, smooth motion not as much.
Same would hold true for something like this. A smooth updating map that scrolls along with car movement isn't very noticeable. Something suddenly changing draws the attention.
Re:Want a great example? (Score:5, Funny)
Speedometers are a distraction while driving and constitute a real danger to both the driver and anyone in his immediate vicinity. NHTSA should focus its efforts on banning them, or at the least, blanking them (and all other dashboard instruments) while the car is in motion.
Also something needs to be done about drivers who are bobbing their heads around to the beat of the music they are listening to. They are clearly in a state of distraction and are also a distraction to other drivers. Cops should have the authority to pull them over, take their driver license on the spot, and assure that they will no longer pose an immediate hazard by confiscating the vehicle's sparkplug wires.
Re:Want a great example? (Score:4, Insightful)
There is technical issue as well. Can a car calculate the speed to miles per hour and if so, is it meaningful? I would argue that a car cannot reliable calculate, on a second by second basis, the speed to such an accuracy and therefore such displays are there purely for entertainment purposes. I would argue that we are seeing an increasing number fo displays that are for entertainment purposes only. For instance, I rented an Altima that displays frequent updates to current fuel usages, which went from 60 mph on the down slope to 10mph on the step positive grades. This was not useful. My car gives me a trip average which potentially allows me to adjust my driving when the average is to low. The gauge on the Altima is entertainment.
And I think this is what the discussion is about. What part of mapping is useful and what part is visual entertainment, which many agree is not appropriate for the driver. I don't have one of these devices in my car, but from what I have seen driving with my friends is that the device tells you what you need to do, and all the driver needs to do is listen. There is no reason to constantly check the display. Now, I don't want those instructions, so I when I am going to a new place I figure our where I am going beforehand. It seems more dangerous to me to have to look at a map while on the go, and maybe have to make extreme changes in lanes or speed, or fast turns, rather than having the navigation planned in advance. Of course, with the computer telling you the navigation, that is fine. But checking a map to determine the navigation, that just sounds dangerous. You may as well be watching a movie.
Re: (Score:3)
"I would argue that the reason we have analogue displays is that they are easier to comprehend."
This was the argument in car circles once digital readouts started to become popular. Some enthusiasts, apparently looking at Sopwith Camels and P51 Mustangs pointed out that these high performance aircraft used analog, so that must be best.
The argument fell apart when it was pointed out that the latest aircraft both commercial and military all used digital readout because it got information to the pilot faste
Re:Bunch of idiots (Score:4, Funny)
Perhaps the windshield is also a problem. NHTSA should require a camera mounted on the front of the vehicle which will render a new image onto an opaque windshield viewscreen every few seconds.
Drivers should not be distracted by any moving imagery.
Next billboards close the street, please. (Score:5, Insightful)
Drivers should focus on the street and the traffic and not being distracted by some ads.
Re:Next billboards close the street, please. (Score:5, Insightful)
Drivers should focus on the street and the traffic and not being distracted by some ads.
You bring up a great point actually, especially in the day of the electronic billboard. They're all over the place here, it's like looking at a HUGE TV screen...gee no distraction there...
Ever hear of a "map"? (Score:4, Insightful)
For those of you bleating about how this idea will make GPS "unusable", I have one question:
Have you ever used a paper map?
Remember the "bad old days" of folding out the map at the side of the road, looking at it, and planning the next leg of your trip?
That's right: figuring out where and when you have to turn BEFORE you reach the turn. Actually KNOWING where you're going instead of letting a machine do the "thinking".
This change would not cause the world to come to a sudden end, but it might well force people to think and plan for themselves again. And if that means some brain-dead loser suddenly can't get where they're going, I say "good riddance -- you were a road hazard anyhow, careening around the streets with no idea where you are going."
Re:Ever hear of a "map"? (Score:5, Insightful)
Growing up, I remember the bad old days where my dad was trying read a map at the same time as driving, when I was to young to act as navigator. Or a couple of near hits on his part while navigating a foreign city looking for a specific street sign and not really watching the road.
He now uses GPS and is probably safer than most of my generation, because he doesn't know texting and isn't addicted to a smart phone, but that's another story.
