Slashdot Mirror
Google Won't Pull Checkpoint Evasion App
RedEaredSlider writes "Don't expect Google to remove apps that help users avoid DUI checkpoints — the company says it is leaving the controversial apps on its Android Marketplace. A source said the company only removes apps that violate its Android content policies and the apps in question do not appear to violate these policies." We'll see if Apple caves to pressure to remove them.
I wonder if they ever consider that this may actually be persuading people to not drink & drive. They check their phone, see that there are some drunk driver stake-outs, and they take a cab home instead. I'm sure it doesn't happen in all cases, but if it helps in a few, that's a good thing.
Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
Apple is practically obligated to pull the app, given the fact they're willing to act as the morality police for their users, though it might take them awhile because they like to pretend they 'think different'. RIM is a lily-livered chicken with no willingness to take any kind of stand for fear of offending anybody. It's also not a surprise they pulled the app. And Google is standing by their principles, and won't pull the app unless its actually illegal.
The world is acting according to my expectations in this regard. And once again, its Google I have the most respect for.
Need a Python, C++, Unix, Linux develop
Why should they? Police in most (all?) areas are required to publish the locations of checkpoints ahead of time, so these apps are just making public information easier to find.
Whether or not the company I bought the device from blesses any particular piece of software is irrelevant, because I own the device after I purchase it and can install whatever software I want, from whatever source I want.
It absolutely astonishes me how many people are willing to live in a cage if it's shiny enough.
search engine? ad gimmick? same thing now? what's good enough for the kings.
top rated key word overlooked?
truth. there's no substitute. it's not a long story, & there's only one(1) version. locating it sometimes can be difficult, as it's not one of the few correctly answered (sponsor/product) searches.
Extra paranoid people can use these apps to find places where DUI checks are happening and be sure that no drunkard will be traveling through those paths!
If you're rational enough to pull out an app and plot a route home that avoids all the checkpoints, you're probably sober enough to drive. The problem with drunk drivers is that they DON'T think straight.
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
Good on Google. I never drink, maybe one beer a month with a meal or something. But I would use this app because I would be better off avoiding the stupid checkpoint.
Maybe they should just make the app harder for drunks to use. Make the screen rotate or wobble randomly or something.
I object to the content of this post on the grounds that it offended me. I vote that you be thrown in jail. Who's with me?
The app just collects publicly posted information about DUI checkpoints. It could be easily replicated in a for pay website which uses the browser API to grab GPS coordinates and fetch the relevant information. What happens then, are we going to come up with a mobile application website list?
so, you believe only drunks use apps like this?
sorry, I am not from america, but here many people use apps like these and most aren't too stupid to drive when drunk.
sure a few are, but are you suggesting you have that many more stupid people in america? (then the rumors are true...)
I think we should ban GPS as well, it makes people, especially drunks not having to care so much about the road since they can see every turn coming on their phone.
hell, as far as i know most people will flash with their lights if there is a random checkpoint somewhere, so people know to avoid it when they want/slow down.
The government should make the app illegal if they believe it is a problem for human safety. It is not up to the companies to police the app users.
also, random guess, conservative person?
Then chances are you're too drunk to use the apps. I can't imagine some drunk driver trying to use some Google Maps mashup on a phone to navigate around police roadblocks, let alone have the mental aforethought to consider using it. People don't drink and drive because they're evil-doers, they do it because they lack the sober rationale to realize they're not capable of driving in their current condition.
"Where is my mind?"
I don't drink at all, I can't for health reasons, so why should I have to wait in a long traffic line that exists (supposedly) to "catch drunk drivers", wasting my time sitting there in traffic while cops use it as an excuse to look over me, any passengers, and my vehicle so they can fulfill their real reason, finding things to write tickets for so they can get back some of the revenue they lost to shrinking tax bases states and the fed cutting revenue sharing...
All traffic fines should go to charity rather than the policing agencies/municipalities issuing them.
I wonder have just being clumsy but not drunk at all would affect their DUI tests....Obviously you'd pass the breathalyzer...
Organized resistance to the overlords FTW
The proper course of action would be to pass a law making these apps illegal and only then would they need to be removed, but of course such a law would be held to be unconstitutional so law makers are trying to bully these companies into enforcing a would be illegal law.
This application just allows users to enforce their constitutional rights.
Americans once had a right under the constitution to protection from illegal search and seizure. Now even someone who is driving in total compliance with the law is subject to being interrogated by the police and having their blood forcibly taken from them.
Personally, I'd rather not have the police stick me with a needle in violation of my constitutional rights.
This app will be very useful until unconstitutional police checkpoints can be banned.
In a strictly literal sense, the app in question is aiding and abetting a person to break the law. There is no other way to spin it, unlike the murky waters of file sharing apps where there are proven legitimate uses to it. If aiding and abetting does not break the ToS, then they need to take a serious look at changing it, otherwise the App store is going to become a cesspool of criminal tools.
