Slashdot Mirror
Keeping Older Drivers Behind the Wheel
Hugh Pickens writes "A new study shows the key role technology can play in extending the age at which people can drive safely and highlights the important psychological role that driving plays in older people's lives in contributing to feelings of independence and freedom and maintaining their quality of life. The study identified ideas for in-car information systems to help compensate for the reduction in reaction time that affects many older drivers. Specific recommendations included a head-up display on the windshield that displays road sign information based on GPS position so the driver doesn't have to keep watching the road side for information and a system to provide the driver with audible feedback on their current speed so the driver doesn't have to look at the dashboard so often. 'Our research highlights issues that have been overlooked by car designers and those advising older people on lifestyles,' says Dr Charles Musselwhite, who led the study. 'The current emphasis on developing technologies which take over part of the driving task may actually end up deterring older drivers. By contrast, better in-car information systems could help them drive safely and ensure they want to keep driving.'"
You kow, I just don't see how this will help much with people who have severely reduced reaction times/cognitive abilities in dealing with traffic.
My mom uses the sweet public transit deals that exist exclusively for seniors. We need to have those everywhere, they work great. They pick her up right at her door with a handicapped-style van with a lift, and she goes wherever she wants. Her church, her local senior center, and her medical clinic all have similar setups which she also uses. There's even a similar deal that takes her the whole 300 miles to Atlantic City when she's in the mood. Costs her way less than keeping a car, and it's a lot safer for her, as well as for the rest of us. I think it's a far better solution than encouraging her to drive, which she really cannot competently do. Until real available cars can reliably drive themselves , I say please, keep the seniors off the roads for everyone's safety. Besides, we seriously need to reduce the number of drivers on the road, not find new ways to let everyone drive!
All this just strikes me as something sponsored by the auto industry in the hopes of opening "new" markets.
Caveat Utilitor
Google and other can't even get address 100% much less road sign done to the point of where it will need to be and How big of a disk will you need to just fit each road in big city area?
Wouldn't it be better to invest in the newer generations?
Get off my lawn and away from my car!
and say good-bye to crazies on the road and in the shopping malls - you have free will !
Directions to Country Kitchen Buffet...
The article says among other things: The study identified ideas for in-car information systems to help compensate for the reduction in reaction time that affects many older drivers.
I must say that I sincerely doubt that older drivers have any reduction in reaction time.
> The study identified ideas for in-car information systems to help compensate
> for the reduction in reaction time that affects many older drivers.
We get faster with age? That's great! But why would we want to compensate for it? So as not to have an unfair advantage over younger drivers? Too late. We already have that.
Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
According to the National Center for Statistics and Analysis, in 2005, over 43,000 people were killed in traffic accidents in the U.S. alone. I don't know what the number is for the entire world but it must be in the six digits. Most of them are not caused by older drivers. Traffic fatalities and injuries are a much bigger threat to the nation than terrorism. All the money being spent on terrorism should be thrown into developping a 100% automated transit system. And no, we don't need AI to do it.
Just in time for the incoming wave of our aging baby boomers...It feels like everything these days is centered around them.
Why does it need to be linked to GPS data? Road signs are pretty easy to read with a simple camera mounted on the dashboard. You could probably add a few lines of code to the recognition software and have it read construction speed limit signs, too.
In fact, I think my neighbor's car has a display on the windshield for the speed she's going. And the car is at least from the mid to early 90s. I don't know if it reads the speed limit, though.
a car that just drives them to their desired destination beats thousands of buttons and blips and bleeps of LED light. we need the DARPA SENIOR 65+ challenge
And the problem with driving is complicated by many, many factors. First off, you have vision problems, hearing problems, problems placing objects in space (as much cognitive as visual), memory (even short term things like cancelling a turn signal), reaction speed, fine motor skills, and the list goes on. The folks I deal with are not computer users, and their unfamiliarity with them would make the addition of GPS, warning lights, vocal instructions simply more confusing than helpful. The real solution shouldn't be keeping elderly drivers driving, but rather giving them more safe and accessible public transportation options.
A HUD? With the relevant traffic signs on it? What does that have to do with old people? I want those things!
Error 001
Security Scan and Virus Detection do not work with your operating system.