Re:Ever hear of a "map"? (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, and I remember how often I got friggin lost. Or how !@#$% up it was when the exit was closed and I had to find an alternative route, or the map was wrong (very common).
I also remember how dangerous it was trying to look at the map, fold it, and plan my re-route all while trying to drive. Or the dangers of having to pull off to the side of the highway, then try to merge back in traffic.
Do you remember when we didn't even have cars. Oh that was a grand time, no oil changes, no breakdowns, no timing belt failures, and no worry of rising gas prices. Man those were the days.
Let's hate on progess some more and be elitist arrogant pricks. Hoor-ahhh!
Key word in your post if FORCE (Score:2)
People around here sure love FORCING other people to bend to their will. What a great world.
Re:Ever hear of a "map"? (Score:5, Insightful)
Remember the "bad old days" of $SOME_CRAPPY_THING_THAT_OLD_PEOPLE_THINKS_MAKE_THEM_HARDCORE ?
Fixed that. Some things are just better than other things. Nav systems are one such thing. Further, the best nav systems display the upcoming turn from either the driver's POV or a close-in top-down with forward displayed up. This is helpful when a glance can give indication of where exactly the turn is. This is invaluable particularly with irregular or dense intersetions, where a verbal "turn right in a quarter mile" could yield 20 options.
I hate driver distraction as much as the next guy, but when one glance down for a quarter second can actually make the driver safer, we'll cope.
So go be a grumpy old guy about something else, like how Metamucil takes like shit.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Ever hear of a "map"? (Score:5, Informative)
Maps are only useful when the municipality you live in has marked the roads properly. Here in Massachusetts they mark cross-streets only, not the road you are on. And even then the signs are in non-uniform places, have different colors (some black on white, others white on green, still others white on brown, some have a mix), different sizes and sometimes they are not there at all. And they also compete with the billion other signs out there. There is no interest in upgrading, standardization or other things to make it better. The roads are not arrayed in any sort of logical grid, either. In certain cities like Boston, there are a collection of one way streets that can make getting back on track really confusing. Not to mention aggressive drivers, pedestrians with a death wish, etc.
GPS has been the most revolutionary technology to allow me to get somewhere the first time. Previously when I'd have to go somewhere new, I'd get out my map, use mapquest, try to get directions first. Then I'd try and follow those directions. Sometimes they worked, other times not. I'd then call the place I was trying to go, and the first thing they asked -- what street are you on? You can't tell! You'd be reduced to trying other landmarks (I'm near a Dunkin Donuts next to a Catholic Church with a bar across the street), dead reckoning, the position of the sun (if you can see it), watching birds fly, etc.
So, yes, I am quite well versed in how to use a map. I can read and use road maps, topo maps, directions written out on a napkin. The GPS fills in all the gaps nicely to let me get where I'm going when something goes wrong, which can happen due to any number of circumstances beyond my control. It also talks to me so I can prepare for turns and don't need to take my eyes off the driving. It's a wonderful technology and I'd hate to see it crippled my some lame-brained administrator.
Re: (Score:3)
I fail to see how whether a map scrolls is going to affect whether it displays "unlabelled" streets.
All the article talks about is removing the scrolling of the maps. It doesn't say anything about disabling the audio cues as to where to turn, nor does it say anything about disabling the locator functions of a GPS unit.
So back to my key point: even without scrolling, a GPS is a hell of a lot more convenient than a paper map. But without the scrolling, you'll be encouraged to plan ahead. And I firmly
Re:Ever hear of a "map"? (Score:4, Insightful)
There are so many streets out in the area I''m at that either don't have signs or have small, hard-to-find signs (imagine trying to find a sign on a random corner of an intersection of a 4-lane-plus-turn-lanes road and a 2-lane side road, with trees and poor lighting). Often by the time I've found the sign, assuming I even find it at all while making sure I don't hit something, I've gone right through the intersection I was supposed to turn at. I've seen a lot of accidents and close calls caused by people slowing to a crawl coming up on an intersection, presumably trying to find the sign to see what street they've reached, sometimes swerving into the turn lane at the last second. I don't want to be one of those.
For some reason, the DOT out here doesn't seem to have heard of the concept of putting the signs up on the traffic light cross-poles or even putting up signs on multiple corners of a large intersection.
