Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

FCC/DOT Want High-Tech Cure For Distracted Driving

Posted by timothy on from the by-which-I-mean-actual-korea dept.

coondoggie writes "The Federal Communications Commission and the US Department of Transportation are teaming up to develop what they called high-tech solutions to the growing problem of distracted or inattentive drivers. The DOT and FCC said they will set up a working group to evaluate technology-based answers to the distracted driving problem and will improve outreach efforts to educate the public about the dangers of texting while driving, talking on cell phones while driving, and other distracting behavior that can lead to deadly accidents, the agencies stated." Meanwhile, Korea has overturned a ban on dashboard TV-watching for taxi drivers.

3 of 432 comments (clear)

  1. Here's the cure by camperdave · · Score: 4, Interesting

    You want a high tech cure for distracted driving? Easy. Get rid of the driver.

    --
    When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    1. Re:Here's the cure by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 4, Interesting
      My argument is that if you want to have children, you should have to shoulder more of the cost to have them. You get federal and state tax deductions for having children, the ability to get pre-tax money out of your paycheck to pay for their daycare, very close to zero cost primary education (where I live in Illinois, you pay about $150/year to send your child to school), and that's just to start.

      I want to live in an educated society that promotes personal responsibility. That doesn't mean couples with children should get to freeload on everyone else's hard work. Be prepared to shoulder the costs you've incurred by the decisions you've made, or don't make the decision. It's that simple. Anything else is whining.

  2. Re:Why bother? by DerekLyons · · Score: 4, Interesting

    So, what exactly is the problem they're trying to solve?

    It never occurred to you that just because nobody died in the accident that doesn't mean there weren't other consequences?