We should realise that driving is dangerous and it's not a right. So when you hit a certain age you should be tested on a regular basis because the fact is old people do start losing their ability to react, remember things among other problems.
To be quite honest I'd like to say that once you hit 65 you lose your licence full stop but that probably won't happen especially while the ageing population is growing but I think you'd find that would help a lot.
And younger people who drive dangerously should lose their licence for life. Having an accident is fine but there is zero reason for being a road raging retard.
Just don't let them drive if they have long reaction times or bad vision.
Look grandpa might have slower reaction times but how much reaction time do you need going 12 miles an hour with a right turn signal on? I know older drivers can be a pain but you just don't see too many of 'em in accidents. They forget where their keys are I suppose.
Nearly every close call I've had in the last 8 years was cell phone related. How about we tell those damn kids (who are still on my lawn by the way) to stop texting, reading, watching movies, and fiddling around with their GPS while driving to frakin' stop that stupid crap.
load "$",8,1
... they get a fucking taxi?
Round here (Gloucestershire, England) they're worse than the boy racers. They don't indicate, take ridiculous changes-of-heart in betweeen manoeuvres, drive at 20mph and piss me off. Get a taxi.
Always upgrade to the newest stable drivers. Have we learned nothing?
"Three eyes are better than one" -- Lieutenant Columbo
Anything that makes it safer for older drivers to keep driving will make it safer for all drivers to keep driving. An 18 year old shouldn't be looking at the dashboard or road signe any more than necessary. In fact, there isn't a single argument that isn't equally valid for drunk drivers as it is for older drivers. The point isn't to make it easier for drivers who have lost the ability to drive safely to keep driving. The point is to assess all drivers, of all ages and walks of life, on an ongoing basis, based on current technogy, to make certain they still have the physical and mental skills necessary to meet the current requirements for a license. This is just a dodge to A) make money, and B) court the AARP vote.
It's not that simple and you may need more then one.
The Atlantic recently had a very good article comparing the philosophies of road design in North America versus in Europe.
In brief: lots of road signs (1) micromanage drivers, (2) make drivers complacent to an individual sign's importance, (3) cause drivers to pay more attention to the side of the road in search of signs and less attention on actual road conditions, and (4) condition drivers to not think for themselves (e.g. driver slower than the limit in poor visibility or in rain).
The suggestions mentioned in TFAS seem to be an extension of this philosophy.
Meanwhile, the reason seniors are so isolated when they don't have cars is because North American cities tend to be built as a series of urban islands. With more liveable communities and better-connected public transit, it wouldn't be quite as bad for people of any age to not drive a car when it is not safe for them to do so.
- RG>
Hey pal, this isn't a pleasantforest, so don't waste my time with pleasantries!
OK, let me mince words.
This is bullshit.
My 80 yr old grandmother has been in 3 accidents in as many months. SHE states she needs to be off the road, but at the same time, she refuses to let her freedom go.
I call bullshit. Let the ARRP get some people to help the elders. They just DON'T have the reaction time that younger (relatively) drivers have.
But, I guess we can't say anything bad about the elderly. After all, nobody is entitled to bring anyone else down in these U.S. of America.
But seriously.... My grandfather sold his 80K dollar travel trailer, truck and everything when HE realized that it wasn't safe. Then he became one of the WORST people against old people driving, just because he had enough common sense to "get off the road".
--Toll_Free
When they place the comfort of seniors above the safety of everyone, we have already lost.
Learn to love Alaska
...the important psychological role that driving plays in older people's lives in contributing to feelings of independence and freedom and maintaining their quality of life.
Is anyone worried about maintaining the quality of life of the unfortunate pedestrians in the crosswalk in front of grandpa when he gets the brake and gas pedals confused?
~Philly
Most fatalities are in the age range of 18-24, ad primarily involve males. That says to me that its younger people who haven't learned to drive responsibly who are the root problem to be addressed.
A learning experience is one of those things that say, 'You know that thing you just did? Don't do that.' - D. Adams
Either you misread the GPP or you think that "late 20s" qualifies as "older drivers". My money's on the former...
you aren't going to realize what a huge mistake this is. There are drivers here that would make you turn white. These blue-hairs trying to drive their land-yacht cars and endangering the rest of us. I completely agree that most fatalities occur in younger, inexperienced drivers. But most accidents, at least here, are caused by old people.
