Slashdot Mirror
Why Apple's DUI Checkpoint App Ban Is Stupid
hookskat writes "Reason.tv Editor in Chief Nick Gillespie reacts to Apple's decision to ban DUI Checkpoint Apps from the App Store, writing: 'Let me add something even more damning of this latest development in corporate cave-ins to legally protected free speech and I'm gonna bold it for emphasis: Some police departments actually supply the data used in such apps because they reduce the number of drunk drivers on the roads! Somehow, I'm thinking that Steve Jobs circa 1984...would have told U.S. senators sending threatening letters about computer-based info sharing to take a hike. Or at least to spend time on, I don't know, creating a freaking budget for the country rather than worrying about regulating something that helps reduce impaired driving.' Last month, after RIM caved on the same question, Reason.tv released this video on the subject of banning DUI checkpoint apps."
I agree.
The end.
From the summary on slashdot: "I'm gonna bold it for emphasis: Some police departments actually supply the data used in such apps because they reduce the number of drunk drivers on the roads!"
From the article: "Apps which contain DUI checkpoints that are not published by law enforcement agencies, or encourage and enable drunk driving, will be rejected...."
Does it really decrease the total number on the road, or only the total number counted by police checkpoints?
Also that old line on causation. You know the one.
Supporter of the +1 Over Dramatic mod option. In memory of apk.
This is horrendously bad for apple, cause if I think it's not cool, then I stop recommending it. I stop recommending it, they don't get sold. It took a lot of nerds to make apple get where it is today, IMSHO.
CS majors know the time/space tradeoff, but they never get taught the 3rd, crucial, tradeoff of the set: comprehension!
A motor vehicle with a drunk driver is a deadly weapon. This is our right under the second amendment.
I think the reason RIM caved so quickly is users can easily install apps outside of their 'App World' application.
I once took an excursion to Reddit, and later HN. Unlimited up/down voting sucks when dealing with a hive-mind.
Watch the video.
I once took an excursion to Reddit, and later HN. Unlimited up/down voting sucks when dealing with a hive-mind.
If you doubt something, research it. Then come back with your information.
Blanket statements against blanket statements yields politics.
"because they reduce the number of drunk drivers". Really? Where's the proof of this? And it better not be stats from DUI arrests at the checkpoints because well....you're telling them where you are, they go a different way. Not that I agree or disagree with Apple's decision but if you're gonna make such a "bold" statement you better be able to back it up Nicky G.
Still waiting for those facts.
No, he's right -- the burden of proof is on the one making the claim.
There's no -1 for "I don't get it."
i've run those kinds of apps before (trapster in my case)
and you know what i'm doing the whole time i'm running it? I'M LOOKING OUT FOR COPS AND STAYING VERY AWARE OF MY SPEED!
in other words, i'm being safe!
Is this news or an opinion? If you actually read the reasoning, Apple WILL allow apps which display publicly available data. If the police department did not release the data of their secret checkpoint then it's not public data. The End.
You mean like this one?? It's not in an app, but this is where the apps get some of their info from...
http://www.hcso.tampa.fl.us/DUI-Enforcement.aspx
Also, why are they banned? You can find them by driving around and seeing them. Why is the sharing of them, even if they are not "advertised"??
You'll be pleased to know that I just spent way too much time thinking your signature, the benefits of being able to use a superior force in a given situation, and the possible effects of the Ninja Kill Law when applied to clone armies.
Supporter of the +1 Over Dramatic mod option. In memory of apk.
dude makes no snese. if you actually read the apple TOS they say that it's ok if the police departments are releasing it.i it's onl not ok if its crowedourced.
-- Flame me and I will happily flame you back. Bring it!
This doesn't violate the first amendment, because the Apple App Store is definitely not a public forum. Apple has the right to ban any apps it sees fit, with or without good reason.
I also don't see how a DUI checkpoint app could reduce the number of drunk drivers. A determined drunk would try to find an alternate route home then to sit and sober up where they are.
If you haven't the time to watch the video (or maybe you're using elinks or something), they specifically cite the fact that police in Travis County, Texas have willingly supplied checkpoint data to Trapster developers.
And anyway, I don't see how these apps would help people avoid DUI checkpoints. If you're sufficiently wasted, then you probably don't have the judgment skills to use the app and avoid the checkpoint in the first place.
Freedom is drinking a beer in the park when you're supposed to be at work.
The rules specifically apply to checkpoint information that is NOT published by law enforcement agencies.