Feed the need: Digitaladdiction.net
The age-old "yelling fire in a crowded theatre" is NOT an excuse to attack freedom of speech, let alone some kind of proof that freedom of speech "has limits". That kind of thinking is immature to say the least. Yelling fire in a crowded theatre is already the practical equivalant of tripping the fire alarm, and everybody knows it -- freedom of speech has nothing to do with this. When somebody trips the fire alarm without due cause, there are legal consequences, and rightfully so. Why do we need to invent a reason to attack free speech in order to solve this problem? The problem is already solved: put people in danger, and you are liable.
And this leaves us with only one conclusion: the people who drag free speech into this have a bigger agenda than simply holding people liable for putting others in danger.
Just re-brand the application as one discouraging drinking and driving.
obviously, this app should be banned. if you really have to wonder why, consider yourself amongst the fundamentalist idiots of the world.
A bit hypocritical, wouldn't you say? You're the one spouting fundamentalist FUD.
Its not Google's job, or even moral responsibility, to police our streets nor our people. They didn't create the app, and even if they banned it people could still get a hold of it (easily, and legally). In this respect, its imperative for Google to stand by its principles and avoid starting down the path of "morally superior control freak."
A real solution to the drunk-driving problem is autonomous cars. DUI checkpoints are simply a profit generator for the police and, IMO, have very little consequence on the amount of accidents.
People pay taxes. Corporations consider taxes part of their costs, and pass them along to the customers in the sales price, or deduct them from employee's wages -- economists support both POVs, but no economist says that corporations pay taxes.
Sales taxes are widely understood to be regressive, that is, having a larger effect on the poor than the rich. Corporate taxes on food and drug suppliers are equally regressive.
As for 'cheating', there is a serious distinction between tax avoidance and 'cheating'. Most corporations are strictly within the law wrt taxes, and Google is merely taking advantage of the laws as they are written.
Generally, tax avoiders have the same advantage as black-hat hackers, and for the same reason : writers of laws and regulations are fewer and dimmer than the people looking for loopholes.
"The Constitution, the WHOLE Constitution, and nothing but the CONSTITUTION."
We'll see if Apple caves to pressure to remove them.
Knowing Apple, they'll cave to whoever screams loudest.
Hey Steve, how is it going in your walled garden? I've heard the sun shines brighter there than anywhere else!?
Take care..
Rest of the world.
What if you object to the existence of the checkpoints themselves? DUI checkpoints are the only scenario I can think of where a refusal to be searched absent any probable cause constitutes the probable cause required to search you.
I don't even drink and I'd like to know where the checkpoints are just so I don't have my 4th amendment rights violated on the way home from work.
All they need is the first person to die in an accident that happens after someone uses one of these apps to evade a checkpoint, and the lawsuits and bad publicity will push them to remove them. Hopefully they get smart before that happens. "Don't Be Evil" - risking innocent death vs. whatever theoretical argument? Be reasonable, and pull those apps.
What if it was an app that helped people avoid hate-crime checkpoints?
I find checkpoints annoying, and I don't drink and drive. Seems to me if I want to know how to avoid them, I should be able.
It is common knowledge where I live that certain municipalities stop drivers at checkpoints, and then will not release them until they have found some reason to give them a ticket. They aren't DUI checkpoints. They are the modern version of "highwaymen". A few coins to keep the kings peace....
not drinking and driving is not driving at all
Yep. How many people here would be willing to eradicate an objectionable website from the internet? Probably none. So why are apps treated differently?
If this becomes normal attitude then websites are going to be next.
Granted, I really don't know a lot about this story, every article on it is a little hazy, but one issue, two really come to mind.
Why isn't the bar tender locked up when he says, "Be careful, there is a traffic stop 3 blocks away." I mean technically that is two counts of being an accessory to attempted homicide.
The other, how does the app maker obtain this info? Some states require that check points are made public, others do them at random. Using public information really isn't that different than owning a police scanner to know who is getting locked up, only the maker was too stupid to word their product as a "Tobacco pipe, only for tobacco, not crack, pot or opium; did you say something other than tobacco, sorry, you'll have to leave".
If the data is user reported and this is really that big of an issue why isn't someone like MADD downloading these apps like crazy and reporting that every street corner in America is a traffic stop?
In no way do I think that is a conservative position to take. I think its a retard position to take.
If I can just reach out with my words and touch a butthole, just one, it will all be worth it.
An app like this should be encouraged. These senators are trying to throw away a great opportunity to catch drunk drivers. Smart police (if there are any) could use this to funnel drunk drivers towards a particular intersection where their checkpoint is set up. Just sit down with a map, look at where the bars are, where the colleges are and where the residential neighborhoods are. It should be pretty easy to pick a small set of intersections that a majority of the bar traffic will pass through when the bars close for the night.