I've seen a man over 70 who had to physically lift his leg off the accelerator pedal and put it on the brake. To make matters worse, he was driving a gigantic Cadillac El Dorado. The man could barely see, and that's bad enough, but he could barely physically drive. Technology here isn't the answer, public transportation is.
They're using their grammar skills there.
So long as the older folks have tremendous power at the ballot box, there's only a minor chance we'll see them having to be retested every so often to renew their licenses.
My grandfather, who's in his early 80s, continues to drive occasionally during the day and without incident. Maybe that extra old computer I gave him is keeping him sharp?
old people can't even use a dvd player, and end up yelling at things they can't get to work ( i used to work in a video/tech store ). What do you think will happen when the blinky thing on their windshield isn't doing what they want? or when they try to program the system while in transit? technology + old people=bad
If anything, reaction will be slower. I can now imagine what would happen if my parents would have a head ups display.
* Well, officer, there suddenly were these letters in front of me and while I was changing my driving glasses for my reading glasses, I hit the car in front of me. And I was just on my way to my grand-son. Little houghi is now engaged, you know. Lovely girl it is. They will get married next summer in ...
At a certain age EVERYTHING becomes a distraction. My parents can't even drive with the radio on anymore. If I tell them to go left or right, I need to tell that WAY in advance and need to repeat it three times.
I would not dare to give them a GPS, let alone ask them to handle one.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
"All this just strikes me as something sponsored by the auto industry in the hopes of opening "new" markets."
Slashdot! Slashdot. In your zeal to spear one big organization, you completely missed another.
Let's say it's 1Tb of data (doubt it is even .1% of that, but lets just say)
http://www.pricewatch.com/hard_removable_drives/sata_1tb.htm
An extra $120 isn't a big deal on a car.
Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
I disagree with you on the basis that the elderly are no more responsible for wrecks than teens and young adults.
U.S drivers under the age of 25 are about twice as likely to be involved in a fatal wreck and often 3-5 times more likely to be in a wreck per 1000 drivers.
I've seen some statistics from Canada as well which echo similar results.
Remember, old people don't drive well because they are impaired... Young people don't drive well because they make reckless and/or inexperienced decisions. If you want to restrict licenses, then you should probably start with not issuing licenses until the mid twenties for males and late teens to early 20s for women... It seems teen/young adult wrecks coincide pretty well with frontal lobe development... which in itself, could be labeled an impairment.
Fact: Everything I say is fiction.
"A new study...highlights the important psychological role that driving plays in older people's lives in contributing to feelings of independence and freedom and maintaining their quality of life."
You know, I buy this. I can understand why it would be hard for an older person to hear "sorry, you can't do that anymore." I'm sure it's genuinely painful to lose the independence to go anywhere you've had since you were sixteen.
But, I'm sorry, no. I'm sorry it hurts their feeling of self worth, but that's a crappy reason to keep people who don't have the reflexes, coordination, and visual acuity to drive safely on the road.
If you're not physically capable of driving safely, it's not ABOUT you. It's about keeping everyone ELSE on the road safe.
Some Nissan Silvias had a display in the top of the dash that reflected back to the driver, but it was just a secondary speedometer reading that you could see without looking away from the windshield.
mediocrity rules, man
The first time I became aware of this issue was on a "60 Minutes" segment in the mid '80s. They talked about an elderly women in Florida who had killed a total of seven people, in two separate instances at the same bus stop. And she was still fighting the state to keep her license. "Loss of independence" was cited as the reason.
In the meantime, though, I'm concerned about surviving my hellish commutes on the freeways. Apart from those who [illegally] text or talk on their mobile phones while driving, there are all too many drivers who seem personally offended that I am in front of them, even at 75-80 mph. They'll drive right up on my tail, pass me, and then switch lanes every few hundred yards in the hope that they can get to their destination a few seconds faster. It's too bad that the Highway Patrol doesn't crack down on them.
These cars routinely zip past the older drivers, who stay close to the speed limit, usually in the right hand lane. I worry more about single drivers in Escalades, Excursions, Tahoes, and other large vehicles that completely block my view of the road ahead.
