Slashdot Mirror
Will Your Car Tell You To Put Down the Phone?
crimeandpunishment writes with this story from the AP: "We know it's dangerous to text while driving, or talk on a cell phone without using a hands-free device. What if our car knew it as well, and warned us about it? Our cars buzz and beep at us when our seatbelts aren't buckled ... now there are new applications in the works that could lead to a warning if we're driving with a cell phone in our hand."
Will Timothy post another article asking a vague, sensationalist question in the title? The answer may surprise you.
I thought it was still up in the air. Isn't the distraction being on a call?
How about the headlights flash when the driver is using their cell phone so everyone else knows to dive out of the way?
"Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
The article only seems to mention smartphone apps, which doesn't seem optimal to me.
What about pressure monitors in the steering wheel that sound an alarm when they don't feel anything for more than, say, 30 seconds? Sure it might annoy those who prefer driving with one hand, but I suspect driving with two hands might be inherently safer anyway. Pressure monitors would also prevent you from fiddling with the radio for too long, and would work for people without smartphones - or people you lend your car to.
I'd rather you rationally disagree than irrationally agree.
It's a social problem. No amount of gadgets is going to stop idiots from wanting to yammer away instead of paying attention; witness the mechanic in this discussion mentioning how many of those warning systems he disconnected.
The solution is brutally simple: three strikes, and you're out. Three tickets for driving while on the phone? Lose your license. Need your car for work? You should have thought of that and moved to the side of the road before dividing your attention between traffic and your important conversation.
Otherwise it is time for some good old vigilantism and just shoot them in the head. It's not as if they have any brains to splatter the inside of the car, so that keeps its resale value.
Mart
"I know I will be modded down for this": where's the option '-1, Asking for it'?
As a non-mechanic, I have disabled the seat belt warning on my own car. I'm mostly driving a few kilometers, I don't like to buckle up for a 1-minute drive. So i plugged the passengers belt in the drivers sensor. No reminders. :-)
That's stupid. Most accidents occur at low speeds. You may not fly through the windshield but it still trivial to get permanently mangled.
As a student who is required to take ergonomic/applied psychology papers, I can assure you that this is just false.
Studies show, very clearly, that hands free devices have almost exactly the same magnitude of effect as just talking on a cell phone. The problem isn't only having one hand, the problem is that your attention is divided.
Example source (there are actually hundreds of studies reproducing these results): http://pss.sagepub.com/content/12/6/462.abstract
You of course have the right to determine whether or not you wear a seat belt in your own car or in another car you are riding in. But you have no right to determine whether or not I wear a seat belt in my own car (and I don't and won't). If you would like to start making my car payments and insurance payments, I'll be more than happy to let you make seat belt decisions for me.
I want a new quote. One that won't spill. One that don't cost too much. Or come in a pill.
you could probably fit a hands free phone into the car for the same price?
That sounds fine to me, so long you pay your own medical expenses, as well the expenses of whoever/whatever you happen to hit if you fly out of the windshield. After all, according to your own logic, other people shouldn't be paying for you either.
I'm still a big proponent of the USD—the "universal safety device,"
It's a railroad spike sticking straight out of the steering wheel.
The way some people drive, they'd probably use it to hold their doughnuts and completely ignore the danger.
These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
No need for crazy car-stuck-on-crossing scenarios...
- I'm driving, my passenger is on the phone, relaying landmarks to the person on the other side, and giving me directions as I drive. ("Ok, let me call you back after the next two turns and we've come to a safe stop because driver Runaway1956 doesn't want me to talk on the phone while he drives")
- I'm driving, we pass a big traffic jam, my passenger calls others that we know will be taking the same route, advising them to take another route ("Yeah sorry dude, we saw the traffic jam you got stuck in 15 mins before you left the office, but I had to wait until Runaway1956 stopped the car in order to call and let you know about it and of course by then you were already stuck")
Those are both completely legitimate scenarios of a passenger using the phone while the car is moving. You must be a bundle of joy, demanding that your passengers hand over their cellphones to be locked up until the car is at a safe stop.
It wouldn't work in this case. You can't drive until you're sixteen, and by then the idiots that would even get in a car like that would already have three kids.
Free Martian Whores!
because only rednecks are bad drivers?
I'm just as likely to see a guy with a suit in a beemer fooling with his blackberry on I95 as I am to see a teeny-boper txting her bff.
Because the speed limit has nothing to do with safety and everything to do with revenue generation. They WANT you to speed. Thats why the speed limits are set so stupidly low. Many cities would be financially screwed without the income from speeding fines.
Autobahns in Germany are a great example that humans are quite capable of driving fast, safely.
If they REALLY wanted to increase road-safety in the US, they should make the driving test a lot tougher. Like at least as tough as it is in Europe.