Use the app to announce fake checkpoints at the other intersections an hour or so before closing. Then don't setup the checkpoint until the last moment. All the drunks will come right to you! Cops used to do the same sort of thing via CB back when that was a popular way to avoid speedtraps. Stupid senators, ruining a good thing. They share the same half brain as the RIAA/MPAA crowd.
A real solution to the drunk-driving problem is autonomous cars. DUI checkpoints are simply a profit generator for the police and, IMO, have very little consequence on the amount of accidents.
Autonomous cars seem excessive, when there are safe, already available alternatives, like taxi service. Furthermore, in some cities there are FREE taxi service options such as this one for major occasions when folks are likely to be out partying.
Yes, and while standing shoulder to shoulder with drunk drivers and Google, we are also standing shoulder to shoulder with our local news papers, radio stations, municipalities, and police departments, seeing as how they are REQUIRED BY LAW to advertise the location of these check points.
It is unconstitutional to search or sieze an individual or their car with out reasonable cause. Being on the road after bar time is not reasonable cause. The only way that these check points have been able to pass constitutional muster is by advertising their existance (including the when and where) to act as a deterrant.
I loathe drunk drivers. I lost a girl friend and another close friend to drunk drivers. I left a company after the finding out that the CEO had been arrested for his 4th DUI. I'd love to see much harsher penalties for multiple offence drunk drivers. But the posting of these check points is a matter of constitutional law. If the senate were to forbid media industries from distributing this information, the check points would fail to pass the constitutional measure and would have to stop.
As much as I hate drunk drivers, I love the Constitution far more.
-Rick
"Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
He said that Google Said That "..the apps in question No Not appear to violate these policies.." Which is a double negative, which in turn means Google is going to pull the app right? RIGHT?
Lol, but seriously, how many DRUNKS, I mean genuinely DRUNK Drunks, do you know who can even use their cell phone whilst inebriated? Let alone operate an app that helps them avoid DUI Check Points?
I do not, nor shall I EVER, condone Driving While Impaired. However, I think a lot of people misunderstand the significance of this post. The point is that Google did not bend to the will of the Government and preserved the rights of the developer. I am proud of them for this move. Though the application is incredibly useless, people die from various means every single day. It is not important what the application is or is not for. It is important that Google did not give in to the Government Request and continue to set incredibly dangerous, and freedom reducing precedents.
Understanding isn't necessarily reflected in actions; but in this case I think flogging the censorship horse is a bit out of touch.
I think Apple bans apps based on brand positioning rather than morality or deference to authority. In short, they identify their products with creative, intelligent, well off people. They want people to envision their products fitting in at a well lit coffee shop with too many plants.
They don't want people to think iphone==mini porn device, or imagine a "fondle slab" in a trench coat.
Will they ban it? Depends what they view the net effect of banning it will be on their brand. In this way, they aren't different from other businesses.
If you take exception to their practices, nobody has impinged upon your freedom to not be their customer.
About 6 years ago GreenPeace did an article decrying the excess packaging of Apple products. Apple rejigged their packaging almost instantly. Not necessarily due to morality, certainly due to an image issue important to their base.
It seems to me that if you were sober enough to actually remember to use this app that you probably aren't drunk enough to get arrested for drinking.
Wanting to avoid having your 4th amendment rights violated is not a crime, yet.
No matter how many cops you see in front of you, make sure and talk to the one in the middle.
That is most likely the real one.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
Sorry, should have put a YMMV tag on that.
As another example, in Wisconsin, sobriety checkpoints are illegal.
-Rick
"Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
the problem is that people like you are so self deluded that you think you can drive after downing a few and expect the rest of us to suffer the consequences of your self serving attitude.
Everyone keeps referring to these apps as "Checkpoint Evasion" apps, implying their primary purpose is to help drunks dodge DUI checks. Both PhantomAlert and Trapster are primarily built to identify SPEED TRAPS, not DUI checkpoints. They just happen to allow users to tag checkpoints as well. I've been a Trapster user pretty much since it came out and have never seen a checkpoint listed. The "Buzzed" app seems to be focused on DUI checks and thus could be much more questionable, but again at least the other two are not explicitly for DUI checkpoint evasion.
I used to get high on life, but I developed a tolerance. Now I need something stronger.
If you have even a single drink, your reaction times go down and you're a little more likely to cause an accident.
More likely than whom? I've been playing car simulation games ever since the first force-feedback wheels were launched in the 1990s. My reflexes are probably much faster than those of the vast majority of drivers on the street. They could be impaired and I'd still drive more safely than many people who never drink.
