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?
What a waste of effort.
As a mechanic, I personally removed, disconnected or otherwise rendered useless dozens of "spoken word" feedback systems on cars. They have been around for many years, doing anything from reminding you that your seatbelt is unfastened, that you left your headlights on or to tell you your door is ajar (No it isn't! It's a door!).
I did so at the REQUEST OF THE VEHICLE OWNER.
Once the novelty wears off, spoken word feedback systems are annoying as a kid in the back seat repeatedly asking "Are we there yet?"
Law, or otherwise, such a system would be disabled as soon as the customers patience wore out, and there will never be a shortage of mechanics willing to do it for you if the price is right.
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?"
Run Timmy! Run!
These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
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.
I don't know what the current numbers are, but as of a couple of years ago the story was that the leading cause of distracted driver accidents was messing with the climate control and radio. So, yeah, let's go for saving lives and make it so you can't change the radio station, volume, or adjust the temperature. There will probably have to be congressional hearings on whether defogging of the windows is worth the risk involved in enabling it. I guess for safety's sake we should just make defogging be on all the time, just in case.
I personally think that the real problem is people not giving the driving the attention it requires. Whether it's your child (my wife was once rear-ended by a woman in a SUV because she was watching her child in the back seat -- did I mention we drive an impossible-to-miss yellow car), having a beverage, or adjusting the climate control... You need to pay attention to the weapon you are steering.
Sean
With cars becoming all *-by-wire, if you are going to the effort to detect the phone being used, why not get it to shut the car down?
(Of course there are safety issues here, but you get my drift)
I lost me sig.
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'?
"Trying to get around a law aimed at safety makes the crime less safe".
Dumb. That's like saying the law makes bank robbery more dangerous. I hate government oversight as much as the next citizen, but this is a good idea. So long as law enforcement doesn't have a line into my car's logs or the warning mechanism.
I hate printers.
"How far have we drifted from "news for nerds, stuff that matters.""
Well, if you take a sip from the Firehose, you'll see that Slashdot is actually the new craigslist.com.
Most of the stories posted are just advertisements.
I'm not kidding. Go take a look.
The people that ignore those laws and accept the danger inherent in being distracted from driving don't do so because they don't know better. No, I'm not shitting you!
You can forget to put a seatbelt on, although it is quite hard, and you can easily forget to turn the headlights off. But you cannot forget that you are texting while driving. So unless this system pulls the car over at the next save opportunity and doesn't let you start the engine until you've put the fricking phone away, this won't do squat.
Everyone else who commented that there are other, and worse, distractions, are correct. But people talking on the phone is something that is so easily fixed with just a few bucks, that I find it really annoying that people still keep holding onto their phones.
The interesting part around here (Switzerland)? Most of those people don't drive cheap, old Skodas or Renaults, no siree-bob. They're usually wearing business suits and driving new Audi, BMW, Mercedes or Lexus. Now if a single mother of three without a job is on her way to an interview and needs to contact her potential employer due to a detour, that I could understand. Fifty bucks, to her, are probably a lot of cash.
But this guy with the 1000$ suit and the 130'000$ car just does not get to use that excuse.
by not showing characters texting or making phone calls while driving... People see their favourite actor doing it so they think there's nothing wrong with it...
Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
"...there are new applications in the works that could lead to a warning if we're driving with a cell phone in our hand"
Uh, I think the driver already knew they were driving with a cell phone in their hand; a warning seems superfluous.
"I like systems, their application excepted", George Sand (French)
The cell operator can detect that a user is moving. The operator may be able to warn the caller that the callee is moving (faster than a threshold), allowing for the caller to disconnect before it rings. Drivers should be able to opt in for this warning system so that passengers aren't affected by this check.
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
After one major display of crap management (leaving the annual budget till the night before he had to present it to the group CEO and then blaming the CFO when the numbers didn't add up) the CFO announced that he now intended to wait till there was a really heavy storm on the M42 and the CEO was driving through it, then call him and tell him exactly what he thought of him. This would surely result in his getting flattened by a truck.
Unfortunately we all got other jobs and left before the opportunity arose, but I still think it would be a legal way to wipe out very aggressive people.
