Hacker News Reader

Comment by tripngroove | Hacker News Reader

Good! A person operating a moving vehicle should have 100% of their attention focused on the road. I have yet to see an argument to the contrary that doesn't attempt to rationalize unsafe behavior.

Any device that actively creates distractions occluding a person's field of vision should be prohibited while driving.

View on HN

This is a pretty silly statement, because it implies that what someone could do with google glass they don't normally already do. What about a TomTom? Is that illegal? Is it better to look at its screen wherever you positioned it in the car? What about billboards? Aren't they there to catch your attention while driving? Are they illegal? What about checking your speedometer or the gas level, or gas mileage?

In the future things like google glass or even active screens/windshields will be more and more able to show the same information and more, without necessarily implying any unsafe behavior on the road.

Do you think that drivers should avoid listening to the radio? Should they pull off the road before manipulating their heater? Windshield wipers?

I ask because I kind of doubt you truly mean "100%", but you insult anyone going for anything less.

>Do you think that drivers should avoid listening to the radio?

Yes, radios are distracting and therefore dangerous, especially if drivers take their eyes off of the road to adjust the controls.

>Should they pull off the road before manipulating their heater? Windshield wipers?

No. It is often necessary to adjust windshield wipers and climate control systems to ensure safety, and sometimes those adjustments must be made in situations where pulling off the road is unsafe or impossible. For example, if it starts pouring rain while on a narrow bridge (no way to pull over), you will need the wipers to keep the windshield clear. The heater can be used to de-fog.

Sounds like an attempt to rationalize unsafe behavior to me. You can always roll down your window and stick your head out for an unobstructed view until you arrive at a place where you can pull over.

You cannot always. In heavy downpours your eyes will be blocked by all the water. In severe cold your eyeballs will burn from the wind. The shelter of a car's cabin serves a purpose.

Sounds like a perfect use case for driving goggles.

..Google Goggles.

Operating the controls of your vehicle to respond to environmental conditions increases your safety more than it decreases it. Turning on my high beams does take a few brain cycles to flip the switch, but it also lets me spot the deer on the side of the road.

It's almost as if there are legitimate reasons not to have 100% of your attention focused on the road, that aren't simply attempts to rationalize unsafe behavior.

That's not unobstructed, you'll have trouble seeing the kerbside.

Also, let's not forget about the fact that all those controls are /tactile/, which means they can be operated without moving your eyes at ll.

Do you think it should be illegal to listen to the radio while driving or illegal to manipulate the radio?

Yes. If you are driving, you should not be doing anything but driving. There are far too many deaths on the road.

Generally, people can adjust the radio and turn on the wipers without looking down. You just know where the controls are.

Just because your eyes stay on the road doesn't mean 100% of your attention stays there. Manipulating controls by feel alone is still distracting.

Unless you have some kind of crazy zen meditation technique, getting an email alert on Google Glass is 100% certain to distract you from whatever you are doing. Your eyes will automatically focus on it for a short period of time, your brain will then spend time processing it. That's how we are wired. And you can get notifications at any time.. perhaps while you're doing something that requires extra care.

People here are doing what they do best: rationalize a situation until it somehow makes sense that they should be allowed to do what they want to do, regardless.

When I started reading this thread I thought I would not engage in a discuss where people cannot accept a distraction is a distraction is a distraction. Apparently, I'm weak in that regard.

I'm simply criticizing a person who took a completely inflexible and dogmatic position, namely that "A person operating a moving vehicle should have 100% of their attention focused on the road." And further stated that all arguments otherwise were simply attempts to rationalize unsafe behavior. All I'm doing is pointing out that this implies that arguing you should be able to e.g. turn on your headlights is "rationalizing unsafe behavior" according to that metric.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com