AAA says Apple's Siri causes potentially dangerous driver distractions

135

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 89
    tenlytenly Posts: 710member
    Where does the baseline of NOT using any voice assisted electronics fall on this same scale? How distracted is the person who DOESN'T use Siri or Sync or anything else and fumbles around with the phone on their lap? And what if they had put a real life secretary or assistant in the passenger seat and had you dictate all the same commands/tasks to her? Where would that fall on the scale? How long did it take Microsoft Sync to update your Social Media status?

    This was a truly idiotic study and included a ridiculous set of tasks and devices. It's like comparing the length of time it takes to build a bridge and the length of time it takes the average person to pee and then trying to draw a conclusion from the comparison. Absolutely useless.
  • Reply 42 of 89
    paxmanpaxman Posts: 4,729member
    I get the feeling most people that have posted above do not use Siri in the car. I have, and do, and at least 50 percent of the time I just have to abort because it is not working well enough. When it works it is fantastic, but often the dictation is wrong, or Siri just doesn't get what I am trying to do... and THATS when it gets dangerous. When Siri misbehaves it is frustrating and consequently your attention definitely leaves the road ahead. Natural language is great but it is by no means equal to speaking to a real person with whom you can reason and explain what you meant.
    Nothing is as dangerous as texting manually in a car, we all know that. Siri is much better. In fact She is amazing. About 50% amazing, and that is why she is also very dangerous.
  • Reply 43 of 89
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,926member
    So why does AAA single out Siri? Why not Google Now and the majority of Android? Click bait. I've never txt or update Twitter/FB while driving.

    Oh Android users are too cheap to own a car. I'm joking. Haha.
  • Reply 44 of 89
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Benjamin Frost View Post

     
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post



    This report is by idiots, of idiots, for idiots.

     

     

    Because none of the drivers who cause incalculable deaths and their accompanying misery and suffering are idiots...no, they were just in the wrong place at the wrong time.


    Oh, spare me the sarcasm. The VERY SERIOUS issue of driver distraction is completely separate from this idiotic, poorly-done, biased, click-bait study.

     

    I guess I was right after all, with my comment....

  • Reply 45 of 89
    pazuzupazuzu Posts: 1,728member
    Siri disappoints time and time again. Anyone who would rely on her for directions is just asking for aggravation.
  • Reply 46 of 89
    nolamacguy wrote: »

    incorrect. the cognitive load to work abstract processes or workflows (such as composing Facebook posts or emails) w/ a non-human is higher than simply having a conversation w/ a real person on the phone, which is likewise higher than speaking w/ a person sitting next to you, which is higher than speaking w/ someone in front of you. our brains have dedicated an enormous amount of space/bandwidth for high-resolution vision and the visual cortex for processing that data...the further removed from it the more taxing it is on our CPUs to do stuff.

    this is not new science.

    not sure why they did the study on "Siri" by name. did they compare it to other software agents for comparison? is Siri worse than those? possibly, who knows. worth studying tho.
    Given some of the idiots I have seen driving, talking (period), no matter the target, is a major distraction. Having a child in the car is a major distraction. Turning around to carry on a conversation is a major distraction. Dictating a letter or report is a major distraction. Manually changing a car radio can be a greater distraction for some when compared to using a hands-free device. Simply put, everyone should try to minimize the frustrations while driving.

    It's intuitive to think that texting and updating Facebook is a distraction. In fact, it's against the law to operate a keyboard while driving in many states. Hand-free is less—IF THE DRIVER DOES NOT TAKE HIS EYES OFF THE ROAD. Unfortunaely, even with Hans-free devices, that's usually not the case as attention is focussed anywhere but on the road.

    Singling SIRI out is not a fair evaluation compared to other types of distractions. It's apples and oranges.

    Bottom line is people should not text, email or update Facebook or perform any other complex task while driving no matter the device or interface or activity.
  • Reply 47 of 89
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by tenly View Post



    Where does the baseline of NOT using any voice assisted electronics fall on this same scale? How distracted is the person who DOESN'T use Siri or Sync or anything else and fumbles around with the phone on their lap? And what if they had put a real life secretary or assistant in the passenger seat and had you dictate all the same commands/tasks to her? Where would that fall on the scale? How long did it take Microsoft Sync to update your Social Media status?



    This was a truly idiotic study and included a ridiculous set of tasks and devices. It's like comparing the length of time it takes to build a bridge and the length of time it takes the average person to pee and then trying to draw a conclusion from the comparison. Absolutely useless.

