4 ms·

There 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 ago
How? In a crash it won't necessarily be on the bike anymore anyways.
- sudosysgen 4y ago
  The 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 ago
    And 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 ago
How would the phone possibly distinguish that from the rider being thrown from the motorcycle in a true-positive scenario?
- sudosysgen 4y ago
  Once 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 ago
    This thread baffles me. Turn the feature off if you want zero false positives.
    - sudosysgen 4y ago
      Why? 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.
      - chrismcb 4y ago
        But... If there is a crash, I would argue that there is a good chance the phone will be separated from the bike.
  - tpmoney 4y ago
    Why would we assume the only possible states for the phone in a motorcycle crash would be attached to the motorcycle or attached to the rider? It's perfectly within the realm of possibility for the rider, cycle and phone to all be separated from each other.
  - lolinder 4y ago
    And if its sitting in a cupholder in a car? If the phone is in loose in a saddle bag? In a backpack on the floor of a car? In a backpack on their back, out of range of a proximity detector? If the motorcyclist hits the phone on the way down and the phone goes tumbling and ends up hitting the ground in a way indistinguishable from the situation OP had? Apple clearly chose to accept false positives in order to avoid false negatives. I'm pretty sure their engineers and lawyers have given this more thought than you have from your armchair in the one hour since this was posted.
kaba0 4y ago
Have you heard of Newton’s laws?

Jtsummers 4y ago

How? In a crash it won't necessarily be on the bike anymore anyways.

sudosysgen 4y ago
The 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 ago
  And 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 ago

How would the phone possibly distinguish that from the rider being thrown from the motorcycle in a true-positive scenario?

sudosysgen 4y ago
Once 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 ago
  This thread baffles me. Turn the feature off if you want zero false positives.
  - sudosysgen 4y ago
    Why? 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.
    - chrismcb 4y ago
      But... If there is a crash, I would argue that there is a good chance the phone will be separated from the bike.
- tpmoney 4y ago
  Why would we assume the only possible states for the phone in a motorcycle crash would be attached to the motorcycle or attached to the rider? It's perfectly within the realm of possibility for the rider, cycle and phone to all be separated from each other.
- lolinder 4y ago
  And if its sitting in a cupholder in a car? If the phone is in loose in a saddle bag? In a backpack on the floor of a car? In a backpack on their back, out of range of a proximity detector? If the motorcyclist hits the phone on the way down and the phone goes tumbling and ends up hitting the ground in a way indistinguishable from the situation OP had? Apple clearly chose to accept false positives in order to avoid false negatives. I'm pretty sure their engineers and lawyers have given this more thought than you have from your armchair in the one hour since this was posted.

kaba0 4y ago

Have you heard of Newton’s laws?