Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:inb4 (Score 1) 638

I will give you credit for making me learn that the image is projected a certain distance out. However, it still requires a change in focus, albeit more mental than ocular. Which keeps to my point of reading a text while driving will make you lose focus on what is going on around your car.

Here's one example of many that came up in my search
http://blog.vectorform.com/2013/07/17/the-google-glass-experience/
[emphasis mine]

Focusing on the Glass display is actually quite easy, and doesn’t result in everything else becoming visually out of focus. This is because the focal point of the projected image is not on the surface of the Glass prism, but rather about 8 feet out from your current position. Even being nearsighted, without my contacts, the Glass display is unreadable as my eyesight at 8 feet is all but a blur. However, even though your eye focus may not change, the display doesn’t create an image that fits within 3D space. It’s still a 2D plane that is floating in 3D space, which results in you having to make a conscious decision of which plane to mentally focus on. Watching someone use Glass almost looks as if they’re daydreaming; their eyes are locked to the position of the Glass display and it is tough to break their concentration

Comment Re:inb4 (Score 1) 638

Projecting an image out into space is not what a HUD does. That would be more in the realm of a holographic projector. But since that technology would have to be invented by geeks, the first thing they would project would be Princess Leah saying "Help me Obi-Wan Kenobi. You're my only hope." And then they would die in a fiery crash because they were transfixed by the vision of Leah. Leaving mankind with no idea how to replicate the tech. Thinking about it, who knows how many times this tech has already been invented only to be lost in a tragic car fatality.

Comment Re:Good. (Score 1) 638

1. This thread is about a HUD with email on display. Email is entertainment when it comes to driving. It has nothing to do with information that needs to be processed while driving. I am willing to grant that someone developing a HUD for a car, and nothing else would be a great addition to my car.
2. I think I covered this in (1), but allow me to repeat that if someone built what you're talking about and made it so that it was only providing driving AR functions (i.e. no text message pop ups, youtube is all out) it would be awesome.
3. In the US alone there are over 30,000 car fatalities per year. I think that is a large enough number to justify using the word carnage: the killing of a large number of people. If you don't then I am sorry that you were offended. What word would you use to describe 30k+ deaths a year?

Comment Re:Good. (Score 1) 638

Wow, I provide a link to a study that shows people can't multitask, and you wave your dick around as if that would distract from you having no facts. I'll ignore the small phallus seeking attention, and bring you back to the subject at hand (hint, it is not what is in your hand).

You are comparing short duration tasks to a long duration task. You do not read emails in one second bursts. And while you are focused on the email you are not multitasking (see my link for proof - note that was the first one that google listed, there are many more). During that time the situation around you is evolving and you are not aware of it. Sure a big red semi drifting over might catch your attention, but you drifting out of your lane won't. A kid running up to the street won't. Will you be able to avoid some incidents, of course. Will you be as safe as someone driving without the distraction of reading slashdot on the road, not even close.

Comment Re:Good. (Score 1) 638

This discussion is about HUD glasses not car HUD systems. A car HUD system could well decrease the fatality rate on our roads. An entertainment HUD system like the one discussed here is a distraction and will add to the carnage on our roads.

Comment Re:Guilty (Score 2) 638

Sorry - the confluence of your name and the video subject matter was just too easy, I would like to clearly state that my comment was purely meant to be ironic and in no way a reflection of BHI.

And yes, the idea of some fucktard catching up on Breaking Bad as a way to occupy time while commuting fills me with fear too.

Comment Re:Good. (Score 1) 638

I agree a properly developed HUD would be an improvement, and there are cars that are beginning to use them. But they are not Google Glass, they are car HUDs. Google Glass hooked up to your phone is a distraction and saying that just because it might be completely reengineered into something good for driving does not make it good for driving.

Comment Re:Good. (Score 2) 638

A HUD with email might be less of an impairment than reading a speedometer for 1-2 seconds? Really. We need to spend how much money doing studies to find out that reading text
a) takes longer
b) longer distraction times will be more distracting

No. A hud with email or text will be a distraction to driving far worse than looking at the speedometer - which you've already established a upper threshold of how much distraction to allow. Ban the crap out of this until a reliable study shows that this really isn't obvious and that taking your eyes off the road to read an email or text for 5+ seconds somehow makes drivers safe and skunks smell like unicorn farts.

Comment Re:Impaired Driving Abilities? (Score 1) 638

I'll add
3. The integrated HUD displays information relevant to the operation and survival of the craft and nothing else. It does not provide distracting text messages from mom and ex-girlfriends(*) when missiles are locked on to you/a child is about to leap from behind a car.

(*) Note, the ex-girlfriends applies to military pilots, they are studs and have real ex-girlfriends.

Comment Re:inb4 (Score 4, Insightful) 638

Just because the information is in your line of sight does not mean that it is in your focus. You have to shift focus to see information in the near plane. And there is a reason HUDs use graphic icons, they are faster for the brain to process. And the plane HUD displays information directly relevant to the successful operation/survival of the aircraft. Reading text takes several orders of magnitude longer to process. If you are traveling at 30mph (slow residential speed) and you read a text for 5 seconds, you have traveled 77 yards, nearly a football field, and you then have to refocus on the outside and scan for any new threats, which will take additional time.

If I was to tell you that I would drive down your street at 30 mph once a day with my eyes closed for a 100 yard section, and I was to do it when you little brother/ daughter/insert loved one was out playing would you be as cavalier about the costs of distracted driving?

or, to answer you question, no I would not inform the world's air forces that you don't understand the difference between a military HUD and a recreational distraction.

Comment OMG I read the article... (Score 2) 79

Reading the summary I was wondering if this would have any applications to improve detection of stealth aircraft. So I *gulp please don't mod me to oblivion* read the article. It's light on details, but not what I expected from the summary. The guy was able to build a sonar, followed by a radar that is able to distinguish between different materials. It's potential uses are for detecting explosives hidden in rubble and such, and for finding buried victims after some form of disaster (specifically homing in on their phones and other such devices). Oh, and it's cheap, if you know what you're doing you can build it for two bucks.

Slashdot Top Deals

Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler. -- Albert Einstein

Working...