下次當(dāng)我以75英里每小時(shí)的速度開(kāi)著豐田汽車外出的時(shí)候，我將啪地一聲打開(kāi)我打算在幾天內(nèi)看完的這本書(shū)。據(jù)我所知，沒(méi)有一項(xiàng)法律禁止在開(kāi)車時(shí)看書(shū)。如果我能把書(shū)架在儀表板上，甚至可以把它當(dāng)成是“免提”產(chǎn)品，并且這并不違反任何安全法規(guī)。 只要是免提的東西，就被視為是安全的。至少汽車廠商希望你這么認(rèn)為。據(jù)《華爾街日?qǐng)?bào)》上面的一篇文章，汽車不久將具有以下能力： 福特汽車：收聽(tīng)互聯(lián)網(wǎng)音樂(lè)，瀏覽新聞和播客，發(fā)送推文(Tweet)
豐田汽車：購(gòu)買電影票，餐廳訂位，觀察股票行情，在Bing上搜索
通用汽車：播放視頻和幻燈片，通過(guò)語(yǔ)音指令訪問(wèn)歌曲
特斯拉汽車：具有17英寸屏幕的無(wú)線互聯(lián)網(wǎng)，USB插頭
奔馳：瀏覽Facebook，閱讀推特(Twitter)文章，使用谷歌本地搜索和Yelp 而同樣是這些汽車廠商，每天都在大做廣告突出其汽車的安全性。我猜測(cè)，如果你在駕駛過(guò)程中因?yàn)楦翭acebook而發(fā)生撞車事故的話，防抱死剎車和安全氣囊一定會(huì)隨時(shí)救駕。 不能說(shuō)免提應(yīng)用就是“安全的”。如果你的視線離開(kāi)了道路，就會(huì)走神。而注意力不集中正是引起事故的禍?zhǔn)住? 以下是《華爾街日?qǐng)?bào)》援引的一些數(shù)據(jù)，顯示了分心駕駛的利弊： 汽車廠商提到的研究報(bào)告，包括弗吉尼亞科技運(yùn)輸學(xué)院研究人員發(fā)表的一份報(bào)告，該報(bào)告顯示，開(kāi)車時(shí)通過(guò)手機(jī)交談發(fā)生撞車或接近撞車的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)會(huì)比正常駕駛高出1.3倍，而用手撥號(hào)則發(fā)生事故的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)會(huì)增加2.8倍。在開(kāi)車時(shí)發(fā)送短信，發(fā)生車禍或者接近發(fā)生車禍的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)上升20多倍。 這些數(shù)據(jù)是通過(guò)每天利用攝像頭監(jiān)視數(shù)百名司機(jī)收集到的，它讓汽車廠商和管理機(jī)構(gòu)得到這樣的結(jié)論：“免提”通話是安全的。其它研究，包括美國(guó)猶他大學(xué)研究員Michael Strayer所作的一項(xiàng)研究，顯示開(kāi)車時(shí)通話，不管是否免提，同樣危險(xiǎn)。多數(shù)較新型汽車電子系統(tǒng)允許司機(jī)通過(guò)觸摸屏進(jìn)行控制。 汽車廠商堅(jiān)稱，他們?cè)谄囍卸哑龈鞣N電子娛樂(lè)功能，只是提供人們想要的東西。連接性是其中的頭號(hào)功能。我認(rèn)可這點(diǎn)。但連接與娛樂(lè)是兩回事。在開(kāi)車時(shí)更新Facebook或者推特，確實(shí)有這種急迫需求嗎？如果真是重要的事情，你的熟人不會(huì)給你打電話嗎？ 事實(shí)是，即使我的手仍舊放在放向盤上面，這些功能多數(shù)會(huì)讓人分散注意力。其中多數(shù)功能會(huì)讓我的眼神離開(kāi)道路幾秒鐘。但你的語(yǔ)音驅(qū)動(dòng)系統(tǒng)有多少次誤解了你說(shuō)的話？或者搜索引擎執(zhí)行了錯(cuò)誤的搜索？或者系統(tǒng)詢問(wèn)“你是這個(gè)意思嗎？”你是否收到過(guò)令人心煩意亂的短信？ 這就涉及到了技術(shù)問(wèn)題。語(yǔ)音驅(qū)動(dòng)已經(jīng)改善了。觸摸屏技術(shù)和智能功能(如你的設(shè)備預(yù)知你想要干什么)則沒(méi)有太大進(jìn)展。我經(jīng)常在觸摸屏上觸到錯(cuò)誤的按鍵，而且我的打字功夫很差。我不停地取消輸入，刪除錯(cuò)誤內(nèi)容。我重新開(kāi)始。有時(shí)我會(huì)摸索正確的按鈕或者在我迅速過(guò)時(shí)的汽車中尋找撥號(hào)盤。 觸摸屏知道你想打開(kāi)收音機(jī)而不是雨刷？我還沒(méi)碰到過(guò)這么聰明的觸摸屏。對(duì)于花費(fèi)幾十年時(shí)間來(lái)開(kāi)發(fā)和測(cè)試汽車安全技術(shù)的一個(gè)產(chǎn)業(yè)來(lái)說(shuō)，對(duì)于消費(fèi)電子方面的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)卻非常松懈。界面質(zhì)量參差不齊，我在公路上開(kāi)車時(shí)根本沒(méi)有要么多的精力來(lái)操作它們。我最需要指引方向或者更新新聞及交通信息的時(shí)候，是我在開(kāi)車全速前進(jìn)的時(shí)候，我已經(jīng)非常緊張了。換句話說(shuō)，注意力不太集中了。 我知道人們會(huì)在路上花費(fèi)幾個(gè)小時(shí)，上述多數(shù)功能都非常有用。如果能把這些功能限制在每小時(shí)20英里或者更低車速時(shí)使用，我會(huì)感覺(jué)更安全一些。實(shí)際上，我知道存在這種技術(shù)。同時(shí)，我將通過(guò)微博告訴你我下次約會(huì)將走的路線，你如果怕被我“撞上”，可以找另一條路線：） 本文授權(quán)編譯自EBN Online，版權(quán)所有，謝絕轉(zhuǎn)載 參考英文原文：The Illusion of 'Hands-Free' Electronics, by Barbara Jorgensen, EBN Community Editor

相關(guān)閱讀：
• 首款基于以太網(wǎng)的汽車環(huán)視系統(tǒng)將在明年實(shí)現(xiàn)量產(chǎn)
• CES：奔馳分享汽車電子與電動(dòng)車研究最新進(jìn)展
• 百兆以太網(wǎng)進(jìn)入汽車，主攻ADAS和全景泊車應(yīng)用oqcesmc

{pagination} The Illusion of 'Hands-Free' Electronics 1, by Barbara Jorgensen, EBN Community Editor The next time I am out driving at 75mph in my beat-up Toyota minivan, I'm going to crack open the book I've been trying to finish for a couple of days now. As far as I can tell, there are no laws against reading while driving. If I can prop the book up on my dashboard, it will even be considered "hands-free," so I know it won't violate any kind of safety rules. As long as something is hands-free, it is considered safe. At least that is what car manufacturers want you to think. According to an article in The Wall Street Journal, the following capabilities will soon be available in automobiles: Ford: Stream Internet music, access news and podcasts, send a Tweet Toyota: Buy movie tickets, book a table, check stocks, search