I love my GPS just for that.
It's just an added bonus that I don't have to pull over and pick up the tattered old map to remind myself which tree-named street I want again, and is it the 3rd or 4th turn after the last major intersection that I haven't reached yet, and then is it left-right-right-left or left-right-left-left once I get into the subdivision. It's not because I can't use a map of because I'm lazy, but the GPS is so much easier and a time-saver, that I am able to concentrate more on the driving and not on where I'm trying to go, that I feel it's much safer to use the GPS than to not use it.
Re: (Score:3)
Parent post approach is great for all those persons living in a dream world where you never miss your turn. In my real world, if I need a map to find my route from A to B, things are complex enough that I might well miss a turn. Maybe I'm in the wrong lane for it; maybe the turn is closed by construction; maybe it is raining or snowing so hard I cannot read the signs.
The GPS will tell you immediately when you have gotten off course. No more "I should have made that left turn in Albuquerque". Which is espec
Training and practice (Score:2)
I think many drivers can cope with these moving displays and even talking on the phone - just takes enough practice and proper training[1] (pilots and others manage fine). The problem is when drivers do it on public roads when they haven't reached that level of skill.
[1
Velocity (Score:3, Insightful)
Not only that, but the car's velocity would no longer be conveyed with a static display. It's why digital numeric-readout speedometers were a failure in 1980's Fords -- they didn't convey acceleration.
Re: (Score:2)
Manifold pressure is actually a useful one for constant diagnostics on a turbocharged engine - if it doesn't come up at all or comes up slowly or late, you've likely got a turbo control issue, if it goes up too high, you've likely got a turbo control issue that could get very expensive very quickly.
NHTSA = dumb !@#$% (Score:5, Insightful)
1. All this will do is encourage people NOT to waste $2,500 on in car GPS units and use their cell phones handheld or mounted to their dashboards.
2. It clearly shows the NHTSA hasn't done any real research on this issue. If they had, they would have come out with a much different solution. My own independent research has made it clear that GPS units screen movement are not the issue but the location of the unit. (off to the right, centered in console)
Safety would be greatly improved by relocating the GPS console to the driver's side directly in line of sight, and with a night heads-up display even better. Why is this? Because having it in the center of the console forces drivers to look away from the road, and offers ZERO reduction in distraction. However, placement in front of the driver's line of sight does something interesting. Even when the driver is distracted by looking at the screen, the road remains in the driver's line of sight, and the driver's peripheral vision remains on the road.
Peripheral vision is attuned to movement. A driver is able to still be alerted to an incoming car or obstacle even while focusing on the GPS screen when it is position properly.
D@|\/|N Government....
Other dynamic displays ... (Score:2, Insightful)
While we're at it, why not get rid of all those other dynamic displays: gas gauge, speedometer, rear-view mirror ...
Is there a real problem? (Score:4, Informative)
Freeze (Score:4, Insightful)
While they are at it, perhaps the tachometer and speedometer should be frozen, since they could be distracting. Make the turn signal indicators solid... that blinking can be distracting. Better make sure there is no sweep/seconds hand on any clock.
And passengers- especially children, those should be frozen too. They are MAJOR moving distractions.
Oh- they should repaint all the lines on the roads to not have dashes, since those appear to be moving. Mirrors....
This is a great idea (Score:2)
We have so many out of control bureaucracies and they tend to survive by never pushing people too hard too fast.
However, every so often they go WAAAY too far and piss so many people off that it causes everyone to ask seriously "can you make me?"... and the reality is that if they try to cash this check it will bounce.
So they should do it. And the TSA should strip search people. And the FCC should start censoring the internet.
All great ways for overblown bureaucracies to cut their own throat.
Every few Seconds? (Score:5, Funny)
If I wanted updates on my driving every few seconds, I wouldn't bother to duct tape my wife's mouth.
It would lead to more crashes (Score:2)
Passengers are more distracting (Score:2)
If the goal is to remove distractions, all vehicles should have the driver in an isolated compartment. No fussing kids or conversations with the passengers to take their focus off the road.