For now, I just hope to live long enough to become an older driver!
Ok, so the HUD/GPS Combo could alert a driver that a sharp turn is coming up on this back country road, and it could notify the driver that there's a stopsign hidden behind that tree (or that has been stolen again). What about instantaneous conditions? It's not going to help with stoplights for sure, but what about road work when that guy is standing in the middle of the street with a slow/stop sign? What about this new intersection that was just added last week, how will these updates get to your car on time?
I think a HUD would be absolutely AWESOME (even for us young whippersnappers), when it comes to things like vehicle and environment information (temp, blindspot sensors, etc), even GPS, but it can't substitute for the ability to watch the road. Things will always pop up, and we can't let people drive just because their car will tell them when a stop sign is coming up, because it WON'T tell them when there's someone on a bike on the shoulder, or a broke down car on the road, or any other number of things.
I don't in any way think that driving should be cut off at a certain age, but it should be more seriously tested than it is now. Young people can have poor reflexes and eyesight, and people in their 80's can be perfectly healthy and competent to drive.
There are certain roads I avoid unless absolutely required to drive on. Mainly because of all the old people in the area who drive 10+ mph under the speed limit regardless of the time or road conditions. On the other roads I drive, almost daily I get cut off by some old person usually with a handicap tag, who doesn't bother to actually look in the mirrors before switching lanes and most of that time with no signal. What are we going to do with the people who don't even make the effort to even look out their windows? What really boiled my blood one day was watching an old woman coming out of the grocery store, plodding along at a snails pace with a walker in front of her and some guy carrying her bags. How can she drive a car if she can't even get to her car without assistance? Christ, some days I thought I've ruptured a blood vessel from stressing out about all the old people on the road.
I keep working at getting them out of the car earlier.
There's a whoooole lot more than lessened reactions... and even more than the fact that their ability to judge distance and speed of oncoming objects diminishes, too. There's an overall lack of awareness in many situations.
Until we have those cars that will drive themselves, then get them out of the cars.
And when we DO get cars that drive themselves, I'll buy one for my parents, and one for myself.
Oh, you're not stuck, you're just unable to let go of the onion rings.
In reality, I have seen older drivers 1. Pull out in front of oncoming traffic leaving no or little reaction time and impeding traffic flow. If you doubt this looking at the traffic accident log of any police station in a retirement community, Panama City Florida is just ONE example. 2. My sister was stopped at a traffic light in Los Angeles she was the only car at the light, the light was RED. An elderly couple didn't see the red light and ran into my sister's car. If she had not seen it happening she would have been pushed out into oncoming traffic. The elderly couple said the driver had lost his glasses but thought it was okay to drive home. I would much rather spend money on improving public transportation than trying to invent a technology that would lead to more liability and more accidents.
Old people's technophobia.
Giving more technology to old people behind the wheel sounds pretty scary to me. My mom doesn't know the difference between low beams and high beams. Just imagine her trying to control a computer in addition to the headlights. Shoot, my grandpa can barely turn the TV on.
In france, people living in bordeaux can board the train and make it to their jobs in paris, 400-500 km away, just in an hour or so.
in america, people suffer 1-1.5 hours of traffic to go to their jobs downtown.
the solution is simple. more, quality mass transportation. this way you can assure that life quality and independence of older citizens never deteriorates, and also you can save younger citizens from wasting their life away in traffic.
Read radical news here
Like lots of software, obsolescence often comes before stability.
Engineering is the art of compromise.
At this site I have leaned that open-sourcing the drivers will solve all drivers' problems.
Without any doubt, OSS community will fix all these drivers in no time.
Google and other can't even get address 100% much less road sign done to the point of where it will need to be and How big of a disk will you need to just fit each road in big city area?
Good questions. Now let's answer them.
Let's say there are 1,000,000 road sign varieties in North America of any consequence.
Let's be really generous and give each sign 1KB of information on average that's 10GB or so of data.
