Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
AI Technology

Pool Owners Take Up AI To Prevent Drownings (wsj.com) 42

Posted by msmash from the moving-forward dept.
Homeowners and pool operators are turning to artificial intelligence for an extra layer of safety to prevent drownings in backyard and public pools. From a report: The detection systems, which use submerged cameras and a form of AI known as computer vision, analyze live videos of swimmers and send alerts if they spot a person who appears to be drowning. Jenny Naggatz, 33, of Gulf Breeze, Fla., installed an AI device from technology company Coral Detection Systems in her family's pool to safeguard her two children, both of whom are under 4. Coral Detection's triangle-shaped device sits in the corner of a pool with an attached camera hanging a few inches below the water surface. "It has definitely given me more peace of mind," Ms. Naggatz said. "I'm just as careful around the water as I would be without it, but it's just another layer of protection."

The safety of young children around swimming pools remains a cause for concern, according to a U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission report released last week. On average, 379 children under 15 drowned each year in pools, spas or hot tubs from 2015 through 2017, the most recent statistics available, and hit a peak of 395 in 2017, the commission said. Noting that most child drownings occur at home during the summer months, the commission urged caution given that Covid-19 measures had confined more families to their homes and delayed the opening of public pools. AI drowning-detection products are not intended to replace adult supervision or lifeguards, but rather to serve as an extra safeguard.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Pool Owners Take Up AI To Prevent Drownings More

Pool Owners Take Up AI To Prevent Drownings

Comments Filter:

  • Iterating (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward

    Does Phoebe Cates still look the same? On film, not on film? Will she?

    Sorry, got distracted. Carry on with the significance of people coming up out of the water.

  • Peace of mind is great, but do these devices really work? Article is paywalled, so I have no idea who is making the claim that the AI really works or if it is just claims by the companies selling them.

    • Here's some info from a distributor [swimeye.com].

      It appears as if it would work much better in a modestly populated backyard pool, since its angle of sight would be limited in a crowded public pool. I'd hate to be the contractor selling them who'll have to face the inevitable liability lawsuit in some near future...

      • When it detects somebody drowning does it drain the pool like a bathtub?

        • No. It alerts lifeguards or folks in possession of the software's wifi link.

          Practically speaking, it would take long enough to empty the pool that a drowning person would not be saved. Suction created by a pump powerful enough to attempt the act would create dangerous conditions at a drain inlet for other swimmers.

          Public pools already have to be outfitted with a suction break device, should a swimmer get stuck to a suction port. It's happened. [pooloperat...gement.com]

    • But the article isn’t just from the Wall Street Journal... it’s from WSJ Pro. I’m sure they vetted the claims 50% more strongly than paid product placements In non-pro journals!

      (Seriously - WSJ “Pro”? WT everlovin’ F?)

  • Article seems to be paywalled or something. What does it do when it detects someone potentially drowning? Drain the pool? Sound an alarm? Send in a robotic lifeguard? Does it upload underwater videos of everyone swimming in your pool to the cloud?

    Seems like fences and parents/guardians are the answer to kids drowning in pools. This has the potential to make people complacent and trade their privacy for peace of mind.

    • Maybe flash drains the pool!

    • What does it do when it detects someone potentially drowning?

      Sounding an alarm is the obvious action.

      Seems like fences and parents/guardians are the answer to kids drowning in pools.

      This is an additional layer of safety.

      This has the potential to make people complacent

      You could say the same about the fence. Or seatbelts in cars. Or elevator brakes.

      The ability to be complacent is a big benefit.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by PPH ( 736903 )

      This is for kids who are permitted to be in the pool. If they start struggling it sounds an alarm.

      You may now start the discussion about whether this sort of technology will seduce some parents into letting down their guard and result in more child deaths.

      • I’m sure that, prior to purchasing this device, Ms. Naggatz would never have been imbibing alcoholic beverages while she was out by the pool with her kids.

      • This exactly. Sounds like an apt comparison to Tesla autopilot. The 'pool AI' instructions will no doubt say you can't leave kids unattended,this is meant only to supplement careful observation (aka keep your hands on the wheel) . And no doubt there will be a terrible tragedy where a parent is playing with their phone, or making dinner, or otherwise distracted but thinks the computer thingy is watching and someone drowns.

