Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> an incomplete feature that results in false positives more often than not.

It doesn't.

> The article directly mentions that none of the calls have been actual emergencies and that it is absolutely tying up resources.

None of the calls in this small town in the middle of multiple skiing resorts. The feature works pretty well in general and has saved multiple lives. It just unfortunately produces an increased number of false alarms for an activity (skiing) that is done very geographically concentrated, and on top of that impedes responses to confirmation calls (because the phones are kept in the pockets of thick clothes).

> Automation that is not accurate is a real problem. Humans will quickly calibrate to it being wrong most of the time. This has occurred time and time again.

Even if they did that, they would do it only in skiing towns, leaving the feature useful elsewhere.



> It just unfortunately produces an increased number of false alarms for an activity (skiing) that is done very geographically concentrated

Skiing isn't the only industry affected by this. I'm involved in the auto racing industry. At a recent conference, there was some intense discussion about false alarms resulting in emergency services showing up at the track and who's responsible for paying for it.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: