[reneherse]

I was thinking of a similar possible problem during my commute this morning, not with automated driving but with automatic equipment and systems in general. Does convenience breed mental laziness and/or decay? In our increasingly automated and comfortable existence, what experiences confront us with the need for high focus and alertness, or systematic problem solving? (Speaking of humans in general, not just engineers and other professionals who benefit from this kind of activity in their work.) So many things have been reduced (usually delightfully so) to point, click and enjoy.

Some physical environments for advanced age folks are designed with features to promote extra physical exertion, to help maintain the occupants' fitness, which in turn promotes safety. (Better balance, fewer falls.)

Similarly, we might consider building-in a baseline requirement of mental activity for the operation of certain systems. In the short term, this might increase alertness in the moment, as in the semi-autonomous driving example. (In that case, perhaps a UI that requires maintaining a certain amount of eye motion across the road, or particular posture.) In the long term, perhaps other (more challenging?) in-built exercises will promote mental and neurological health in people whose work and play would otherwise fail to be stimulating.

[agumonkey]

There was an article about crash statistics on roads that used to be surrounded by tree lanes [1]. There were as many accidents with or without the trees. Removing the trees avoids the opportunities to crash into them, so now people drive faster and carelessly.

I also think stress, in healthy dose, is necessary. I'd bet heavy on decay as a result of removing it. Until the potential self-driving car future where people won't even have to think about driving and will find other ways to be proactive.

[1] http://a395.idata.over-blog.com/1/74/49/41/SPECIALITES-GOURM...

[eru]

Same number of crashes, but people can drive faster? That's a win in my book.

[agumonkey]

Heh, fair point, we have different value systems. I'm for same speed / lower accidents, especially dumber ones. These days speed gets all the rage but in my mind we should aim for lower tempo, more density.

[eru]

Oh, lower accidents, same speed is also good. Anything that improves on the pareto frontier!

[robotresearcher]

Crash outcomes are worse at high speeds.

[eru]

That's true. So the sum of outcomes is worse here?