3 ms·

I remember using some car’s built-in GPS once and it wanted me to take every freeway exit and get right back on after. Because it decided that saves time/distan

by Swizec 7y ago

I remember using some car’s built-in GPS once and it wanted me to take every freeway exit and get right back on after. Because it decided that saves time/distance. Maps really need a “not worth it” features for tiny optimizations. I’d often prefer a slightly slower route that’s less work to drive.

K0SM0S 7y ago
Oh please YES, the "not worth it", followed by an option to "please take me back to previous path before (because) latest fork = mistake". The very idea of judging the overall travel is a good start (at the end, when they prompt you) but individual datapoints should be reportable as well. I'm pretty sure this would massively help build a dataset with "annotated" cases (good / bad) for RNNs. > I’d often prefer a slightly slower route that’s less work to drive. Me too, and I suspect most people — like, when is it ever a good option to avoid a free highway to save 1 minute when the driving is twice or more fatiguing? Are we bodyless machines or animals with a concept for "tired" and "attention"? This is where I feel recent evolutions in DL have been, perhaps, more for the benefit of developers and researchers (efficiency), and maybe not for real human benefits on the user side. I don't claim the problem is easy, but I know second-hand that what users want and what AI projects solve for may be two very different X.
- johnmaguire2013 7y ago
  > please take me back to previous path before (because) latest fork = mistake Seriously. I regularly travel from Ohio to Michigan and back, and often times if I take an exit for gas, Google Maps will assume I want to take an obscure country backroad for the final 2 hours rather than get back on the highway. I absolutely do not want to worry about deer, a lack of gas stations, food, and light.
  - sjwright 7y ago
    This is especially true in the UK where most rural roads are nominally 60 MPH even if they’re barely wide enough for two cars.
manicpolymath 7y ago
> I remember using some car’s built-in GPS once and it wanted me to take every freeway exit and get right back on after. Because it decided that saves time/distance. It feels like cheating to the other drivers who didn’t take the “short cut” and leads to delays all around due to the extra merging going on. (exhibit A: I-85N vs. I-285 in Atlanta, aka Spaghetti Junction)
- scarface74 7y ago
  I live in Atlanta. I’m curious what do you mean?
codyb 7y ago
My Mom doesn’t even use a cellphone, much less map directions. But she always is amazed at the directions given because she’ll pull out a map and do something with 3 turns what’ll have 20 turns on the map direction. She’s certainly not wrong that from a UX perspective, simple can be really nice, especially if you’re driving on crowded roads and want to focus on driving.
Smoosh 7y ago
Another possible option to make navigation more human-friendly would be "keep route simple" - so minimize the number of turns, complex intersections, road works (even without delays), backstreets etc, even at the cost of a few minutes extra travel time or extra distance.

by Swizec 7y ago

K0SM0S 7y ago

Oh please YES, the "not worth it", followed by an option to "please take me back to previous path before (because) latest fork = mistake". The very idea of judging the overall travel is a good start (at the end, when they prompt you) but individual datapoints should be reportable as well. I'm pretty sure this would massively help build a dataset with "annotated" cases (good / bad) for RNNs. > I’d often prefer a slightly slower route that’s less work to drive. Me too, and I suspect most people — like, when is it ever a good option to avoid a free highway to save 1 minute when the driving is twice or more fatiguing? Are we bodyless machines or animals with a concept for "tired" and "attention"? This is where I feel recent evolutions in DL have been, perhaps, more for the benefit of developers and researchers (efficiency), and maybe not for real human benefits on the user side. I don't claim the problem is easy, but I know second-hand that what users want and what AI projects solve for may be two very different X.

johnmaguire2013 7y ago
> please take me back to previous path before (because) latest fork = mistake Seriously. I regularly travel from Ohio to Michigan and back, and often times if I take an exit for gas, Google Maps will assume I want to take an obscure country backroad for the final 2 hours rather than get back on the highway. I absolutely do not want to worry about deer, a lack of gas stations, food, and light.
- sjwright 7y ago
  This is especially true in the UK where most rural roads are nominally 60 MPH even if they’re barely wide enough for two cars.

manicpolymath 7y ago

> I remember using some car’s built-in GPS once and it wanted me to take every freeway exit and get right back on after. Because it decided that saves time/distance. It feels like cheating to the other drivers who didn’t take the “short cut” and leads to delays all around due to the extra merging going on. (exhibit A: I-85N vs. I-285 in Atlanta, aka Spaghetti Junction)

scarface74 7y ago
I live in Atlanta. I’m curious what do you mean?

codyb 7y ago

My Mom doesn’t even use a cellphone, much less map directions. But she always is amazed at the directions given because she’ll pull out a map and do something with 3 turns what’ll have 20 turns on the map direction. She’s certainly not wrong that from a UX perspective, simple can be really nice, especially if you’re driving on crowded roads and want to focus on driving.

Smoosh 7y ago

Another possible option to make navigation more human-friendly would be "keep route simple" - so minimize the number of turns, complex intersections, road works (even without delays), backstreets etc, even at the cost of a few minutes extra travel time or extra distance.