Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!think.com!yale!quasi-eli!cs.yale.edu!engelson-sean
From: engelson-sean@cs.yale.edu (Sean P. Engelson)
Newsgroups: comp.society.futures
Subject: Proper design (was Re: Techno Terror)
Message-ID: <1991May6.131027.2783@cs.yale.edu>
Date: 6 May 91 13:10:27 GMT
References: <9517@suned1.Nswses.Navy.MIL> <1991Apr30.020847.12423@osh3.OSHA.GOV> <1991Apr30.225521.755@husc3.harvard.edu> <16@nvuxr.UUCP>
Sender: (null)@cs.yale.edu (Sean P. Engelson)
Organization: Yale AI Mobile Robotics Project
Lines: 41
Originator: engelson@argentina.CS.Yale.Edu
Nntp-Posting-Host: argentina.ai.cs.yale.edu


In article <16@nvuxr.UUCP>, ccw@nvuxr.UUCP (christopher wood) writes:
|> In article <1991Apr30.225521.755@husc3.harvard.edu> mason3@husc9.harvard.edu (Richard Mason) writes:
|> 
|> >(And yes, a bug in that automatic system can be fatal: witness
|> >the Audis that unpredictably lunged into first gear and killed people due
|> >to a fault in the cruise control chip).
|> 
|> No faults were ever discovered in the Audis.  This is a popular
|> misconception spread mostly by the media.  The cars lunged forward
|> because drivers stomped on the gas, thinking it was the brake.  I saw
|> the woman on 60 minutes: "I pressed harder and harder on the brake, and
|> the car just kept going faster and faster".  After the accident, no
|> problems were found with either the cruise control or the brake system
|> on that car (or what was left, after it was stopped)
|> 
|> It is tragic that people were injured or killed by these incidents, and
|> it's easy to "blame the engineers" rather than admit that the driver
|> could have possibly made a mistake that had tragic consequences. 
|> Improved driver education is probably the only answer - If your car
|> surges forward, take your feet OFF the pedals.  then find the brake, and
|> stop your car.

But in fact, this too could be due to a design error---one which encourages
the mistaking of the accelerator for the brake.  It is easy to say "well, the 
user should have known what to do; they read the manual, right?"  but this is
not always appropriate.  It is the responsibility of the designers to take
into account the human factors relating to the equipment they build.  It should
always be kept in mind that the machines are there to serve people, and that
if a machine requires the operator to be "redesigned" its time to rethink the
design of the machine.  See _The Psychology of Everyday Things_ by Don Norman
for an excellent explanation of this and other related topics.  Thus, most 
likely, *improved design*, not driver education, is the answer.



-- 
Sean Philip Engelson, Poet Errant	Make your learning a fixture;
Yale Department of Computer Science	Say little and do much;
Box 2158 Yale Station			And receive everyone with 
New Haven, CT 06520			   a friendly attitude.