Slashdot Mirror
New System Detects Calls While Driving
Gary writes "Talking on your cellphone while driving isn't a crime in most states, but it should be. Studies have shown that people who drive and talk are many times more likely to have an accident. A new company is releasing a device to automatically detect drivers talking on their cell phones. Instead of police officers needing to observe a cellphone in use, the system automatically detects a cell phone call and records which car was making the call." The article is fairly light on details, but it would be interesting to see how the system differentiates from a driver talking on a cell phone versus a mere passenger.
Who thinks a blow up doll in the car will fool this technology?
09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688C0
+2 Troll is Slashdot's way of saying groupthink is confused
Automatic law enforcement is cheap but it's not the way to go. Make it illegal and slap offenders with a hard punishment to deter people. It works well enough with all other reasonable laws, so why do it differently with this one?
I support drunk driving laws. And I have heard that cell driving is similar in impairment to drink driving (though I think the studies so far have been less than perfectly rigorous). So that makes me tend to support the idea of cell driving laws.
However, at the same time, I see plenty of erratic and dangerous drivers who aren't talking on cell phones. Why is a cell driving law a better idea than simply getting tougher on poor driving? Or at least shouldn't getting tougher on poor driving come first?
It seems like the main (or at least first) question should not be, "Are you on a cell phone?" but, "Do you present a risk to others?"
Stop-Prism.org: Opt Out of Surveillance
I don't see a system that shoots paintballs or shuts off cell phones getting too far in the US. This really goes too far and can potentially create more chaos than it is worth. I can almost hear the lawsuits being filed now the first time one of those paintballs causes a wreck, or when a physician talking to a patient has his/her phone disabled rushing to the hospital. Technology is a great thing, but ultimately laws should be enforced via human education and discipline.
To the making of books there is no end, so let's get started
The system should also automatically detect children in the car, and report those to the police. Or how about radios? That's easy - just report every car. From here:
(Of course, I understand that radios in cars are far more common than cell phones. Was merely making a point.)
The Online Slang Dictionary
No it shouldn't.
Distracted driving should be a crime. IF the person is observed driving distracted, then ticket them. I don't care why they were distracted, whether it is cell phone use, putting on make up, or getting a blow job.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
The company's site explains (in annoying Flash) that the system merely photographs the car. Later, the photos are manually inspected to determine whether it was the driver who was using the phone.
Tell you what, Nanny State, you criminalize the phone. But in exchange I want massive reductions in my car insurance because now everyone is safe and snug.
I go for a bicycle ride every morning and have noticed that in about 1 of 4 cars, the driver is either not looking at the road while dialing, talking or just finishing a call. If I have to cross traffic, I make sure the driver sees and acknowledges my presence. If they are on a cell phone, even at a stop sign, they are either oblivious to my presence or the invisibility cloak is working.
1011 1010 1101 1100 0000 1111 1111 1110 1110
The key difference is that you can't usually crash your airliner if you lose attention for a split second.
A car traveling at 80kph makes 22 meters per second, that's more than the width of the average road. And all you need to die is to lose control for a moment.
I'll start.
From the study:
Tags != Comments, and -1 (Troll) != -1 (I Would Respond Angrily To This Poster So They Must Be Trolling)
But why single out talking on cell phones? Where is the system to detect an intense conversation with a passenger, changing the radio station, fumbling with the A/C controls in a rental car, a crying baby in the back seat.... We've accepted that driving is hazardous. Everybody on the road knows it. News flash, there are irresponsible or distracted drivers out there; look out! A driver should be able to safely speed away from someone that is doing something that is stupid. A driver should be able to call the police when they drive by someone who is in trouble. Driving will always by a highly variable and highly hazardous situation that one voluntarily puts themselves in. That little yellow line isn't going to stop someone from drifting over onto your side of the road. You have to pay attention constantly. It shouldn't matter what other people are doing; assume everyone is drunk, distracted, or whatever and adjust your driving accordingly. Stop worrying about them and make sure you are doing what is necessary to stay safe. You only have control of your own situation. A thousand laws won't give you control over someone else.
There was a radio breakfast show in Melbourne Australia talking to the legendary (and not very bright) Warwick Capper who they were interviewing by phone while he was in his car. Warwick says he has to put the phone down because there is a cop up ahead and does so... you then heard the high-pitch thick aussie accent shrill of a female saying "Warrick.... I'm the one driving".
A few problems with this:
1. I saw nothing about checking whether it was the driver or passenger using the cellphone.
2. They will get sued out of existence the first time the automatic paintball gun hits a nice new expensive car.
3. The EMP.
-- Cars nowadays are highly dependent on their electronic controls. How would the EMP not disable them?
-- If any electronics besides the cellphone are disabled, that would also lead to a lawsuit the company likely could not win.
In short, there are too many problems for this to be practical.
WOW, this is so completely bogus it's not even funny. The "Company" site is amateurish at best, paint balls thudding on the car could CAUSE an accident, and EMP would take out not only the phone (permanently), but also the car computer, and all other electronics in a fairly decent radius, causing the car to halt where it is rather abruptly.
/or the possibility that isn't the PASSENGER.
This product is totally bogus and will never happen as stated in this article. That doesn't even cover legal cell phone use with hands-free and
I Call Shenanigans on this!
The Digital Sorceress
Which is why you say either "hey, I'll call you back, I'm in traffic" or "hey, shut up for a minute, weirdness is afoot".
If I'm in a Heavy traffic area, i don't talk on the phone, I need all my attention on the road.
But if I'm driving back home 6 miles from getting groceries, where I will see maybe 4 cars, total, after i get out of the city limits?
The problem is, like everything else, the State wants to be my Mommy. I have a mother, i don't need OR want another one. I'm a adult, I've been driving for almost 30 years in all sorts of environments, I haven't had a accident for over 20 years, and that one wasn't my fault.
If you are going to let me vote & drive in the first place, don't you sort of kind of think I can be trusted to NOT do something suicidally stupid?
Why, yes, I AM a Pagan Libertarian.
Smoking?
I quit smoking a while back, but I'm pretty sure that outside of the lighting process, absolutely no brain activity is required whatsover to smoke.
Which might be why so many people do it, come to think of it.
Why, yes, I AM a Pagan Libertarian.
If you outlaw blow jobs, then only outlaws will get blow jobs.