8 ms·
He does say 'Wouldn’t you think you’d get a notification on your Apple Watch, allowing you to dismiss the crash alert'. Notification on the watch is a reasonab
by geenew 4y ago
He does say 'Wouldn’t you think you’d get a notification on your Apple Watch, allowing you to dismiss the crash alert'.
Notification on the watch is a reasonable and safe change.
I wonder too whether a filter could be applied for situations where the phone detects massive acceleration, but the watch does not. It's hard to imagine a scenario where 1) a crash occurs, 2) the phone imu detects it, but 3) the watch imu do not.
- dymk 4y agoThe phone is a quarter mile away where he dropped it. No watch connectivity.
- sudosysgen 4y agoThere was connectivity at the time of dropping. And the phone should have been made to detect whether it is on or off the bike, anyways.
- Jtsummers 4y agoHow? In a crash it won't necessarily be on the bike anymore anyways.
- sudosysgen 4y agoThe phone will receive a very strong acceleration before being thrown off the bike. In this case, the phone is being disconnected from the bike while receiving a small amount of force, and then hitting the ground with great force. EDIT: In a one vehicle accident where the driver lowsides onto gravel, the phone will receive a lot of forces as the bike deccelerates or tumbles, and this force will start when the phone is still attached to the bike.
- Jtsummers 4y agoAnd how different will it be from what happened here? Will it be substantially different versus a one-vehicle accident where the driver spills on a gravel road?
- dymk 4y agoHow would the phone possibly distinguish that from the rider being thrown from the motorcycle in a true-positive scenario?
- sudosysgen 4y agoOnce the rider is thrown off the motorcycle, the motorcycle will eventually crash, imparting force onto the phone while it is still attached to the motorcycle. If the phone is in the pocket of the rider at the time of accident, this can be detected using the proximity sensor or nominal accelerometer data crosschecked with GPS velocity, or even capacitive sensing. EDIT: There are only three possible states before the crash. Either the phone is in the rider's pocket, or it is mounted to the vehicle, or it is held in the user's hand. If the phone is in the rider's pocket, it is going to stay there until the rider feels a strong impact. If the phone is in the rider's hand, then the phone should turn this off completely because it's far more likely to slip. If the phone is attached to the vehicle, it should only register a crash if it begins simultaneously with the phone being disconnected to the vehicle (if it is to begin with). The fact that the three may be separated is irrelevant, because they will be separated after the crash begins. As long as the phone mount is sturdy enough not to separate under normal conditions, this is fine. If it is not, then a false positive is much more likely than a true positive. And a crash sensor with more false positives than true positives is actively harmful. This only applies to two wheeled vehicles, obviously. For four wheeled vehicles, the way it's working right now is fine. It is pretty trivial for a phone to make the difference between a car and a bike.
- dymk 4y agoThis thread baffles me. Turn the feature off if you want zero false positives.
- sudosysgen 4y agoWhy? Apple's implementation is clearly suboptimal. Motorcycle crash sensors aren't new, and they work differently to this for very good reason. Sensing whether the phone is on or off the motorcycle at the time of the crash is a really basic feature, because phones fall of bicycles and motorcycles almost as often as there are crashes to begin with. A feature with that many false positives can be actively harmful. It's not responsible engineering to ship it. Especially if you lock it to specialized hardware, then you have no excuse not to go all the way and at least have a proximity sensor at the back.
- kaba0 4y agoHave you heard of Newton’s laws?
- tylerhou 4y agoWatches can have cellular service.
- dymk 4y agoAnd now we depend on a cellular connected watch for this corner case of a corner case?
- semireg 4y agoThe idea of a highly integrated ecosystem is all about providing elegant solutions to corner cases. If you don’t have a cellular watch it’d just keep on working like it has been. False negative and all. But if the watch was there… Crash detection could just use the “everything is fine” feature by pushing it down from the cloud to both phone and watch simultaneously. I’m actually surprised this isn’t how it works.
- kaba0 4y agoWell, surely the person that dropped his phone can just send a few messages to his emergency contacts then that he is fine with that cellular.
- ec109685 4y agoRight, and he could get the alert and broadcast a “I’m fine message”.
- melling 4y agoMy Apple watch doesn’t have cellular service. Now can we find something worthwhile to discuss and flag this story dead?
- WirelessGigabit 4y agoTCP over pigeons?
- RcouF1uZ4gsC 4y ago> He does say 'Wouldn’t you think you’d get a notification on your Apple Watch, allowing you to dismiss the crash alert'. As you lift up one hand to look at the watch, and the other to dismiss the alert, suddenly you are completely unable to control your motorcycle and then really have a crash! Doesn’t seem to be that great!
- tux2bsd 4y agoYou can stop the vehicle. Which (hypothetically) also serves to have you closer to the phone that may be findable and/or salvageable (if the phone can ring). Chances are not high, obviously.
- kaba0 4y agoIf you go over 100 kmh, that means ~30 meters per second. Even with instant reaction time to the watch ringing, then you having a look at it and start breaking in a safe manner, you are already way out 100+ meters.
- tux2bsd 4y agoA lot of people will walk more than 100 meters to have an ice cream worth $3. A phone worth $1k+ (stupid), might be worth a stroll. That of course depends on the road and safety etc, I only mention this last point to save you using it as a empty retort.
- Jtsummers 4y agoThat leads to a consensus problem. If you have two sensors reporting different circumstances, which one do you trust? Do you err on the side of assuming the crash report is a false positive? Then you may fail to report a real crash when you really have a false negative (the non-crash report). For the feature to be useful, with only a pair of sensors and no reason to assume that the one is giving a false positive, you should err on the side of caution.
- tux2bsd 4y agoMotorcyclist crashes, Apple watch wearing arm is severed but it lands in the bed of a truck and carries on down the road. Imagining scenarios that would be workable, that's harder. The chances of the above are not zero... stranger things have happened (and that's from what we've seen on video, let alone what's not captured on film).
- ec109685 4y agoThe key thing isn’t to prevent the alert a crash happened, but to let his other devices know so he can quickly cancel the alert.