While a GPS can be distracting, it also has that great benefit of allowing people to pay more attention to the road and other vehicles, instead of scanning for street signs and building numbers.
This is not about eyes (Score:3)
We need an information based way of considering these things. A measurement of how much total distraction a car is allowed to give the driver. Then we can use that metric to allow or disallow various things.
It's perfectly safe for a driver on an open highway to use a cell phone. If he has a manual transmission, less so. If he's drinking coffee too, probably unsafe. A driver may be able to handle a GPS safely if it's in visual format for faster integration. Perhaps the car should allow no more than two of: manual transmission, radio, cell phone, GPS.
It's been proven that talking on the phone is almost as distracting without the headset.
My point is by worrying about where the driver's eyes are they're taking entirely the wrong approach.
You awesome amazing slashdot drivers/navigators... (Score:3)
Now, judging by most of the people I see on the road, you guys are in the overwhelming minority. Ban GPS entirely, and bad drivers will keep finding ways to be bad drivers.
Touchscreens are the real problem. (Score:3)
I don't think GPS moving map displays are the problem, at least after the first few times you use one. The larger issue is the terrible touch UI. It just isn't a good system when driving. I used to have an N95 that I used for navigation and as an MP3 player. I could easily search/spell using T9 without looking or with just a quick glance to make sure it had the correct spelling while driving. Now that I have an Android phone, I have to look at the screen to do anything because there's no way to feel the keyboard under my fingers. It is FAR more distracting to the point that I often need to pull over just to pick a new album.
I'm really looking forward to next generation systems that don't need touchscreens. The new Audi nav system that lets you draw letters on a console mounted touchpad is a good start. Steering wheel controls that could interface with phone's bluetooth HID protocol and act like a joystick mouse would be better.
Who feels that driving is "too dangerous" now? (Score:3)
I know there's a lot of complaints about distractions, specifically cell phones, texting, smartphones, etc but has anyone reached the conclusion that driving is somehow more dangerous than it used to be?
I'm a little concerned that we're managing by statistics and only interested in lower numbers, which is not evil, it seems kind of misleading and leads to kind of draconian ideas to find the changes necessary to alter the statistics without taking into account some kind of bigger picture.
For example, if N people are killed or seriously injured due to futzing with a GPS, we decide to make the GPS less useful, without ever understanding that pre-GPS X people will killed or seriously injured fumbling with a piece of paper, looking for street signs and trying to read addresses in traffic.
I don't know if N or X is the larger number, but what if they are the same? We can't ban fumbling with a sheet of paper, but we can ban or hinder GPS. We may "solve" the GPS deaths but we just end up re-creating the other navigation deaths as well as inconveniencing people who otherwise find great benefit in GPS devices.
Re:Garmin lobbyists (Score:5, Insightful)
*shrugs* If I need GPS, I use my cell phone. It has current maps, and doesn't require me to buy a $200 update every few months so I'm up to date.
I also stuff it in the cup holder and just listen to the auditory commands, if I'm using it for navigation. The screen *is* a distraction. If I want to study the route, I'll do it when the car isn't moving.
Actually, to that end, I'm a bit surprised that the NHTSA isn't suggesting that the in-dash navigation systems should blank the screen while the car is moving. That would make things significantly safer, I think.. they could even make it so that if it's pulled out and facing the passenger seat instead of the driver, the screen unblanks and updates, so that a passenger can give directions.
Re: (Score:2)
*shrugs* If I need GPS, I use my cell phone. It has current maps, and doesn't require me to buy a $200 update every few months so I'm up to date.
For what it's worth, there's quite a few consumer-level GPS receivers for car navigation (such as those produced by Garmin, TomTom, etc.) that have "lifetime" updates -- the maps are updated quarterly (or so) from the vendor.
I have one of these devices and it's quite handy. Many of the cell phone navigation applications I've seen require that one have mobile phone service to get maps -- they cache a bit of the maps in case one is outside of coverage for a little while but if you're out of coverage for an ex
Re: (Score:3)
The screen *is* a distraction. If I want to study the route, I'll do it when the car isn't moving.
Depends on the cities you drive in. I glance at the screen when I am unsure what the GPS means. Sometimes the device is silent but driving what seems straight to me is the wrong way - I need to keep right (the device would tell me to "keep left" if I actually needed to go straight in that place), this is probably some weirdness in the map.