That can be organized into:
Sign GUID: 32bit integer
Sign Shape GUID: 8 bits
Sign Color GUID: 32 bits
Sign location: 2x 32bit signed floats
Sign Content: ~1KB
And that's if we decide to be anal retentive about our signage. Let's limit ourselves to 256 different sign categories and a basic sign would only take up about 128 bits of information if we're incredibly generous.
Sign Type: 8 bits
Sign Location: 64 bits should be sufficient to designate the street/block you're on with close enough to 100% accuracy.
Sign GUID: 32 bits
that leaves another 24 bits for a pointer to speed information or more specific information.
You could fit 66,000,000 stop, yield or speed limit signs in one GB.
This is not going to be a storage problem.
Most people have ipods with at least 32GB of data that would be 2.1 billion stop or yield signs signs.
... there's an old driver behind my rear wheel right now.
Have gnu, will travel.
Cars are the number one killers, both of planet and of people, and they want to keep people driving older?
Just add Water.
I can't hear my clicker when the radio is on (Honda Accord). Specially when I'm going "na na na naaa na na naaaa na na THUNDER!".
Given that some car radios automatically increase in volume when the engines revving, why can't they have a clicker that automatically adapts to the sound level? And that gets really obvious when it's been on for more than 10 seconds?
I gotta patent these ideas, I really do.
Let us not forget that driving is a privilege, not a right. If you can no longer operate a vehicle safely, you really ought to figure out another way to get around. I live in a suburban neighborhood and have no car, and I get around just fine.
In my limited experience with elderly relatives, I'm guessing that a large part of the reason seniors keep driving past when it is safe for them to drive is simply pride. They do not want to accept the degradation of their abilities that comes with old age, nor the convenience of driving.
I'm amazed! This is Slashdot, and here I was all ready to do what I usually do: stick my oar in and say, guys! Forget the technology angle, there's an important policy issue here—we should be restricting car use to the competent, not extending it to the incompetent! And what do I find? That's what everyone is saying! Will marvels never cease?
Unfortunately, there's a show-stopping technical issue here that everyone is—quite surreally—overlooking. Use GPS to tell people about roadsigns? What if GPS mis-reports your location? What if you're in a tunnel? What if there's construction? What if, for heaven's sake, the bridge is out, and the sign and the road are not there? Building a system in which people control physical weapons (sorry, vehicles) based on information from an ungrounded virtual reality is criminally insane!
Now, putting directional transponders on road signs so they can identify themselves clearly and reproduce themselves on in-vehicle displays is such an obvious idea that I've been expecting to see it announced as reality at every car show for 35 years. It's an absolutely must-do, supervising-officials-must-be-suicidal-morons-to-miss-it (or evil geniuses up to no good to pretend to miss it) sort of thing. Of course we want that. But it has to be very reliable. Over 99% reliable, because unlike physical street signs, the failure modes aren't ones that we can fix by moving the signs or adding flashing lights. And it has to be a solution that applies to flares and bollards and temporary signage just as smoothly as it does to fixed signage. Use GPS?
Sorry, my brain just exploded.
... of people who haven't had to watch their parents independence decline and take on those burdens themselves. And feeling guilty that they can't do more.
Instead of keeping old drivers on the street driving, concentrate on keeping us from aging and thus, preserving our reflexes.. :)
The real answer is to get those older drivers off the roadways. Forget the grey panthers and require drivers over 65 to re-qualify to keep their license every 2 yrs and include a driven and reflex test as well as the usual vision test.
Old drivers aren't often in accidents, they often cause accidents. They will obliviously run a red light and cause a collision behind them while they blissfully continue on to park with their wheel up on the curb at the grocery store.
Can we stop them from having accidents in their pants too?
Whoops I Crapped My Pants!
Make everyone re-certify their written and skills tests every 8 or 10 years, plus after every accident.
Problem solved.
Most old people are adverse to learning new methods. This works to our advantage inasmuch as at least they aren't trying to drive and text at the same time. I don't see a smart car working for a borderline senile senior. If they grew up with the technology, and it was second nature, then maybe it would prolong the amount of time they could drive safely. But that isn't what is being proposed here. What is being proposed is a new trick to teach old dogs, and we all know what they say about that.
Tomorrow's news yesterday -- the bleeding, visionary edge.
They are talking about old drivers pre-Vista and 'the Wheel' = Vista.
