this post was submitted on 05 Mar 2024
1767 points (99.5% liked)

Technology

60070 readers
3415 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Lutra@lemmy.world 36 points 9 months ago (2 children)

For more thinking about this issue for software/hardware makers a good read is "Enchanted Objects" by David Rose.

iirc. He says we're in a 'Glass Rectangle' phase, where makers are stuck on screens, Like Xhibit in Pimp my ride - we put 22 screens in your car. They know how to "screen" and they use it the solution to all problems. It's like an infatuation, where you just can't see another way. There are entire sciences of Human Machine Interaction that explain why these designs are messed up, and the designers are aware, and have chosen otherwise.

2016 Actor Antov Yelkin who played Checkov is killed by his 2015 Jeep Grand Cherokee, pinning him to his mailbox and fence. Because it didn't have a gearshift. It has a thing that looks like a shift but is a joystick.

[–] Gestrid@lemmy.ca 6 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Antov Yelkin who played Checkov

You mean Anton Yelchin who played Chekov?

[–] Lutra@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago

most definitely that. not the other. The guy who played Pavel Checkov, the Enterprise's navigator. Not the noted author born in 1860.

[–] anonymouse@lemmings.world 6 points 9 months ago (2 children)

I think what happened to Yelchin is a separate issue. The joystick was still a physical object that gave tactile feedback. The design was fine, but GM flushed the mouse on the implementation.

Where we have a bigger problem is when common vehicle controls are just an image on a screen, and a driver has to take their eyes off the road to do something simple like change the A/C temperature or skip a song track.

[–] Timecircleline@sh.itjust.works 6 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I've never heard the term "flushed the mouse". I tried to google it but all I got are -people flushing live mice down the toilet (?) and -the movie flushed away. Can you elaborate?

[–] anonymouse@lemmings.world 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

It's basically a nicer way of saying "shit the bed." I picked it up from the Tony Kornheiser podcast. It's a running bit there.

[–] Timecircleline@sh.itjust.works 2 points 9 months ago

Thank you! That's what I guessed from context but wasn't sure if it was a regional thing.

[–] Lutra@lemmy.world 4 points 9 months ago

Yes, this is a bit outside the screen problem, but it is pertinent to car UI. Buttons/Joysticks give a form of tactile feedback, they don't give positional feedback. Take a button. Pushing it does give tactile feedback (she feels that she pushed the button), but it's quite possible that the button wasn't pushed enough or long enough to register the push, same with joystick up/down. Flipping a switch for example is different. The position changes, and latches. She is certain that her intentions (turn on the light) were either carried out or not, because the switch with either be in position one or two. Buttons/joysticks require a second evaluation, to check that the button knows it was pushed. It's a subtle difference, but serious. Sliding the gearshift all the way forward, we just know it's done. Likewise pulling up on the handle, hearing the ratchet sound, I know that my parking brake is on.