←back to thread

Are touchscreens in cars dangerous?

(www.economist.com)
238 points Brajeshwar | 3 comments | 20 Sep 25 15:57 UTC | HN request time: 0.401s | source
Show context
nine_k ◴[20 Sep 25 16:24 UTC] No.45314709[source]▶
Un-paywalled: https://archive.is/u1OqX

In short: various studies show that touchscreens draw attention of the driver for longer, so they are more dangerous at speed.

European agencies noticed and started requiring physical dedicated switches for certain most important functions to get a full safety rating.

Car makers also gradually revert to physical switches, and also push voice control for certain functions.

replies(2): >>45314990 #>>45315051 #
1. macrolime ◴[20 Sep 25 16:57 UTC] No.45315051[source]▶
Voice control is much much much worse than touch screens. You have to try 10-20 times to spell out a command before it maybe does want you want, and that is if you're incredibly lucky
replies(2): >>45315503 #>>45318018 #
2. nine_k ◴[20 Sep 25 17:45 UTC] No.45315503[source]▶
That's weird. I never ever had trouble with voice menus on the phone, and I bet that phone lines are worse than what you can have in a car, and the processing resources spent on recognition should not be large.
3. aednichols ◴[20 Sep 25 22:06 UTC] No.45318018[source]▶
Mileage varies a lot on this one. I have an Android Automotive car (not to be confused with Android Auto) and “Hey Google” is basically flawless for changing car settings while driving.