this post was submitted on 04 May 2024
737 points (97.2% liked)

Technology

59594 readers
3363 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] cley_faye@lemmy.world 19 points 6 months ago (2 children)

I'm sure these "engineers" were confused everytime they saw an elevator door not mercilessly crush people.

[–] barsquid@lemmy.world 11 points 6 months ago

This breakthrough technology could finally provide a way to teach people on the MTA not to hold the doors.

[–] gian@lemmy.grys.it 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Nope, but they probably know that an elevator doors and a car lid are two completely different thing with different use cases and security concerns.

[–] cley_faye@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

They sure did not know about the "not crushing human limbs" part.

[–] gian@lemmy.grys.it 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Obviously.

But let's face it: if the car lid would never close if something is in the way, some other dumb youtuber would have made a video about it and here there would be a discussion about how stupid are the engineers to not let the lid close even if a bag in slightly on on the way and the user know what they are doing.

[–] cley_faye@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

You're missing the point of a safety feature. The car shouldn't, by itself, close the lid if something's in the way. It should allow the user to push it down, or disable it temporarily, to do so.

The point of a safety feature in any system is to prevent unexpected situation from having unexpected consequences, not to be a magic solution that accommodate for brainless people. In one direction, you can make the judgement call and force the thing down, in the other direction you lose a finger.

[–] gian@lemmy.grys.it 0 points 6 months ago

You’re missing the point of a safety feature. The car shouldn’t, by itself, close the lid if something’s in the way. It should allow the user to push it down, or disable it temporarily, to do so.

I get the safety feature. The point is that here I am saying to the car to close the lid even if something is in the way. I made a conscious decision to do so, and more than one time, so I expect the car to do it. But I agree that it could have been designed in a better way.

The point of a safety feature in any system is to prevent unexpected situation from having unexpected consequences, not to be a magic solution that accommodate for brainless people. In one direction, you can make the judgement call and force the thing down, in the other direction you lose a finger.

Which is exactly what happened here. He made the judgement call to ignore the safety feature (and probably ignored how the feature works)