The reason that this is so cringey (besides the obvious) is that due to #autonowashing and other factors, many people wrongly believe that L2 Advanced Driver Assistance Systems are capable of reliably detecting stationary objects. They are not.
Our mental models (the knowledge we conceptualize about the systems we use before, during, and after we use them to aid in our understanding & use) are often based on a number of assumptions—some true, some false—and with time & experience better align with the intended model
Mental model construction could be thought of as a series of if/then statements…like gestalt principles, for example
Intuitively, your brain is if/then’ing this image to make sense of it. Your brain does this subconsciously & immediately—it’s a survival mechanism 🐯
Intuitively, your brain is if/then’ing this image to make sense of it. Your brain does this subconsciously & immediately—it’s a survival mechanism 🐯
Back to driving automation, our MM may be formed in a similar way:
“I have heard/seen (maybe #autonowashing) and/or experienced that my driving automation system can do ABC, so that means it can probably do XYZ, too.”
Similar gestalt mechanism; 🧠 closing gaps
“I have heard/seen (maybe #autonowashing) and/or experienced that my driving automation system can do ABC, so that means it can probably do XYZ, too.”
Similar gestalt mechanism; 🧠 closing gaps
And so, we cringe…seeing the figure of a child, possibly learning for yourself via this video/thread the limitations of these systems, and also knowing these systems are on-road and that others might be confused about their limitations, perhaps as you just were 🙃
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
