November 13th, 2006, 4:37 pm

augi
step two
step two
Posts: 60
Joined: March 18th, 2005, 8:32 pm
Location: a mitten
wow... i mean wow?

Re: Human or in-human design?

November 14th, 2006, 1:24 am

supra_stephe
step two
step two
Posts: 59
Joined: October 7th, 2006, 11:39 am
Location: champaign, il
Canadian ID wrote:This reminds me a bit of what the reaction must have been like when Automatic Transmission was introduced.

The auto industry condemned it and said it was unreliable. The original magnet type autos that is. Then after john z. Delorian dreamt up an auto for Packard the perception changed. I still think they are unsafe, (j/k).

Have any of you seen the back seat of this guy? It is very nice, and it looks like Lexus is going for a Maybach level of luxury. Reclining rear seats and a cool center council and stuff like that.
Want to help fight cancer? check out www.illini4000.org or PM me for more Info!

November 14th, 2006, 6:16 pm

User avatar
Lmo
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 3965
Joined: January 20th, 2004, 5:29 pm
Location: Pismo Beach, CA
CID,
Parallel parking is not driving. While I know there are a lot of people on the road that maybe shouldn't be, you can't assume that just because someone can't (or doesn't like to) parallel park that they aren't a safe driver.
With all due respect I must disagree with you.

Parking is most certainly "driving". Operating a motor vehicle is all about spacial relationships; knowing where you are ("you" being the envelope of your vehicle) with regard to other vehicles, people, structures, etc., surrounding you.

Given the near zero-velocity of parking maneuvers, I would argue that a driver, who cannot confidently park their vehicle, cannot handle traffic congestion, especially at highway speeds.

If a driver is uncertain of the placement of their vehicle, relative to conditions around it, how can s/he be considered "safe"?

While I agree that driving is a privilege, I struggle with that on such a black & white level in cities with little public transportation infrastructure. Mobility is a right.
I would agree; mobility is a right. But not necessarily a motorized one ...
Lew Morris
"It's what you discover, after you know it all, that counts." _ John Wooden

New to the boards? Please read before you post ->Discussion Boards Posting Standards

December 26th, 2006, 11:48 pm

User avatar
molested_cow
full self-realization
full self-realization
Posts: 1561
Joined: January 20th, 2004, 6:54 pm
Location: Everywhere~Anywhere
As a company making products and services for people, you can do it in many ways. For me if I have the choice, which Lexus does, I will try to provide services that is for the benefit for my product audience.

Now, of course it's not entirely up to me to call it a good or bad design, I do and should have an opinion on it too.

My reaction towards this feature comes from my concern on how people interact with other people and things in his surroundings, and how people have given less attention to his surroundings with the increase of convenience that products bring to us. We keep "improving" our lives with machines and automatic systems that we don't have to be aware of the things around us. Things like road GPS systems serve a great purpose in helping us get to our destinations more efficiently, but there have been reports saying that over reliance on it also reduces the user's brain performance. Actually, my point is, we are humans, and we are putting ourselves in unnecessary convenience.

Another example that I have came across. I was doing a research on people who lead a lifestyle surrounded by technology. One of the interviewees does financial consulting. He's well-off. He's house is filled with LCD screens, so are his cars. He has 2 young daughters and as soon as he realized the wonders of what LCD screen + cartoon do for them, he stopped discipline his daughters. He simply turns on the tvs and they would shutup and watch. He told us that like it was some innovation he came out with, with pride.

An extension to that is, once I was at a grocery store in the seafood section. A mom and kid came along. The mom points at the fish tanks and said "Look, fish!" at the toodler. The toodler replied "Sponge Bob!!!" Well, that is a whole other topic here, but while a parent relies on an external device or source to substitute their presence in their kids' lives, this is what you get.

I sound like I want to create an ideal world, but who doesn't? To me, I'd rather teach someone to parallel park for free than to provide a feature like that for them. Yeah I will starve to death, too bad for me then.

January 3rd, 2007, 4:59 pm

Robin
step four
step four
Posts: 281
Joined: February 8th, 2005, 11:22 am
Location: St. Louis
I have no problem parallel parking but my wife never has become very adept at it.
If I could afford to buy a Lexus and it could park itself better than she could, I would definitely want this option.
After a dozen years of her grinding rims against the curb and busting license plate covers, I finally thought it was finished when we built this fantastic garage behind our house.
She promptly bashed the rear fender on the door frame!
Seriously though, shes awesome in every other respect.

January 3rd, 2007, 5:51 pm

User avatar
cg
full self-realization
full self-realization
Posts: 2498
Joined: January 10th, 2004, 12:21 am
Location: San Diego
molested_cow wrote:My reaction towards this feature comes from my concern on how people interact with other people and things in his surroundings, and how people have given less attention to his surroundings with the increase of convenience that products bring to us. We keep "improving" our lives with machines and automatic systems that we don't have to be aware of the things around us. Things like road GPS systems serve a great purpose in helping us get to our destinations more efficiently, but there have been reports saying that over reliance on it also reduces the user's brain performance. Actually, my point is, we are humans, and we are putting ourselves in unnecessary convenience.
The corollary to this is that we've become assulted by information, and a constant pressure to live in the present. We live our lives today on "internet time" therefore we demand new products that help us cope, be it GPS or self-parking cars.

We are clearly evoloving beyond homo-sapien. How long will this take and what will we evolve into?

Longer lives, but fatter.
Less physical labor, but more stressful.
Fewer physical friends, but more virtual.
More of us, but fewer boundaries.
More sense of self, less sense of selflessness.

Good, bad or just different?
Reply