Also, sometimes two roads are very close to each other, so when the device tells me to "turn right" I need to glance at the screen so see whether should I turn right now o
Re:Garmin lobbyists (Score:4, Interesting)
*shrugs* If I need GPS, I use my cell phone. It has current maps, and doesn't require me to buy a $200 update every few months so I'm up to date.
I also stuff it in the cup holder and just listen to the auditory commands, if I'm using it for navigation. The screen *is* a distraction.If I want to study the route, I'll do it when the car isn't moving.
Agreed, so the real question is what is preventing people from using their cell phones as dynamic GPS in the future, or is the NHTSA going after ALL devices with GPS technology and guidance software (i.e. even a laptop with Microsoft Streets and Trips)? I doubt their reach will go that far, but anything short of that is basically pointless.
Actually, to that end, I'm a bit surprised that the NHTSA isn't suggesting that the in-dash navigation systems should blank the screen while the car is moving. That would make things significantly safer, I think..
Ah, no, that would make things significantly more worthless. a GPS navigation system without a dynamic visual aide has basically been reduced to the value of a paper map. Might have fixed the problem, but you're sure not going to sell too many $3000 navigation packages on cars.
they could even make it so that if it's pulled out and facing the passenger seat instead of the driver, the screen unblanks and updates, so that a passenger can give directions.
Or the driver could just pull it out themselves and lay it on the passenger seat and use it anyway. Oh, the tech won't turn on because it doesn't sense a passenger (weight sensor tied to the airbag system)? No problem, I'll just set my backpack in the front seat, that usually does the trick.
Try and idiot-proof something, the world will build a better idiot. The real answer here to curb distracted driving is to punish appropriately and ENFORCE IT. Threatening someone with a $200 ticket doesn't mean shit if it's empty threats 99% of the time.
Re:You think that's bad? (Score:5, Insightful)
Well that's moronic. What if you're the passenger. *sheesh*
Re: (Score:2)
Lol - Navigation not allowed while Navigating...
Re:Hyperbole much? (Score:4, Insightful)
Indeed. I refuse to use a GPS where I can't have a map with north up, but instead have to rely on the constantly shifting view made for people who can't read maps nor think further ahead than the next turn, but can only relate to the direction the car is going in right now.
What's really sad is how such a large part of the population lacks skills that were common. Like estimating distances, giving correct change without a calculator, making a meal from scratch or reading a map. People don't use technologies to make things they know how to do easier, they use them so they won't have to learn something in the first place.
At my best estimate, this Great Age Of Ignorance became mainstream in the late 80s, early 90s, and has continued since. There used to be a saying that someone was so dumb that they couldn't find their ass without a map, but these days, the average Joe or Jane would look dumbly at the map.
If you can't read a map but rely on POV views, I don't want you on the roads without special dispensation and training. You have no spatial awareness, and are a danger to others.
Re: (Score:3)
You are in a car, not a forest... (Score:4, Informative)
North is essential if you are lost in the woods and have no idea as to your location, but do know your direction.
But in a moving car, we turn steering wheels "left" or "right", not "North" or "South." Re-orienting the map to the current direction of travel makes perfect sense, especially if you are looking at the display quickly, and it's not immediately clear which way the car is pointed. (At least, not without looking at the symbol for your current location closely.)
With the map always being oriented to the direction of travel, I can see out of the corner of my eye how far it is to the next turn, and which direction the turn will be in. If the map stays oriented North, and I'm right on top of a turn from, say, East to South, I can't tell if I need to make a turn at all, or if I'm supposed to go straight; at least, not without examining the direction pointer closely.
Re: (Score:3)
You completely miss the point.
There's nothing wrong in using a calculator if you know how to calculate, and use it to make life easier. What's wrong is using it instead of learning how to calculate. You become dependent on it, and are helpless as a baby when it isn't available.
Similar with butchering and sewing. Knowing a little bit of both doesn't hurt, and not only makes it possible for you to prepare a meal and mend your clothes on a cabin trib, but also makes it easier to communicate one's wants and
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed. If you don't know where you're going, have your passenger navigate. If you don't have a passenger, pull the fuck over and read the map until you do know where you're going.