     

    The simple truth is that it IS more distracting when the person isn't in the car with you. I don't know a single friend (or foe) riding in the car with me who wouldn't react to my obvious concern for traffic or other approaching road hazards by shutting the hell up and letting me drive to a safer situation on the road.

     

    Siri isn't even a person, (at least you can tell someone on the phone to "hold on"). Nobody says, "Siri, give me directions to Panera." They say, "Siri, where is the nearest Panera." Or, "Find a Panera on my way to work," or, "Call the Panera in Montgomery." She almost always presents you with options to choose from (on screen)—which is inherently more distracting than talking to a live person.

     

    Oh, also, random complaint, she definitely cuts me off in most of my sentences. She gets all my words about 60% of the time. So annoying.

     

    I don't think it's idiotic to set up tasks for someone to do and then, (keyword) MEASURE the outcomes based on creative variables. It's called an experiment and it is the bedrock of (another keyword) EMPIRICAL science.

  • Reply 48 of 89
    emoeric87 wrote: »
    The simple truth is that it IS more distracting when the person isn't in the car with you. I don't know a single friend (or foe) riding in the car with me who wouldn't react to my obvious concern for traffic or other approaching road hazards by shutting the hell up and letting me drive to a safer situation on the road.

    Siri isn't even a person, (at least you can tell someone on the phone to "hold on"). Nobody says, "Siri, give me directions to Panera." They say, "Siri, where is the nearest Panera." Or, "Find a Panera on my way to work," or, "Call the Panera in Montgomery." She almost always presents you with options to choose from (on screen)—which is inherently more distracting than talking to a live person.

    Oh, also, random complaint, she definitely cuts me off in most of my sentences. She gets all my words about 60% of the time. So annoying.

    I don't think it's idiotic to set up tasks for someone to do and then, (keyword) MEASURE the outcomes based on creative variables. It's called an experiment and it is the bedrock of (another keyword) EMPIRICAL science.
    You have truly amazing friends if they are always watching the road for you. Not everyone does.

    As for asking for directions, either have a friend do it or pull to the roadside a parking lot, Etc. That's what I do.

    I've never had a problem with Siri cutting me off. Nor with recognizing what I say. Recognition rate >90%.

    Empirical or not, if it's poor experimental design, that makes bad science, not good.

    Just because the functions are there, using them comes with risk. Using them unwisely increases that risk. The level of risk will vary from driver to driver and vehicle to vehicle and from device/interface to device/interface.

    Finally, testing inherently high risk activities then using the results to prove a more capable system is worse is like saying cars are the most dangerous form of transportation, therefore we should use horse carriages or buses (a different issue) (and, yes, that's an extreme analogy). Fairer analogy: while driving, which is worse, using Siri to find a restaurant or using a paper phone book and paper map?

    My point is that technology should be used with a modicum of common sense. That's why I ask for directions with my car engine off.
  • Reply 49 of 89
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Benjamin Frost View Post

    I'm very happy to see a post from you.


    I am alive thankfully...recovering not out of the woods just yet.

  • Reply 50 of 89
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,388member
    Originally Posted by emoeric87 View Post

    Youre not having a conversation (philosophically speaking)


     

    If that’s your only delineation, my point stands. Everything you listed is exactly what happens in a human conversation. The only difference here is that you have to hit a button before talking to Siri, which, yes, removes you from the act of driving in the same way that console actions do. Afterward, it is, again, no different from listening to the radio or speaking with someone else in the car.

     

    (Have you ever tried to make an appointment with a number or date in it using Siri? Brain-numbing...)


     

    Not sure whose brain is being numbed. Perhaps you set a lot of appointments in “conference room two” (too/to). Otherwise…

     


    Also, for the love of God, could you please, for once, admit that others' views could be valid, even if they conflict with yours? I mean seriously....


     

    First, this isn’t a matter of differing views; it’s a matter of fact. Second, your assertion is wrong on the face of it.

     

    I have had Siri wig out on me, though.

  • Reply 51 of 89
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,784member
    Yes, AAA of course it's far safer to look at a crappy printed map you get from the AAA office whilst driving than listen to turn by turn direction and keeping your eyes on the road. Missing people coming to your office for maps maybe?
  • Reply 52 of 89
    ibeamibeam Posts: 322member

    I do use Siri all the time but occasionally try Google when Siri fails to return the results I want. The one thing I notice about Google is they return audio verbal responses much more often than Siri. For example try asking for weather conditions for a particular city with Siri and then with Google. In my experience Siri just displays results on the screen while google verbalizes a summery which is much better if you are driving. It does depend on your location though. You get a different experience if you ask for a city near your current location with Siri. If you do ask for weather conditions near your location it might just come back as 'pretty good' according to Siri.

