44 ms·

the issue is clearly attention not vision when it comes to humans. if we could actually process 100% of the visual information in our field of view, then accide

the issue is clearly attention not vision when it comes to humans. if we could actually process 100% of the visual information in our field of view, then accidents would probably go down a shit load.

kube-system 8mo ago
Humans have both issues. There are many human failures which are distinctly a vision issue and not attention related, e.g. misestimation of depth/speed, obscured or obstructed vision, optical focus issues, insufficient contrast or exposure, etc.
- arijun 8mo ago
  But how many of those crashes not caused by inattention could have been avoided with less idiocy and more defensive driving? I mean, yes, we can’t see as well in fog, but that’s why you should slow down
  - kube-system 8mo ago
    Again, I'm still not saying that humans don't make bad decisions. I'm saying that, unequivocally, they also get into accidents while paying attention and being careful, as a result of misinterpretation or failure of their senses. These accidents are also common, for example: * someone parking carefully, misjudges depth perception, bumps an object * person driving at night, their eyes failed to perceive a poorly lit feature of the road/markings/obstacles * person driving and suddenly blinded by bright object (the sun, bright lights at night) * person pulling out in traffic who misinterprets their depth perception and therefore misjudges the speed of approaching traffic * people can only focus their eyes at one distance at a time, and it takes time to focus at a different distance. It is neither unsafe nor unexpected for humans to check their instruments while driving -- but it can take the human eye hundreds of milliseconds to focus under normal circumstances -- If you look down, focus, look back up, and focus, as quick as you can at highway speeds, you will have travelled quite a long distance. These type of failures can happen not as a result of poor decision making, but of poor perception.
  - throw10920 8mo ago
    > But how many of those crashes not caused by inattention could have been avoided with less idiocy and more defensive driving? Most of them. We can lump together "inattention" and "idiocy" for the purposes of this conversation, because both could be massively alleviated by a good self-driving car without lidar. If you look at the parallel comments, you'll see that the majority of accidents and fatalities indeed come from these two factors combined (two-thirds coming from distraction, speeding, and impaired driving), and that kube-system is having to resort to ridiculous fallacies to try to dispute the empirical data that is available.
    - deleted 8mo ago
      [deleted]
    - kube-system 8mo ago
      I didn’t claim vision was responsible for the majority of accidents anywhere in this thread.
- throw10920 8mo ago
  > There are many human failures which are distinctly a vision issue and not attention related Which are a tiny minority. The largest causes of crashes in the US are attention/cognition problems, not vision problems. Most traffic systems in western countries (probably in others, too, but I don't have personal experience), and in particular the US, are designed to limit visibility problems and do so very effectively.
  - kube-system 8mo ago
    That sounds more like a personal opinion, because I don’t think that data is particularly easy to objectively collect. Regardless it is irrelevant to the point. Whatever the number may be, lapses in human visual perception are responsible for some crashes
    - throw10920 8mo ago
      > That sounds more like a personal opinion, because I don’t think that data is particularly easy to objectively collect. That sounds like a personal opinion? Maybe do the bare minimum of research before spouting yours. DOT says that only 5% of crashes are caused by low visibility during weather events.[1] In 2023, the combined causes of alcohol, speeding, and distracted driving (all cognitive/attention issues) caused 67% of highway deaths. [2] I was able to find these in 30 seconds. You did zero research to confirm whether your belief was correct before asserting that my claim was opinion. That's pathetic. > Regardless it is irrelevant to the point. And your point is therefore irrelevant to the discussion at hand, because the person you were replying to did not claim that vision had no safety impact, but that it had little safety impact: > the issue is clearly attention not vision when it comes to humans. if we could actually process 100% of the visual information in our field of view, then accidents would probably go down a shit load. ...and, as we can clearly see, the issue is attention (and some bad decision making), not vision. [1] https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/weather/roadimpact.htm https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/weather/roadimpact.htm [2] https://www.adirondackdailyenterprise.com/opinion/columns/safety-on-the-roads-by-dave-werner/2025/10/alcohol-speeding-account-for-over-half-of-fatalities https://www.adirondackdailyenterprise.com/opinion/columns/sa...
gpm 8mo ago
Attention is perhaps the limiting factor, but being able to look in two directions at once would help, and would help greatly if we had more attention capacity. E.g. anytime you change lanes you have to alternate between looking behind, beside, and in front and that greatly reduces reaction time should something unexpected happen in the direction you aren't currently looking...