I don't know about you (Score:2)
But I was taught to rotate my map to that it faced the direction I did.
Re: (Score:2)
Paper maps are also more distracting than a GPS.
Re: (Score:2)
Paper maps don't scroll OR indicate where you are
Which is why you can't look at them while you're driving. GPS scrolling is safer (than what the NHTSA is proposing) because the car is always in the centre of the screen. You can actually look at it and then back back at the road in a safe amount of time because you don't have to find the car on the map.
Re:Hyperbole much? (Score:5, Insightful)
Our former head of traffic police (in the Netherlands), who is notoriously averse of gadgetry in cars, quoted several studies that navigation systems are by far the safest option for navigating an area that you're not familiar with, winning over memorizing maps, having paper maps in the car, stopping to ask directions, or just winging it. The one thing that is safer is having a co-pilot with either a paper map or a GPS.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I've only ever used a GPS system once. I never bothered to look at the screen except to set the destination - the voice was adequate for the task.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know where in the world you're living. In the US, most crossings that I encountered were at right angles and a simple "turn left"/"turn right" is sufficient. In the European cities that I've visited so far, this can quickly be too little information. I regularly come across situations where a simple "turn left" voice command is just not enough to distinguish between the two or three options that may be there (I'm not kidding, these crossings exist). Without a map showing which way I'm supposed to take, I'd be completely lost.
And most good GPS navigation systems will say "bear left", rather than "turn left" when there's multiple choices.
Most cities that have these kinds of intersections have replaced them with roundabouts, which eliminate the problem you describe. (if you want a good example of the kind of issue being described, go to http://maps.google.ca/?ll=48.853153,2.369013&spn=0.011366,0.027874&t=h&z=16 [google.ca] (or in case Slashdot mangles the link, search for "Place de la Bastille, Paris, France")
Re: (Score:2)
This would just mean that automakers need to focus on smartphone integration where you can just plug your smartphone into a dock built into the dash where the CD player normally is and the smartphone acts as the CD player's screen. I know a car or two has iPhone integration similar to this. Unfortunately, Google needs to get their act together because their 3rd party hardware support is nowhere near the iPhone's. They need to start putting out consistent hardware that can be targeted for hardware integration like this.
Actually, my Android phone has no problem integrating with my car. If I want to use the Android phone as the controller, I can play music through the car's stereo using Bluetooth, and if I prefer that the stereo do the work, I can plug the phone into the car's USB port and mount it as a thumb drive. In both cases, the steering-wheel mounted audio controls work for changing track.
There's no standard dock for Android, so having a simple dock you can plug into on the dash isn't going to happen, but there's no
Re: (Score:2)
They're called BSDs (back seat drivers). You probably have one in your family.
Re: (Score:2)
That might work in America, but I can assure you that in Europe the very idea is laughable. With journeys of 50 miles, and perhaps 20 junctions per mile, all different, and possibly none with strait on as an option, you are not going to remember more than the first 7 of over 100. On top of which, each junction you have to check that the spoken suggestion is feasible for your vehicle, and legal and plan an alternative if it isnt - whi
Re: (Score:3)
Why does everything come down to the distraction and not the driver. A good driver won't be distracted by a scrolling map, won't answer there phone on the highway and etc.......
Because the entire transport infrastructure of the western world, as well as large chunks of the economy, rely on every man and his dog driving a private car.
By all means introduce a system in which getting a driver's license is more akin to getting a pilot's license, but be prepared for General Motors shares to take a hit and a lot of out-of-town shopping malls to get boarded up. You might have to start paying cab drivers like professionals too if you require professional qualifications (apologies to cab
Logic Failure (Score:3)
Finally they are applying science (Score:3)
People can't function as well with these distracting devices. Your brain is wired to be be drawn to moving items like a scrolling image on the dash. It is not an AGE specific problem. Sure this may be upsetting like a reality show contestant finding out for the 1st time (on national TV) that they actually suck -- your brain isn't all you may believe it to be.
GPS makers may make a MODE for this; that is, until a law is written... won't be hard to have some studies to back it since the recommendation is well