I live near two large blue hair towns. The biggest problem is when they "forget" what peddle is stop, and want one is go. They then jam on the throttle and plow over people thinking they are trying to stop. AKA Farmers Market.
The easy and simple solution is a impact sensor in the bumper. With a slight bump, the engine shuts off. Simple.
Phone books are extremely important for older drivers. I used to live down the road from a retirement community and there are few things more terrifying than looking into a car and seeing nothing but blue hair and knuckles behind the wheel. Phone books for those drivers to sit on saves lives.
African locusts could help make better cars
London (England) The lowly and much reviled African locust could prevent needless car crashes. Researchers at Volvo and the University of Newcastle are studying anti-collision mechanisms in the locust and hope the information will help build faster and more efficient braking systems.
Has this researcher even spoken with older drivers? Or for that matter have the auto manufactures ever asked older drivers what the want? Here are some points to consider.
1. Why have 26 buttons and knobs on a radio mounted directly below the heater controls?
2. How about headlight and wiper controls mounted on the dash instead of the turn signal lever?
3. How about marking controls with large bold text instead of nebulous icons to small to see without reading glasses?
4. Turn signal indicators mounted on top of the dash in the line of sight.
5. How about a psych profile prior to purchase of an SUV? Many SUV owners think they bought an Abrams tank.
Current cars are built for 25 year old buyers who often can't afford them and for auto company executives that are trying to pump up the sticker price with all the extraneous junk built in. Why put a check engine light on the dash with out further information as to why it is on? Because it drives the customer to the dealer for mystical problems solved at ripoff prices. These problems may be as simple as a gas cap not tight, burned out tail lamp or low freon in the AC, these could be defined on the LCD dash panel and corrected by the driver easily with the proper information being shared. Its funny I can see a display of the CD name, track number and elapsed time of the track but not a burned out light bulb. In short the cars are built for GM's CEO not for the customer and they wonder why we don't buy them.
A modest proposal: every driver must retake the written test and the road test every third time they renew their license (i.e., about once every 12 years).
Traffic laws change, as do reflexes, eyesight, hearing, and judgment. It would be good for everyone, not to mention weeding out the incompetent.
"We reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals." --The American President (20.1.2009)
"With South Park's senior citizens behind the wheel, more than a few farmer's markets have been mowed down. Unwilling to surrender their driver's licenses, the elderly fight back."
http://www.southparkstudios.com/episodes/103856/
Puts the whole "Get off my lawn!" stereotype in a completely new perspective.
Why are people living 400-500 km away from work?
Do they live within walking distance of the train track? Isn't the noise bothersome? If they live further, how much time to commute to the train station? How much time to walk/bus from the train station to work? Sure, traveling 300kph on your way to work is cool, but it's only part of the trip.
Regardless, if your description is accurate, it seems mass transit has enabled ridiculous commute distances rather than improving quality of life in this case.
I've driven over three million miles, mostly for business, on every type of highway, and in all kinds of weather. It's apparent that most drivers simply can't drive well enough to be safe. Every day I see dangerously under-skilled drivers. They speed, change lanes without giving a signal, drive too slowly, wander all over the road, pass going up hills & around curves, miss turns, miss exits, etc.. Driver education classes haven't helped a bit. The number one job of a driver is to PAY ATTENTION! Are you the driver or a passenger?
I'd like to see older drivers have to take a road test every five years after their 60th birthday, plus be required to have their eyes and ears checked every year. And I'd like to see every driver take a real road test to get their license in the first place. It's gotten to the point where if the person giving the exam makes it back alive, the license is granted. That's the problem.
Considering an older driver broke several traffic laws, nearly punched my ticket, and drove off without even noticing...
I honestly can't see this helping much.
Simpler solution: Require re-testing (written AND driving) of anyone that caused an injury bearing accident while breaking traffic law. Require a mandatory minimum of 1 year of zero driving privileges followed by a written AND driving retest before someone that causes a fatality while breaking traffic law can obtain their license again. No special work permit licenses, NOTHING for either of them. Driving is a bloody privilege. Maybe if we enforced traffic law a bit better, and imposed harsher penalties for lawbreakers that cause injuries, we'd see better behavior on the roads.
