2 ms·
As I clarified in the original response, while they might have been "persistent, annoying, inaccurate, irrelevant and useless" to the OP, I'd personally err on
by AlotOfReading 5y ago
As I clarified in the original response, while they might have been "persistent, annoying, inaccurate, irrelevant and useless" to the OP, I'd personally err on the side of annoying people vs not providing important information to people who need it.
- mulmen 5y agoHow is providing inaccurate information acceptable in a safety-critical situation? What happens if Google says one valley is impassable due to fire and the one next to it is not but their data is a few hours old and the only way out is the valley they say is on fire? Task saturation is a thing. If I am trying to navigate an emergency situation I do not need to be inundated with useless information. I need to focus on what matters, like navigating potentially hazardous conditions. Conditions that Google may well have gotten me in to!
- AlotOfReading 5y agoAs discussed in the original link, they're looking at the data straight from the satellite and continually monitoring their accuracy compared to other data sources. Mitigating incorrect information was explicitly one of the design considerations and a launch requirement. Can you elaborate on specifically what you're critiquing here besides the unreasonable expectation to provide perfect information?
- mulmen 5y agoThe claim upthread was that this data was inaccurate in Colorado to the point that it was not useful.