From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
Look at the bright side. At least Slashdot is not posting stories about Tiger Woods and Sandra Bullock.
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?
The problem isn't the absent minded driver it is that humans don't multi-task. We have limited capacities and task switch just like a conventional CPU, and just convince our selves that this is multi-tasking. For example I can play (aka farm) an MMO and listen to a podcast, but if something important happens in the game I will blank out the podcast (and vice versa). This is because playing the MMO is just running on muscle memory and requires very little attention. However I can't really listen to a podcast and read because they are both using the same systems. Similarly you can't be paying attention to driving at the level needed to react quickly to an emergency AND be talking on the phone.
There is plenty of research out there that backs this up.
This is why radio, AC etc, all need to be in the drivers dash and controls need to be on the steering wheel. Drivers still get distracted but that setup minimises it and reduces the chance their eyes will be completely off the road.
P.S. If you think you can multi-task you are dangerously deluded and need to be kept off the road.
YIAAPS
========
CINC, 4th Penguin Legion
And you, sir, are missing the point. We will almost certainly ask our mechanic if he can disable some of the warnings in our car. Not because we dont wear seatbelts, but because the warnings are a nuisance, and sometimes actually dangerous (see below).
There is the parking assistant that beeps when you are close to an object in front of your car. Fine for parking. Drive slowly in a blizzard, and it beeps at the snowflakes, driving you absolutely nuts in the process.
There is the warning that an object is close behind you. This is supposed to detect automatically if you have a trailer. But sometimes it does not - for no reason we can figure. So you get to tow your trailer, with the car yammering at you the entire trip.
There is the warning for glare ice. Implemented so that anytime the temperature changes to 3 degrees centigrade, it warns you. On dry roads, on wet roads, it doesn't matter. It also doesn't matter if it has already warned you 10 times on the same trip.
Or even take the seat-belt warning: If I go shopping, or put my gym bag on the seat, the thing goes off. Do I really have to strap my groceries and my gym bag in?
Warnings with so many false positives are counterproductive. Either people find them so irritating that they disable the things. Or else they get in the habit of ignoring them. Either way, the warnings wind up useless as such - but they can distract at critical moments.
To illustrate that last: I was driving on nasty, icy roads. My car started to skid on glare ice (by the way, no warning, as it was below 3 degrees outside). At this moment, I discovered a warning I had never heard before: the car knew it was skidding and blared at me. Thanks a lot - I knew bloody well I was skidding, and I really, really did not appreciate that distraction at that particular moment in time.
Warning should (a) essentially never have false positives, (b) only warn you if it something you might not notice on your own (and can do something about), and (c) be configurable by the user. Sadly, car manufacturers don't seem to bother to invest the effort to meet any of these conditions.
Enjoy life! This is not a dress rehearsal.
Look at the bright side. At least Slashdot is not posting stories about Tiger Woods and Sandra Bullock.
... yet.
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
Just go the opposite way: Make your car controlled from your phone. Then concentrating on driving and concentrating on the phone are the same thing. :-)
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
If the steering wheel isn't being touched by both hands for at least 10 seconds whilst moving, sound the warning.
"Please use both hands whilst driving", it might need disabling though for amutee drivers.
From TFA: "It would seem natural, then, to offer motorists friendly, yet stern warnings about another bad habit: holding a cell phone while driving, whether for texting or talking."
I would rather there be no warning. The car detects that you're an idiot with a cell phone in his hand, the ignition shuts off until you comply with the law. Idiot - HANG UP AND DRIVE!!
And then, a passenger uses his cell phone, the car mis-detects it as you holding it and shuts down ignition just before reaching a railroad crossing. Due to the missing ignition, power braking now fails, and since you didn't expect it, you press the break too little until after the reaction time, which causes your car not to stop in front of the crossing, but exactly at it, where the train is just approaching. Now you have about five seconds to tell your passenger to put down the phone, restart ignition and get away from that crossing ASAP. Good luck!