the issue is clearly attention not vision when it comes to humans. if we could actually process 100% of the visual information in our field of view, then accidents would probably go down a shit load.

kube-system 8mo ago

Humans have both issues. There are many human failures which are distinctly a vision issue and not attention related, e.g. misestimation of depth/speed, obscured or obstructed vision, optical focus issues, insufficient contrast or exposure, etc.

arijun 8mo ago
But how many of those crashes not caused by inattention could have been avoided with less idiocy and more defensive driving? I mean, yes, we can’t see as well in fog, but that’s why you should slow down
- kube-system 8mo ago
  Again, I'm still not saying that humans don't make bad decisions. I'm saying that, unequivocally, they also get into accidents while paying attention and being careful, as a result of misinterpretation or failure of their senses. These accidents are also common, for example: * someone parking carefully, misjudges depth perception, bumps an object * person driving at night, their eyes failed to perceive a poorly lit feature of the road/markings/obstacles * person driving and suddenly blinded by bright object (the sun, bright lights at night) * person pulling out in traffic who misinterprets their depth perception and therefore misjudges the speed of approaching traffic * people can only focus their eyes at one distance at a time, and it takes time to focus at a different distance. It is neither unsafe nor unexpected for humans to check their instruments while driving -- but it can take the human eye hundreds of milliseconds to focus under normal circumstances -- If you look down, focus, look back up, and focus, as quick as you can at highway speeds, you will have travelled quite a long distance. These type of failures can happen not as a result of poor decision making, but of poor perception.
- throw10920 8mo ago
  > But how many of those crashes not caused by inattention could have been avoided with less idiocy and more defensive driving? Most of them. We can lump together "inattention" and "idiocy" for the purposes of this conversation, because both could be massively alleviated by a good self-driving car without lidar. If you look at the parallel comments, you'll see that the majority of accidents and fatalities indeed come from these two factors combined (two-thirds coming from distraction, speeding, and impaired driving), and that kube-system is having to resort to ridiculous fallacies to try to dispute the empirical data that is available.
  - deleted 8mo ago
    [deleted]
  - kube-system 8mo ago
    I didn’t claim vision was responsible for the majority of accidents anywhere in this thread.
throw10920 8mo ago
> There are many human failures which are distinctly a vision issue and not attention related Which are a tiny minority. The largest causes of crashes in the US are attention/cognition problems, not vision problems. Most traffic systems in western countries (probably in others, too, but I don't have personal experience), and in particular the US, are designed to limit visibility problems and do so very effectively.
- kube-system 8mo ago
  That sounds more like a personal opinion, because I don’t think that data is particularly easy to objectively collect. Regardless it is irrelevant to the point. Whatever the number may be, lapses in human visual perception are responsible for some crashes
  - throw10920 8mo ago
    > That sounds more like a personal opinion, because I don’t think that data is particularly easy to objectively collect. That sounds like a personal opinion? Maybe do the bare minimum of research before spouting yours. DOT says that only 5% of crashes are caused by low visibility during weather events.[1] In 2023, the combined causes of alcohol, speeding, and distracted driving (all cognitive/attention issues) caused 67% of highway deaths. [2] I was able to find these in 30 seconds. You did zero research to confirm whether your belief was correct before asserting that my claim was opinion. That's pathetic. > Regardless it is irrelevant to the point. And your point is therefore irrelevant to the discussion at hand, because the person you were replying to did not claim that vision had no safety impact, but that it had little safety impact: > the issue is clearly attention not vision when it comes to humans. if we could actually process 100% of the visual information in our field of view, then accidents would probably go down a shit load. ...and, as we can clearly see, the issue is attention (and some bad decision making), not vision. [1] https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/weather/roadimpact.htm https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/weather/roadimpact.htm [2] https://www.adirondackdailyenterprise.com/opinion/columns/safety-on-the-roads-by-dave-werner/2025/10/alcohol-speeding-account-for-over-half-of-fatalities https://www.adirondackdailyenterprise.com/opinion/columns/sa...

gpm 8mo ago

Attention is perhaps the limiting factor, but being able to look in two directions at once would help, and would help greatly if we had more attention capacity. E.g. anytime you change lanes you have to alternate between looking behind, beside, and in front and that greatly reduces reaction time should something unexpected happen in the direction you aren't currently looking...