Why the dislike of air integrated computers?

[Adobo]

Thanks, when I get an insta-buddy I'll remember to do that. So far I've been diving with my better half all the time so we both know who's what and we only do the "half-tank let's turn around and head for the shallows" checking. Now; we used to check more often. (You could say we've grown complacent.)


But that's not my point, my point is there's dive planning and there's disaster recovery planning. I don't plan my dives as disasters because I don't think I'd enjoy that kind of diving. So I think "what if you have to share air when you don't have enough to come up safely" is a straw man argument. If that happens you have a disaster on your hands and need to switch to emergency procedures. Nobody's saying you don't need emergency skills, it's just that your DC's and SPG's normal readouts during your regular dive are not about that.

With that approach, you really don't even need a backup regulator either. If your primary regulator is unusable for whatever reason, you can just go into disaster emergency procedures like CESA or buddy breathing.

The good news for you is, most people go their entire dive careers without ever experiencing a real out of gas situation. So maybe you'll be lucky; perhaps you'll never find yourself wishing that you were sufficiently equipped to handle something as simple as donating to an out of gas diver and knowing that you had enough resources to get to the surface without both of you running out of gas.

 

[Scuba7]

Just wondering what some of the concerns with AI are.

You could drop (or handle roughly) your tank before the dive and smash an SPG and be totally screwed also.

 

[eelnoraa]

I don't think people are opposing AI computer, but rather, we believe we need to understand the basis and not blindly trust the AI computer reading. The example I often brought up about ART time is a limitation of AI computer. Users should be aware of this. If that is the case, the user can chooe to accept the risk or plan his/own gas management. However, I do observe most AI users are not aware of such a limitation. I wasn't aware of it when I started using mine until I had to share gas during a safety stop. I considered I was lucky because it happened at 15ft.

The adapting new technology is inevitable when the usage changes. Take car backup camera for example, the a lot to do with the adaption of electric/hybrid cars where they can start moving without any warming (noise). It is definitely a good feature to have. But I still think users needs to know the limitation, such as any blind spots. One example is early Honda/Accura backup camera isn't wide enough in veridical direction. You can see the ground fully, but anything higher than 3-4ft is out of the view. I have known of at least one case a MDX back out of garage without garage door fully open because the diver didn't see any obstacle from rear view camera. I know it was the driver's skill problem, but this is exactly our point. Drivers are losing necessary skill because their perception on new technology is bullet proof. This is especially true for divers because we are in extreme hostile environment. You don't want to discovery the limitation when you hit the limitation

---------- Post added July 25th, 2015 at 04:41 PM ----------

You could drop (or handle roughly) your tank before the dive and smash an SPG and be totally screwed also.

How bad are you screwed here?? miss a dive!!! Much better than OOA underwater.

 

[Scuba7]

How bad are you screwed here?? miss a dive!!! Much better than OOA underwater.

Most people dont dive alone so at worst you swim to your buddy and ascend safely.
If you cant do that, then you should not be diving.

 

[The Chairman]

Drivers are losing necessary skill because their perception on new technology is bullet proof.

I don't follow the logic here. Exactly what skill(s) is being lost due to AI? Divers are still checking their gauge and probably more so since it's so convenient.

 

[phoenix31tt]

I don't follow the logic here. Exactly what skill(s) is being lost due to AI? Divers are still checking their gauge and probably more so since it's so convenient.

If they dive by "alarm"... That's the only thing I can think of as far as skill goes... Otherwise I really just see it as another spg...

So Damn expensive though... That's my major deterrent


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[The Chairman]

I haven't met anyone who 'dives by alarm'. Most I know hate alarms. I'm with them on that.

 

[RJP]

The example I often brought up about ART time is a limitation of AI computer. Users should be aware of this. If that is the case, the user can chooe to accept the risk or plan his/own gas management. However, I do observe most AI users are not aware of such a limitation. I wasn't aware of it when I started using mine until I had to share gas during a safety stop. I considered I was lucky because it happened at 15ft.

What limitation of your AI computer caused you to need to share air?

 

[scubadada]

I haven't met anyone who 'dives by alarm'. Most I know hate alarms. I'm with them on that.

Fortunately you can turn them off

 

[DaleC]

This is too funny. Why shouldn't they 'just trust the camera'? The view from the camera is probably better and wider than what they get by twisting their neck. What's not to trust? Either way, they are looking behind them and the convenience of it means that they are probably looking more often. I own a Sprinter and don't have a rear view mirror. One of the first things I added was a back up camera and it's a life saver.

Are you really arguing that? The problem is that the human eye and brain communicate when you look around and you are in charge of where the focus is or whether you need to look farther, closer etc... It a complex dynamic activity that lends itself to situational awareness. When you look behind, your brain and bodies attention is focused behind. When you look at a cam, that same attention is actually forward. You could counter and say that people can still interpret the data a cam sends but my sense, from watching people use technology, is that once they give up procedural control to a machine they tend to degrade in the awareness department.

How was the back up cam intended to save lives. It allowed drivers to see directly behind the car before engaging the reverse gear, prompted by deaths of small children who were tucked up close behind the vehicle. The same effect can be produced by actually looking behind the vehicle instead of being in a hurry, distracted and jumping in and going. That being said, the cam in that situation augments ordinary core skills ie. backing up. I suspect that the technology is used differently now though in that people don't bother looking behind and just drive by cam instead ie. eroding the core skill.

One could apply all that to AI. There is nothing inherently wrong with it if used intelligently.