Perhaps the law should not aim for a given alcohol content in the blood, but for the reflex times. Instead of a breathalizer, cops could carry equipment to measure reflex times or other factors that impair driving safety.
However, I have no illusion that some rational law like this could ever pass. There are fanatics who like controlling others, there are governments depending on money from tickets, there are too many people who are swayed by propaganda such as the one you mention: "drink a drop of alcohol and you become an incontrollable murderer" .
I read your comment as "Google is setting the bar high for other companies to stop being such dicks." I get it now though, pass the drinks.
You don't need an app at all. In Rio de Janeiro, where DUI checkpoints have become a daily occurrence and where there is a zero-alcohol policy for drivers, people have been using a Twitter feed to keep track of checkpoints. Any device that can access Twitter can be used, and it is free.
Scrooge had captured a Leprechaun and got him to show him where the gold was. He tied a scarf to the tree and had him promise not to take it off. With help from the boys, the Leprechaun was able to circumvent the promise by tying scarfs to all the trees.
Couldn't the cops just log into the apps and put in false info?
Wow, all this iphone stuff sure getting lots of interesting stories and I don't have an iphone. I feel like I'm missing all the action. I hear lots of it on the scanner, I have yet witness a 23103 (CVC for reckless driver) vehicle that's announced on CHP freq.
I drove by a DUI checkpoint, in opposite direction, on a late night. I was thinking about making a u-turn just to see what's it all about. but it was late and I just wanted to get home to sleep. oh well, missed the action on that one as well.
mfwright@batnet.com
dui checkpoints a re not just used for dui. they will write people up for any voliation. yes they might catch a few drunks in the prosses the relly drunk ones but most where warned to avoide it aruldy. its just pulling people over without couse witch is illagle but using the dui hotwords lets them do it anyways. take it to court and you win easly.
Checkpoint awareness promotes drunk driving the same way that birth control awareness promotes teenage sex. In short, it doesn't. I hate driving through checkpoints the same way I hate being groped at airports.
.... it seems to me is that RIM has actually already agreed to pull the app (from a link in the OP article : http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/126130/20110323/rim-research-in-motion-dui-checkpoint.htm ).
I've already ruled out Apple for my next handheld as I don't want to be tied to only what they approve of.
I think my decision of whether to go with Android or Blackberry has just been made for me as well.
The last time I saw a checkpoint in my neighborhood I used an alternate route home. Not because I was drunk. I hadn't had a drop of alcohol. It was because I didn't wish to have 30 minutes of my time wasted for the purpose of having my rights violated.
-- Will program for bandwidth
Good, just occasionally they live by their "Dont be Evil" motto.
Good to see. Hopefully more and more Civil (ie. Human) Rights related apps will appear until its a flood no little bureauhead can stop.
_Make the trains run past last call_ Serious. (not an issue everywhere, but in los angeles it is a huge one).
For the most part, people don't want to drive drunk. A $1.50 train ride out easily turns into a $150.00 cab ride back if you are just a few minutes late for the last train and there are huge swaths of LA that cabs literally just won't go at night. People are scared of getting stuck in the city, staying overnight on the streets isn't fun because you can't afford a cab ride back and the trains stopped. Once people experience it, they drive from then on, even though they probably wouldn't otherwise, just in case.
They don't even have to do a full schedule, just every half hour or 45 minutes would suffice. sigh.
http://notanumber.net/
Sure, if you live in a major city. Lots of the US doesn't have taxi service. And in those areas outside major cities where taxi service exists, its not typically reasonably priced.
To be honest, if your not drunk enough to still be able to operate a phone app, then your probably safe to drive..... (jk) hehe
Hey you assholes!
Publishing an upcoming DUI checkpoint is acutlly required in the DOT guideliness., This app fulfills that. Too bad you dont know shit about it. Dumbasses. Whjy dont you read about it instead of wasing your shitty time on here fuckers?
Police have no expectation of privacy in the performance of their duty. If they are in a public place, they have no reasonable expectation that their location be kept secret.
In Pennsylvania, police must publish ahead of time when and where they will have a DUI checkpoint, and place signs saying "DUI checkpoint ahead" in all directions beyond the first legal turnoff from the DUI location, to give people the opportunity to avoid it.
Further evidence that we shouldn't shed any tears when municipalities announce that they have to lay off police due to budget shortfalls. There's obviously too many of them, and they are very bored. If there's any cops on here, why don't you jackasses ever focus on solving REAL crimes. I have first-hand experience dealing with a situation where the police were given gift-wrapped evidence that someone had stolen firearms and sold them to a dealer at a gun show, and the police did nothing. Fuck the police.
you can sue for illegal checkpoint, abuse of authority, etc etc etc ... sic the local "consumer watch" reporter on them
Sounds like we will need a new Czar.
Brought to you by Trapster-Lite