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
You see a problem, where I see none. Just tell your passengers that cell phone calls have to wait until the car is stopped again. Geeeez, I'd be happy if they just put a faraday cage into every passenger vehicle in the world. NOTHING is so damned important that it can't wait for you to leave the vehicle. Now, you'll come up with yet another imaginary scenario, in which you are trapped in a burning vehicle or something. I have news for you - I've pulled two people from burning vehicles in my day, and watched three other vehicles burn to the ground. The telephone didn't save ANY OF THEM! People passing by saved all of those people from burning to death.
In YOUR scenario, just open the door, and get out of the way of the train. Failure to do is justification for a Darwin award.
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
People caught using a mobile when driving should have these installed into their motors, in the same vein as electronic tags. Friends can't call people when you're driving? That's your problem; maybe peer pressure will work. Driving is not a right, it is a privilege, and we take away other 'privileges' such as access to the internet and computer equipment for things that couldn't actually result in unnecessary death.
I got a ticket for driving while talking on a cell right after California enacted the law. I was at a stop light, my phone rang, and I answered it to tell them that I was driving and would call them back. I hung up, the light turned green, and I got pulled over and handed a ticket that stated I was being cited for (and I quote) "failure to purchase a BlueTooth device".
For optimal comment enjoyment, take red pill now.
Which Switzerland do you live in? Also living in Switzerland, I can tell you that there are plenty of cheaper models on the roads. Go look in the parking lot at the Migros (the largest supermarket chain).
What is different is that your car registration must be renewed every two years, and any significant, visible rust is forbidden. Hence, you don't find any rust-buckets or junkers on the roads.
Enjoy life! This is not a dress rehearsal.
Likewise, the same driver is cruising along doing the speed limit, talking about their depressing day at the buffet and SLAM, drives right into the oncoming train because they were more interested in their conversation than paying attention to driving.
Honestly, they have cars that can park themselves, and my GPS can detect people in the lane next to me. The system should pull them over to a nice safe spot on the side of the road out of the traffic lanes.
If your primary goal behind the wheel is not driving, then stay the fuck off the road so you aren't endangering everyone including yourself.
Make America grate again!
Why not? I hold my Android phone in my right hand often to switch my music, which is connected to my aux-port in my car. (there's no bluetooth in my company car, but I do love the 9.5mm aux port. A bluetooth headset while the Android is plugged into the aux-port works as well for controls on my headset resting around my neck but it's kindof a silly setup.)
If those alarms would fire if I were to switch my tunes (just slide over the screen for the "next random song") I'd be bound to CDs and wont be able to listen my podcasts.
car: "Put the phone down.."
"Just two seconds.. must.. find.."
car: "If you don't put the phone down I'll turn around"
".. good song.. next.. next.."
car: "You've been warned.."
"Oh no! Toyota-bug!!"
I think we can keep recursing like this until someone returns 1
"OMG LOL, this pissed of puertorican is flashing his lights behind me."
"OH GOD NO HE IS GETTING OUT HIS CAR LOL what to do."
"GPS coordinates are x:y. Please, need medic."
All jokes aside, your attitude in traffic is more endangering and agressive. I've seen enough people cutting of others to "show them a lesson", or to retaliate on a mistake they made in traffic or something they weren't aware about. It generates more agression, risktaking and by extension endangers more because you want to pick out 1 person that you feel at that moment is "out of line"?
Furthermore, you'd rather physically harm someone because he "could potentially have harmed you" or "brougth you into danger"? That's a double standard...
If people were more tolerant in traffic, less accidents would result of it. Sign someone you see texting or flash shortly with your lights (not agressively) to draw focus helps more then dragging someone out of their vehicle without even being aware whats going on or yelling at someone, it'll bring others in danger and you'd be doing what you are trying to avoid, right? Driving "defensively" (noticing the guy is texting or distracted and taking into account he'll react different and more slowly you can take that into account and change your behavior to avoid accidents instead of causing at least one on his face.) It doesn't make texting while driving "ok", but it helps reduce risk, we're with millions on the same roads every day, we have to look for eachother and kindof look out for those retards who can't think for themselves or see the "bigger picture", like we do for people who can't in other aspects of their lives.