People say the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Why? Is there any shortage of bad ones?
I suppose you weren't thinking about people with spinal cord injury when you wrote that, right?
Could this article pander any more effectively to the aims and goals of the "personal" transportation industry, whether intentional or not? Couldn't the mobility afforded by an effective mass transit system be just as empowering? If the hand-eye coordination and mental exercise of driving is also a benefit, then it seems to me that "video" games and various forms of exercise and all sorts of other activities would be just as much or more productive in that regard.
(Note: I myself have never seen an effective mass transit system where I live in the United States, but that doesn't mean it's not feasible... far from it, if even half of the energy and manpower devoted to the auto industry was refocused.)
These kinds of proposals all ignore the potential damage that drivers do already, and yet seek to extend the ability to inflict that damage, without any increase in holding people accountable for that damage or misuse in general.
I used to teach driving, I know how bad many drivers are. I have also been hit by cars while riding my bicycle many times, and hauled away in an ambulance twice. The drivers never even got a ticket for running stop signs or failing to yield on a left turn, which were the causes of the two near-fatal "accidents".
A big part of the problem is that we perceive that driving is now so safe, with seat belts, air-bags, etc., we do not need to be concerned about it any more. Something Hans Monderman started to question: http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/12.12/traffic.html, with some success.
Drivers are also shielded from public reaction to bad behavior, behind sheet metal, glass, sound-proofing, which pedestrians are not. Ever notice how polite most people are when walking around? How often do you hear "pardon me", "Go ahead, you first" and other niceties between folks just walking around? Even in NYC I rarely ever see people give the finger or shout obscenities to between pedestrians. Between drivers, I se this all the time.
There is a quote somewhere that best safety feature in a car would be a steel spike sticking out of the steering wheel pointed directly at the drivers chest. I agree. If drivers actually faced the same likely hood of death and injury those outside the cars do, we would all be safer. At least after Darwin got caught up.
Trains, ships and planes are all safer than automobiles, yet we hold the drivers of automobiles to a far lower standard than we do the other three, while studiously ignoring the carnage autos cause.
If anything, we should make driving autos far MORE dangerous to the driver, to increase perceived danger, thereby increasing the caution drivers employ, at the same time raising the level of accountability to levels in proportion to the dangers autos represent when compared to other forms of transportation.
Make all cars convertibles, with open windows so that drivers are not shielded from public ridicule or anger when they do something stupid, require name and address posted on all cars just like is required for commercial vehicles. Wnat to be anonymous? Fine, hire a car and driver owned by someone else, that has that owners name and address on it, who in turn will be held responsible.
Get involved in a collision on a public road: Suspend all driving privileges until fault is assigned. Then continue the suspension for all at fault in proportion to that fault once assigned. Get involved in a fatal crash: Revoke all driving privileges for life for those found at fault.
Travel is a right, using a lethal machine to do so is not. Extending the ability to use that machinery by increasing perceived safety for the drivers, and shielding drivers from the consequences of misuse, without also holding people accountable for misuse will only make things worse.
It may be time to take a break from 'puter.
I thought this discussion was about legacy code.
I've nearly been killed on my bicycle by the elderly more than any other type of driver. They are so dangerous, this is the type of driver that rolls over toddlers without a clue. Wanting to keep them on the road longer is pure insanity... improving the quality of life (which is mostly over) for 1,000 of these people does not outweigh the life of one child. I am for mandatory road testing that increases in frequency with age after 65, and holding doctors responsible for negligent competency assessment, up to and including jail time. I don't care if Florence Fogerty gets put in a home three months sooner because she can't drive, get these people the hell off the road.
> The study identified ideas for in-car information systems to help compensate for the
> reduction in reaction time that affects many older drivers.
There are many more problems than reaction time.
Inability to see or hear as well is a problem, as is a problem of making fast decisions.
Many of the cases highlighted in recent years of older drivers driving into crowds or markets or shops were not caused by slow reactions, but by being unable to -decide- what to do to avoid the accident, do to impaired mental activity (brake? swerve? honk? crash!)
> Specific recommendations included a head-up display on the windshield that displays road sign
> information based on GPS position so the driver doesn't have to keep watching the road side for
> information
REALLY bad idea. GPS data is far too flawed even when dealing with relatively static information about the actual EXISTENCE of roads (versus planned future roads).