        I think it would be interesting to equip public pools with this. They already have

  • It is not perfect, it does not obviate the need for vigilance. It is just another layer of protection. It is likely to reduce the number of accidental deaths. If we make the perfect the enemy of the good and demand this device to work 100% of the time without any mistakes it would be tragic.

    Most people accept the logic of this. Except many of the same refuse to apply it to driver assist technologies like lane keeper, or car distance following cruise, or auto braking ...

  • Where I live children are typically taught swimming around the age of 6 years. If the number of drownings between 6 and 15 is relevant for the statistic, then maybe instead of AI first teach the natural intelligence in children the really simple concept of swimming.
  • 80% of drownings are males.

  • Dumb (Score:1)

    by melted ( 227442 )

    AI gizmos should only be used where non-zero error rate is tolerable. They all make mistakes from time to time, especially if you don't want a lot of false alarms. The cost of such a mistake could be your child. This is irresponsible and dumb.

  • Seems obvious but how about watching your kids?

    • Re:Watch the kids? (Score:4, Informative)

      by cmdr_klarg ( 629569 ) on Friday June 12, 2020 @04:24PM (#60177078)

      Seems obvious but how about watching your kids?

      Obviously someone who has never had kids.

      The reality is that you will not be able to watch your child 24-7. Your 2 year old will get excited about going to the playground, and take off across the street before you realize he's done it. (Actual event. He got in big trouble doing that.)

  • They have for years marketed something to detect and sound an alarm if someone goes into a pool when there is no supervision. I thought most pool deaths was when baby wonders into the pool without supervision. I know a neighbor who had this happen to one of her young children.

    • I thought most pool deaths was when baby wonders into the pool without supervision.

      I thought most pool deaths involved a protracted struggle which was eventually terminated when one combatant managed to pull a hunting knife.

      Also, don’t most pools have a hidden connection to the nearby sea through which their owners routinely admit sharks into the pool?

      • I know you are just being funny, but according to the CDC https://www.cdc.gov/homeandrec... [cdc.gov], kids 1-4 drown most often in residential pools and simply adding a 4 sided fence around the pool reduces those by 83%. So this new fangled AI system will pick up a few cases, but for much less money the homeowner could add a fence and get much better odds. Oh, CDC also notes for adults/older kids 70% were boozed. So my original post was not too far off.

        • In truth, that statistic is really really sad.

          Somewhat both off- and on-topic... When my daughter was little she loved her little inflatable wading pool. I still remember one cool autumn day (my daughter was probably 5 or 6 at the time) when we hadn't gotten around to putting that pool away. It had collected several inches of rather cold rain water in it - we went out to the back yard to find her sitting, shivering, in that darn pool playing with some toys!

  • I can imagine it would be useful for a whole lot of household applications.

  • I would watch over my kids and play with them, instead!

    • I would watch over my kids and play with them, instead!

      Exactly. The solution is for everyone to be a perfect parent.

      We can also get rid of car seatbelts and airbags and just depend on everyone to be a perfect driver.

      With enough perfection, no safety measures are needed anywhere.

    • Do you also sit at the front door at night with your shotgun just in case someone comes past? Or do you lock the door and go to sleep? Why do you care about your kids drowning but not care about home invaders. You are a horrible parent*.

      No I'm serious about that last part, you're a horrible parent for thinking that you're better than some additional safety system that you could employ while watching over your kids, and you're an even more horrible parent for thinking you can watch over your kids perfectly (

  • Unfortunately the teens have their fun sinking to the bottom and not moving for a minute or so and so it gets switched off.

  • Nobody's mentioned Darwin yet?
  • my concern is that tools like this can cause people to exercise less personal care, and actually therefore not result in improved safety. We've seen it with auto-pilots in cars, and previously with anti-lock brakes (studies show some people drive more aggressively)

Slashdot Top Deals

The truth of a proposition has nothing to do with its credibility. And vice versa.

Close