I think we can keep recursing like this until someone returns 1
The "pressure" (actually it's a vacuum, but you can think of it as negative pressure) is stored in a reservoir. There will be enough to stop the car even with the engine off.
At the bottom of the
I've stuck some velcro on the back of my android phone and some on the dash of my car. Works well.
Meh.
Don't look for a solution in the cars, look for the solution in the phone.
Most if not all phones have some sort of GPS. Simply deactivate the screen keypad, and ringer and send all calls to voice mail if the phone is traveling faster than walking speed.
I read Slashdot for the headlines, because the headlines, unlike the articles, are usually original and never duplicated
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.
Your phone will tell your car to stop.
Anyway why do they build cell towers by the interstates?
Now really, maybe someone might forget about a seat belt but they aren't going to forget they are talking on the phone. The annoying alarm will just get disabled. It's not like you don't know you are on the phone and driving at the same time. What a stupid idea!!!
Or how about this one? The driver passes another person doing twenty miles over the speed limit because he's NOT using a cell phone, so he's driving 'safe'. But he sees that person using a cell phone and gets upset because he was more interested in someone else's conversation than driving. Because of this and paying too much attention to that 'unsafe' driver he rear ends the car ahead of him.
Cell phones are NOT the only distractor, not are they the biggest safety issue. Are you going to eliminate drinks in the car? why all the cup holders? Music in the car? get rid of all the radios? Annoying passengers? Make them all personal vehicles, only one person needs to be in the car. Too young/old to drive? Fixed age limits, already have them on the low end. No driving at night because the darkness keeps you from seeing the dangers. Road rage? Get a bike.
You want to fix driving errors, you need to address the core issue-the driver. Anything else is not addressing the problem, except for DUI which can affect even the best driver. Make the test include cell phone use and prove they can drive safely with it. Make it include eating a sandwich while driving. Make it include two screaming kids in the back seat and an arguing spouse. Make them either retake the test if they fail those parts or chip the driver's license to not allow those things.
Our founding fathers removed the guys in charge. Be American. Vote incumbents out.
eeeez, I'd be happy if they just put a faraday cage into every passenger vehicle in the world.
The millions of us with ez-passes might have a little problem with your plan ;)
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
Or even better, fit each car with a cellular phone jammer that kicks in when the car starts, so you have no way of making a call while driving. Fit the car with a "panic" button which makes a call to 911 and transmits GPS coordinates, so if you have an actual emergency you're covered, but have to pull over to send all your lulz and omgs to your bffjill.
How hard is it for phone manufacturers to make a handset with a Really Freakin' Loud speakerphone?
When I am not in my own car (with a car-kit) I use the iPhone's built-in speaker and it sucks badly. I end up holding the phone an inch from my ear and might as well just be using it normally.
Do you or your partner snore? - Visit www.snoring.com.au
Unless its mandated by law, I highly doubt many people would buy a car with such a feature, myself included. While I'm not one to usually talk on the cell phone, I do have the occasional need to hold the phone up to my ear... or go on speakerphone as to be inconspicuous... if there's a call that needs to be made and it can't wait til I reach my destination. The last thing I want while on an important call is the car issuing warnings or the cell phone asking me to press 7 to continue. I'm sure a large number of people would be in the same boat. (ok... bad choice of words :)
Yeah, since all the studies show that talking on a hands-free cell phone is just as distracting as talking on a handheld cellphone that's a great idea. As for your idea, why don't we put a device in cars that detects if you're smoking pot, then it shuts down the car, locks the doors and calls the police.
I am sick and tired of people wanting to pass laws/implement solutions to problems that don't address the whole problem and are redundant (that is they make specific things illegal that are already covered under more general laws).
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
We know that one of the dumbest things anyone has ever done in the history of mankind, bar none, is typing a text message while attempting to drive a motor vehicle
We should probably instead make cars that automatically wrap themselves around phone poles when their drivers are engaged in such activities, to spare the rest of the driving public from their stupidity.
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
but my wife is usually on the other end. It goes something like this, ...
Wife: Are you driving?
Me: Yes
Wife: While you are talking to me?