Add in the need to keep track of speed limits, warnings of 4-way stops, and changing road conditions (high water/bridge out, parade route, school in session, one-way restricted hours, look out for deer, etc.) and I see a MAJOR fiasco on the horizon if someone tries this.
> and a system to provide the driver with audible feedback on their current speed so the driver
> doesn't have to look at the dashboard so often.
That -might- be of value; however even there I would proceed cautiously. Paying too much attention to your own speed and not enought to the speed of the other traffic is symptomatic of some driving problems among the elderly. Driving at five or ten miles under the speed limit when all other traffic is running at five or ten over, slowing excessively when merging with high-speed traffic, etc.
In fact, I think my neighbor's car has a display on the windshield for the speed she's going. And the car is at least from the mid to early 90s. I don't know if it reads the speed limit, though.
Seriously? If you pause to think about the difference between simply projecting a digital readout onto a reflective patch on the windshield and recognizing and reading speed limit signs on the side of the road, I think you can probably answer your own question. No, your neighbor's early 90's car isn't reading the fucking speed limit signs!
If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
Antelope freeway 1/16th mile
That was Zen, this is Tao
Is it really solving the issue to give elderly people more distractions? I would assume they would want what they are already familiar with.
The in-car navigation systems have the voice component which is very nice. Those should have a heads up over the roadway which shows the path, signs, etc.
I currently live in Camarillo, CA. Might as well be a retirement town down here. I have almost been in 4 accidents in 2 months due to elderly drivers.
Most of them have a tendency to make a left turn from a stop sign into my lane of traffic while only going 20 on a 55 street. The pull out in front of me, I have to slam on my brakes, and then someone else causes an accident behind me.
This goes up to the point where elderly aren't in accidents, they cause them.
What about those of us who happen to be young and in need of assistive technology like this? Sure, elderly people often exhibit a great deal of symptoms which might require a whole system built for them, but let's not forget the thousands of other people with vision/hearing/slow reaction/whathaveyou that could benefit from all this. Way to limit the potential market!
Get me a meat pie floater!
You'd think that all this hoopla over global warming, urban sprawl, unsustainable development, economic collapse, etc., would remind people that if our society ever wants to crawl out of its hole we need to work on separating people from their cars. The car is simply not a viable system for transporting people. They're too big and heavy and expensive and dangerous in a million ways.
Yes, keeping old fogies happy is of course important to a society that values the well-being of its citizens. But a society in which everyone must drive everywhere is antithetical to the wellbeing of everyone. The more so because old people are allowed to drive, raising the danger for all road users, but if cars never had accidents the other costs would still be prohibitive.
By my math (from DOT statistics) about one person in 50 in the USA dies in a car crash, and other countries do even worse. That number could be affected by the number of geriatrics in cars. But how many die by illness brought on by the obesity that a car-based society promotes? How many will die by wars over the oil that we still depend on? How about cancer and other hydrocarbon-related diseases? Of course, eliminating all of these sources of death would increase the number of old people...
When will this absurd country pull its collective head out of its ass and invest in public transportation?
"The biggest problem with communication is the illusion that it has taken place."
Perhaps I'm veering off-topic-- this isn't a rebuttal to your entire argument-- but I've never understood how the "Driving is a privilege" idea was so self-evident. Ownership of property is a right*. Use of owned property, in general, augmented by specific restrictions where it interferes with others' rights or safety. There is nothing special about driving an automobile that implies that it is a privilege bestowed upon you by a benevolent overseer. You bought the car, and the roads are a commonly-supported public service. Saying driving is somehow a privilege just gives governments greater license to allow circumstances unrelated to safety or rights-collision to revoke one's right to drive.
Driving isn't a privilege, it's a right that is revocable if a person proves themselves to be a danger undertaking it. Now, I'm not saying that driving should be an irrevocable right, but the unfounded classification and citation of driving as a privilege just works to weaken the right.
Information wants to be free.
Entertainment wants to be paid.
You just want to be cheap.
So will this system help me drive home wasted? It's not my fault there aren't any bars I can walk to from my house!