Wednesday, May 31, 2006

trackback []

Forget What You Learned in Driver's Ed: How to Adjust Mirrors to Eliminate Blind Spots I came across these instructions for adjusting your automobile side mirrors to eliminate the notorius "blind spots" on each side. I've been trying it for a couple of weeks, and it seems to work quite well. So well that it makes me wonder why the practice hasn't spread. I can remember clearly, back 25 years ago in driver's ed class, the instructor explaining how to set the side mirror (singular--this was before right-hand mirrors had become common), so that it showed a little bit of the side of your car. He even quizzed us as to why we should set it this way. The answer, of course, was to provide a reference point, or context, for what you were seeing. Now I see how misguided that practice is. The best defense I can think of, other than tradition, is that by giving you a reference point, you can ascertain with an immediate, un-thinking glance even as you are pulling away, that your mirrors are adjusted as you expect. Whereas with the blind spot elimination technique, you can not verify so quickly and casually that the mirrors are set right; there is a brief calibration process that is needed, and it is definitely best undertaken while not in motion. So, I find myself wondering whether this practice falls into the "safety feature that you are not sure whether you want to become dependent on" pattern. That is, if you get accustomed to this practice, will you be disciplined enough at all times--when driving someone else's car; when driving your spouse's car and you don't anticipate getting on a multi-lane road (which is typically when the blind spot becomes a consideration), but plans change, and you do--to take the time to perform the calibration? (Some other cases of this pattern are: auto-shutoff irons, anti-lock brakes.) 10:46:56 PM    comment []

trackback []

A lab study on multi-tasking. I am generally skeptical about multi-tasking claims. On the negative side, I think multi-tasking often means doing two things poorly or slowly. On the positive side, sometimes it means filling in wasted wait-states with other activity. This is why teenagers can "multi-task" by carrying on 4 IM conversations at once--IM intrinsically has lots of gaps, where you are sitting, waiting for people to type and transmit (one reason I don't care for IM). Technically, this isn't really multi-tasking, it could more accurately be called "task-filling", but that is a somewhat fine distinction. My favorite use of task-filling is reading while waiting in line at a store (PDAs are ideal for this). One of the purest forms of multi-tasking I can think of is talking on the cell phone while driving. Setting aside safety concerns, you drive pretty much the same as when not gabbing, maybe a bit slower, but not much; and you pretty much achieve a full conversation. The counter-argument against this might be that you drive considerably less safely, so you are paying a high price in risk, it's just that most of the time, obviously, that risk is not realized, so it seems like you are getting a multi-tasking two-fer, until you pay the price with an accident. My personal favorite form of multi-tasking is reading while exercising. I can ride the exercise bike, or do the elliptical machine, and read (most stuff) with about 90% the efficiency of reading while sitting. 10:46:53 PM    comment []