Me: Yes Dear
Wife: You know its not good to talk and drive, pull over or call me back when you get there
Me: Yes Dear
Wife: Click
Me: Hey Dude, what's up?
Friend: Not much, I thought you had to call your wife.
Me: I did, but she said to call her back later
To some extent, they already do. There are 'black boxes' of a sort in many cars already that record the last seconds of a car before a wreck, there's been stories on Slashdot already regarding these being used in court cases for evidence as to what was going on when and how...
And rest assured, if need be....more data as it is gathered will be later deemed necessary to "help law enforcement officials in their jobs". Scope creep always happens like this. That's why I am against most any thing like this which can help gather more data on me and my actions.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
What's an "ez-pass"?
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
I'd just as soon not have anything in there that could be gathering more data on me...to give out to law enforcment, or more importantly, the insurance companies.
I don't need the Nanny State in the car with me at all times...
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
Kentucky Fried Movie is still one of the funniest things that I've ever seen. :)
Sorry, I couldn't resist
http://tinyurl.com/y9cj9vm
Wh47 d1d j00 541, 31337 15n't t3h r0xor5 ne m0r3???
No need for crazy car-stuck-on-crossing scenarios...
I agree with beuges, there are plenty of scenarios where a cell phone is fine and or useful if a car is moving... especially if it's a passenger using the phone.
Personally I've never been a fan of driving while on the phone. The most I might do is answer the phone in case it's an emergency (sick relatives and such), if it's an emergency then if it's a conversation that's thought-provoking or will take a while to talk about then I'll pull over. If it isn't an emergency I politely say I'm driving and will call them back. Beyond that, the most I'll do is make a 10-second call saying "I'm stuck in traffic and will be late for dinner" or "I've decided to swing by the super-market, text me anything you think we need for when I arrive at the store."
With passengers you have confirming directions (if you got lost), communicating with people in your caravan, calling ahead saying you'll be late, etc. I don't appreciate it if the passenger is just having a long drawn-out conversation about nothing while I'm driving, but sometimes a call is needed. Beyond what he posted...
- Maybe you're in a caravan (which usually has multiple people in multiple cars). You want a line of communication available in case something comes up (traffic, getting lost, flat tire, etc).
Heck, at the risk of going against this sub-thread's though, I'll take it one step further and say that a cellphone in the car (without a passenger0 can be useful on rare non-crazy situations, usually more for answering the phone more than making the call.
- Meet us at Hospital X, relative Y is hurt/sick/etc -- you change directions and go to new location.
- Your son is sick/hurt, he needs to be picked up at the school nurse's office -- you change directions and go to the school
- One of our servers is out, is there anything we can do -- pull over and discuss the issue or tell them it will have to wait until you get home.
Simply because the grandparent has never experienced any of these, that doesn't mean they're invalid. And none of them are rare/crazy things like calling 911 because you saw a crime or are trapped in an upside-down car.
Absolutely!!
That is why I never txt or use my cell phone in the car.....it might cause me to lose control, and spill my beer.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
There are 'black boxes' of a sort in many cars already that record the last seconds of a car before a wreck, there's been stories on Slashdot already regarding these being used in court cases for evidence as to what was going on when and how...
It's a standard feature of OBD-II, and they not only record the 30 seconds before (and if possible, after) a wreck, but also after any event which the PCM believes is indicative of an equipment failure. The most severe error is stored, erasing any previously stored, lower-priority fault data. This is called the "snapshot" information and it has been used repeatedly to attempt to find the cause of accidents. Almost no pre-1996 cars do this, but there are some exceptions — as far as I know, all of them are automakers who moved to OBD-II ahead of schedule, e.g. Nissan.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Since we're on the topic of bad driving behavior and using technology to solve it, I have another question. If we're going to put sensors / software in our cellphones and in our cars to prevent cellphone usage while driving, why don't we put small transmitters on speed limit signs and sensors in cars to detect what the legal speed limit is? That way, our cars can know what the speed limit is, and prevent us from driving faster than that. I'm not advocating the idea, but I wonder why no legal body has tried to legislate it.