on Bing General Motors: Play videos and slide shows, access songs via voice command Tesla Motors: Wireless Internet with 17-inch-screen, USB plugs Mercedes-Benz: Check Facebook, read Twitter posts, use Google Local Search and Yelp These are the same car makers that advertise the safety features of their automobiles every single day. I guess antilock brakes and airbags do come in handy if you are involved in a collision because you were updating your Facebook status while driving. Hands-free does not qualify as "safe." If you take your eyes off the road, you are distracted. Distraction is what causes accidents. Here is some data cited by the WSJ that supports both sides of the distracted-driving argument: Auto makers point to studies, including one by researchers at Virginia Tech Transportation Institute, which show that talking on a cellphone increases the risk of a crash or near-crash by 1.3 times over regular driving, while physically dialing a number increased the risk 2.8 times. A person is more than 20 times more likely to be in a crash or near crash while sending text messages. Such data, which was gathered by monitoring hundreds of hours of drivers with cameras in day-to-day driving, has guided auto makers and the administration to the conclusion that "hands-free" activities are safe. Other studies, including one by University of Utah researcher Michael Strayer, show that talking on the phone, hands free or not, is equally dangerous. Most of newer car-electronics systems permit access to controls through a touch screen. Carmakers insist they are just giving people what they want by piling electronics entertainment features in their cars. Being connected is a No. 1 priority. I get that. But there's a difference between being connected and being entertained. Is it really urgent that you get Facebook updates or tweets while you are driving? If something were that important, wouldn't your acquaintances call? The fact is, even if my hands are still on the steering wheel, most of these functions are distracting. I would have to take my eyes off the road for a few seconds for most of them. But how many times have your voice-activated systems misinterpreted what you were saying? Or a search engine turns up the wrong search? Or asks you "Did you mean X?" Have you ever gotten a tweet that is upsetting? Then there is the issue of the technology. Voice activation has gotten better. Touchscreen technology and smart features (e.g. your device anticipating what you are about to ask for) have not. I touch the wrong thing all the time on touchscreens, and my typing isn't much better. I cancel; I delete. I start again. Sometimes I still grope for the right knob or dial in my rapidly-aging minivan. Does a touchscreen know you meant to turn on the radio and not the wipers? I haven't met one that does. For an industry that spends decades developing and testing safety technology for vehicles, the standard for consumer electronics is surprisingly lax. The interfaces are still spotty and require a lot more attention than I can spare when I am on a highway. And the time I most need directions or to get updated on news and traffic is when I am driving full speed ahead and already stressed. In other words, distracted. I understand people spend hours sitting in traffic, and that's when most of these functions are the most useful. If there was a way to limit these functions to speeds of 20mph or less, I might feel a bit safer. In fact, I know that technology exists. In the meantime, I'll tweet you about what route I am taking to my next appointment and you can find an alternative. I've got some reading to catch up on.