     

    I'm sorry, 'pretty good' is not a weather report. What is the temperature, wind, cloud cover, etc. Pretty good... right

     

    Here is another example. Ask Siri what is the 50th state of the United States? Then ask Google. Siri just displays info on the screen where Google goes into a full on history lesson verbally.

     

    Except for the availability of being accessed by the home button and able to modify calendars, appointments, alarms and what not, Siri can't compete with Google for general knowledge.

  • Reply 53 of 89
    BS- flawed test. How about the putting on make up while driving distraction. I use Siri all the time while driving and it keeps my eyes on the road. Thanks Siri! Shove it AAA
  • Reply 54 of 89
    tenlytenly Posts: 710member
    paxman wrote: »
    I get the feeling most people that have posted above do not use Siri in the car.
    Nothing is as dangerous as texting manually in a car

    Bullcrap! I remember this time once when I tried to clip my toenails in the car and that seemed more dangerous than texting manually!!! /s

    Agreed that Siri has been hit and miss as far as accuracy goes while barreling down the highway with a window open - but in general, under "normal" conditions, SirI has performed pretty well (for me)
  • Reply 55 of 89

    There are going to have to be some serious advances in voice control in the next year. Here in Austin, there is a new law coming on 1/1/15 that makes any use of any handheld device while driving illegal. Hands-free device use is legal, so a mounted phone with voice control should be allowed -- although I'm not clear on that loophole yet.

     

    Tasker has a plugin called AutoVoice that can intercept Google Now commands to do anything that Tasker can do (which is extensive). I'm planning to whip up some scripts to replace the few touches I currently sneak in while driving.

     

    For my wife, I'm wondering if there are similar solutions available or planned in iOS 8?

     

    If any of you haven't tried one, the Kenu Airframe sold at the Apple Store is freaking amazing. 

  • Reply 56 of 89
    boredumb wrote: »
    If the window were just a little wider, you could see the last, most dangerous category:
    "Laughing hysterically at science as presented by AAA".

    This report would actually mean something to me if AAA didn't actually make the majority of their money from automobile incidents.

    So it would NOT be in the company's or shareholders best interest if they were to actually support information about a safer driving experience. We have to remember that they are supposed to make money AT ALL COSTS. Including disinformation to insure they make MORE money. Companies get penalized by the banking institutions if they do not keep INCREASING their profits.
  • Reply 57 of 89
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    This report would actually mean something to me if AAA didn't actually make the majority of their money from automobile incidents.

    So it would NOT be in the company's or shareholders best interest if they were to actually support information about a safer driving experience. We have to remember that they are supposed to make money AT ALL COSTS. Including disinformation to insure they make MORE money. Companies get penalized by the banking institutions if they do not keep INCREASING their profits.

    What?! They make their money from people not having incidents. If everyone used their "insurance" they would be broke. There is no way that my cost per year to AAA pays for what a single tow would cost or all the discounts I get at hotels and whatnot. In fact, my new car has free roadside assistance, which I doubt is as good as AAA in terms of customer service times for their contracts, but good enough for that remote chance my new car breaks down. I instead keep it for the discounts on many other things.
  • Reply 58 of 89
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Silver Shadow View Post





    This report would actually mean something to me if AAA didn't actually make the majority of their money from automobile incidents.



    So it would NOT be in the company's or shareholders best interest if they were to actually support information about a safer driving experience. We have to remember that they are supposed to make money AT ALL COSTS. Including disinformation to insure they make MORE money. Companies get penalized by the banking institutions if they do not keep INCREASING their profits.

     

    I'm not going to capitalize a bunch of words here, but AAA is a not-for-profit service organization. They have a long history of promoting, researching, and lobbying for automobile and motorcycle safety.

  • Reply 59 of 89
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post



    As for OEM solutions, Toyota's Entune was the least distracting with a ranking of 1.7, while Mercedes' COMAND and Ford SYNC with MyFord Touch systems rated near the bottom at 3.1 and 3.0, respectively. Chevrolet's MyLink was the worst performer out of the automotive industry with a rating of 3.7, but managed to outperform the arguably different test set applied to Siri.

     

    The part I bolded pretty much says it. I think the "different test set" substantially reduces the value of the AAA report.

  • Reply 60 of 89
    asciiascii Posts: 5,936member

    What are voice interfaces good for? Slower than a keyboard for text entry, too distracting for the car. Not really precise enough for controlling a computer game. I guess they are good for asking Internet queries such as "What is the temperature outside?"

Sign In or Register to comment.