Hacker News Reader

Comment by Hnrobert42 | Hacker News Reader

I am surprised the author didn’t use one of the most salient examples: navigation. I used to consider myself quite good at navigation because I took the time to explore my city. Now, I blindly follow instructions until I am lost when my phone dies.

View on HN

I'm super glad for navigation apps in Los Angeles. In fact, the main reason I finally adopted a smartphone was because of how frequently a different route can save you a half hour of waiting in traffic (or more).

But I'm even more glad that I learned to navigate LA via map and memory well before I came to rely on GPS.

Lately I've been trying to keep that fresh by taking a moment to mentally walk through the navigation instructions before I start traveling somewhere. Having the overview in your head -- even if you forget some of it -- makes a world of difference between building a geographic model and just following instructions.

Somewhere in here there's probably a lesson or two about the difference between augmentation and automation, but it's not one I've teased out well enough to articulate better than this.

Yeah, one of the things I think about a lot is supportive versus controlling technology. Google Maps, etc, seem uncomfortably in the middle to me. Yes, I told it where I want to go. But after that, I'm basically a peripheral device to Google for the duration of the trip, and it doesn't help my geographic sense much.

I recently went to Amsterdam. Before I left, I got Google Maps directions for various places I was going and then used Google Earth to "walk" the routes. After 10 or 15 minutes I built up enough of a sense of landmarks and general layout that I felt pretty well oriented when I arrived.

That was cumbersome to do, but I'd love to see GPS tools move in that direction of supporting not just my current goal, but my long-term independence from needing turn-by-turn directions for everything.

Couldn't you look at the road and landmarks while you drive, to learn the geography?

No, because the standard interface shows me a postage-stamp sized understanding of the world. It's sufficient to follow the directions, but not useful for learning the broader context in the same way that one has to do with physical maps.

I felt way smarter when I had to navigate by a paper map and plan things out. It's almost like I've lost that navigational skill. From time to time I will buy a map though just to exercise the brain circuits.

Don't blindly follow. I keep my GPS in North-Up, and I always zoom out to see the intended route. Also, GPS's tend to take you through extra turns a 'native' driver of the area probably wouldn't take. Save 30 seconds at .1 miles by taking 3 turns through this neighborhood, when in reality it was just as quick to continue straight and turn right at the major intersection.

You really only need to know how to get to and a major thoroughfare, how those thoroughfares connect to vicinity of your destination, and then the steps from the thoroughfare to your destination.

It's not quite the same, because navigation systems aren't typically black boxes to their creators. Someone down the chain understands how they work.

I used to drive to different sites as part of my work early in my career. I'd have given my right arm for satnav, it would have saved so much aggravation.

A classic example:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DOW_kPzY_JY&feature=youtu.be...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com