Specifically, a review of the Mazda Rotary Engine Pickup. In 1974 cars had the truly horrible seatbelt interlock system, which would kill the ignition if you didn't put the seatbelt on at the right time. Pickup trucks were exempt from the requirement, as well as many other safety requirements, leading to the following lovely little snippet of text:
"We found the Rotary's cab refreshing in one way: it is devoid of a bunch of buzzers and warning lights and the seatbelt interlock system afflicting today's passenger cars. Once again, we are left to our own judgment as to whether to belt up (we always do), or whether to leave the key in the ignition switch when leaving the pickup. It was nice. We felt almost like grown-ups again."
I have disabled my car's seatbelt buzzer. It's a much calmer place now. I still wear my belt every time.
All the more reason to keep my awesome 1986 Toyota 4Runner in shape. I get to tell the nanny state to go pound sand.
... "I can easily drive while texting, shaving, and putting on my pants, simultaneously. Why punish me when my uber-skills are vastly superior to everyone else on the road?" replies...
Any passenger using a cell phone for any reason should be okay.
Otherwise you might as well demand everyone in the car to wear gags, including kids and babies, in order to not distract the driver.
WE CAN DO THAT!?! Dang-it! If I had only known. Can we do it to wives?
Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
It is news fore nerds, even if it's just "news for nerds to ridicule". The suicide bombings in Moscow aren't news for nerds, they're news for everybody including nerds, unlike this story and unlike news about Linux or Microsoft or Apple or SpaceX or NASA.
If you don't want to read it, don't click on it. Simple. I mean, there are a lot of good, nerdy stories on the front page, there's no sense in bitching about one or two you don't like.
Or HIBT?
Free Martian Whores!
You want to fix driving errors, you need to address the core issue-the driver. Anything else is not addressing the problem, except for DUI which can affect even the best driver. Make the test include cell phone use and prove they can drive safely with it. Make it include eating a sandwich while driving. Make it include two screaming kids in the back seat and an arguing spouse. Make them either retake the test if they fail those parts or chip the driver's license to not allow those things.
THANK YOU!!!
Somebody else realizes the problem!
For years I've thought that the average driver's test could be passed by a small shell script. They're basically pushbutton tests. Turn here. Change lanes here. Do this.. do that...
They specifically state that they won't ask you to do anything illegal or dangerous. My first thought to that is, why the hell not?! If you ask them to do something illegal, and they do it, instant fail. How else is the examiner going to know if they know not to go the wrong way down a one way street, or turn left from the right hand lane, or whatever?
There's no need to think at all for a driver's test. As long as you can follow instructions, you pass.
I think it should include a component of "Look at this map. This is where we are. Get us to this intersection here."
Then the examiner shuts up, and sees what the driver does on their own.
That being said, there are people who can properly prioritize tasks in their head. There are people that can't. The people that can should be able to talk on a cell phone. The people that can't shouldn't. Simple as that. Yes, it makes road law enforcement a little more difficult, as what's illegal for one car isn't illegal for the car behind them, but that's what we pay the police for.
"City hall" in German is "Rathaus" Kinda explains a few things......
The "pressure" (actually it's a vacuum, but you can think of it as negative pressure) is stored in a reservoir. There will be enough to stop the car even with the engine off.
Not if you're driving a diesel.
"City hall" in German is "Rathaus" Kinda explains a few things......
When I read the article summary, I thought to myself: "What's next, localized automotive cell phone jammers?" If the car thinks you're talking on the phone it just jams the signal.
Um, how do you dive in/out a car? :P
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
... you're already unsafe. If you drove 12 hours a day, you'd be averaging more than 80 mph. Even if you drove 16 hours a day, you'd be averaging around 63 mph. So one of two things is going on here: you're either 1) driving at ridiculously unsafe speeds, or 2) you're driving so long without a break that your attention is bound to be wandering. Most likely both.
I agree with the larger point - when driving cross-country, it's just not practical (or necessary, really) to hold onto the steering wheel with both hands. But 1000 miles/day? Kind of a silly exaggeration.
Unfortunately, driving poorly is not an infraction that brings enough money in, so the police generally don't police for those infractions and instead concentrate on speeding, which brings in lots of revenue. I'd happily offer this service to the police department for free. This very morning I had someone pull out in front of me without sufficient room to do so, then drive 30% under the speed limit, then run a stop sign - in a school zone, and continue on at 30% under the speed limit, then turn right without using a turn signal. That's gotta be $300 worth of infractions right there, in less than 1/2 a mile.
If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
If you can't handle two tasks at once, then don't drive and use your phone at the same time.
Yeah...I'd like to find a way, if possible, to 'remove' this feature. I'm guessing it will likely need some kind of small charge or something attached to the chips..and use that to obliterate them somehow?
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
I prefer the CB radio for this...that way, all can hear the same thing..and you can talk to truckers to get 'smokey' reports.
I've found in the past few years..I've known where the cops were LONG before I ever got in range of my radar detector.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
Yeah...I'd like to find a way, if possible, to 'remove' this feature. I'm guessing it will likely need some kind of small charge or something attached to the chips..and use that to obliterate them somehow?
That's pretty much what it would take. I'm not familiar with PCM architecture (mostly I've seen the insides of old Hitachi OBD-I computers, which were usually called "ECU"s; PCM is standardized terminology) but the storage could be on its own chip or integrated into the core. Even in the early nineties while most cars were doing fine with 8 and 16 bit microcontrollers running at single-digit speeds, some manufacturers were already going to big 32-bit cores with everything integrated but isolation hardware. Tampering with it deliberately would certainly be evidence against you. Your best bet is to buy a classic in that region when cars started to get modern safety features, for example a W126-body Mercedes. They come pretty cheap, they're easy to work on, and they have no complicated electronics. Only the diesels get any mileage, though, and they don't have standard airbags for example.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
"- Maybe you're in a caravan (which usually has multiple people in multiple cars). You want a line of communication available in case something comes up (traffic, getting lost, flat tire, etc)."
I prefer the CB radio for this...that way, all can hear the same thing..and you can talk to truckers to get 'smokey' reports.
I've found in the past few years..I've known where the cops were LONG before I ever got in range of my radar detector.
I remember my my family doing that when I was a kid because a couple of times we went on vacations with family friends and had to take 2 cars. I also remember hearing the truckers.
By the time I started driving, I had a small handheld CB I kept in the car; mostly in case of emergency and such. I lost the thing when I lent it to my parents and their car was stolen.
Cellphones were obviously around by the time I got my license and were starting to become popular, but it wasn't incredibly common among teens yet. I didn't get one until around College.
Hey, I came into this life kicking and screaming, and I did NOT sign a contract promising to be a bundle of joy. In fact, I found my life's calling in the Navy. SOMEONE'S GOT TO BE AN ASSHOLE, so why not me? It sure beats being the bundle of joy, 'cause the outlaw and the assholes are always getting laid. Women LIKE the bad guys, and nice guys finish last in most races.
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
Come on, people! Mod Shotgun up! That's funnier than hell, and the next post should be an even funnier one posted by his wife!!
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
Yet another distraction.
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
That begs the question, am I obligated to collect evidence against myself....on/with hardware I own in a car that I own? Is it law I oblige this collection of data?
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
No. The first one that tries it will find itself under the knife to correct this defect, or if unable to do so, sold off and its manufacturer put on my shitlist.
http://www.xkcd.com/699/
Most human behaviour can be explained in terms of identity.
That begs the question, am I obligated to collect evidence against myself....on/with hardware I own in a car that I own? Is it law I oblige this collection of data?
IANAL, but you're prevented from messing with the computer in the states where it matters most; California, in particular, has an equipment requirement that prevents replacement of the PCM for on-road vehicles, except with a CARB-listed replacement part. AFAIK there are no aftermarket PCMs with CARB listing. In order to get certification you have to prove that your equipment doesn't harm emissions, and I suspect that a PCM would have to have an OBD-II interface to get a CARB E.O. number. But I'm no expert here, either.
However, even though I have no law degree I'm pretty sure that it's going to be a serious strike against you if you have tampered with a system known to bear witness against you without some good excuse.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"