Section 22.8 of the updated App Store Review Guidelines reads:
"Apps which contain DUI checkpoints that are not published by law enforcement agencies, or encourage and enable drunk driving, will be rejected."
Some law enforcement agencies publish where DUI checkpoints will be located ahead of time, and these notices have been exempted from the ban.
Source
What the hell passes for "facts" these days?
Apple has *not* banned DUI checkpoint apps. Not even one. All of the checkpoint apps that were up on the store before today are still there.
What they have done is changed their ToS to be explicit about the listing of non-public information, which DUI checkpoints are *not included in* since the police advertise them.
How the fuck this ever (and in the previous article) got twisted into "Apple bans DUI checkpoint apps" is beyond me, other than some serious axe-grinding Apple haters are just making stuff up and posting it as news. Maybe the correction was sent to them via text message from Android, but it somehow got sent to a guy who cleans windows in Atlanta instead.
that Nick Gillespie doesn't actually read what he quotes?
Goatse, the idiot is using the same thoughts.com link.
Hey moron, try using different links.
Yeah, but both sides are making claims, and both sides are disavowing any responsibility to meet any burden of proof. Sounds like it's devolving into a "no, you go first" argument I have to occasionally send my 5-year-olds to time-out to break up.
Good work, Slashdot.
Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
Thanks for the food:
Favorites: ... new account to post that ... what a douche!"
"Ugh. Goatse. NSFW. Asshole (poster and picture, both)."
"Seriously
"You're a fucking douchbag." - "That is the most accurate comment yet"
"I hope you die in a fire before you are old enough to contaminate the gene pool."
"Death to all assholes - Let's put you first into the guillotine"
"Asshole... Ginormous asshole, in fact."
"Ugh. Goatse. You asshole."
"Better than you, you arse bandit."
Hate:
"I hate your guts."
"WTF you fucking asshole."
"Damn! Mod this fucker to hell"
"Fucking troll, do not click there"
"It would be more interesting if I had a piece of pipe and your face, in close proximity so I could smash your face beyond recognition,"
"You fucker" - "I had the same thought as you. What a fucking asshole. The link is nsfw."
"Bravo teeny bopper. You're a really mature mother fucker (or do you prefer father fucking? Damn you homo erotic shittter)."
"Wait! I think I hear your mommy calling to give your tongue a good soap washing. And maybe she'll execute you too"
"You fucking piece of shit!" , "You sorry piece of shit." , "You cunt.", "Fuck you."
"It's because of Assholes like you that I can no longer trust URL shorteners"
"I did not even bother to look, but this same idiot has been doing this for weeks now. Fuck off asshole."
"What a retard..... enough said...."
Funny:
"Didn't click it, but the magic 8-ball says goatse."
"Thanks, I'm reading slashdot in class like a good student and just got tubgirl'd."
"not gonna click it to find out, but I'd be surprised if parent's link wasn't goatse... It appears you would be correct sir. Why oh why do I always forget.."
"Watching second monitor, there was something wrong with the other screen. Control + w. Phew..."
"Doh! One has to also recognize data urls. *sigh*"
"That's somewhat clever, but some of us do know what base-64 encoding is."
"Can you not afford normal entertainment?"
"Hey family! Come look! They're opening the Google Talk client! Now, click here...... (sees goatse)"
"I tried to post warnings about the goaste loving jerk yesterday but was modded into oblivion as a karma whore"
"Turn on TinyUrl previews. It saves lives."
"Posting your picture online again?"
"Really? Are you not tired of this yet?"
"High likelyhood of being a Goatse link. Proceed with caution"
"This is grown up talk, 4chan is that way ->"
"Hey moron, try using different links."
Emotion:
"i WAS eating lunch you ass!"
"Oh dear god my eyes. Haven't seen THAT awful image in a while."
"My eyes are burning... argh! Damn you!"
"MY EYES... dude i am at work here "S "
"WARNING: Don't click on the parent's link! Damn goatse! The first I experienced, no less.
"Oh goddammit. I didn't need that right before bed."
"goatse warning! I'm still recovering."
"Please friends, I beg of you, do not click that link! Do not look at that image, whatever you do! It is a bad image! It is a goatse image."
Frustration: /. "
"Can someone make a fucking goatse blocker firefox plugin please? This is pissing me off now."
"I am sick and tired of that crap on
Philosophy:
"Goatse trolls are getting better these days..."
"Why the sudden coordinated campaign for Goatse? Is someone making money off this?"
"You're right, this is the most coordinated troll campaign in a long time. Multiple accounts, multiple pages."
"Urgh...dammit, am I the only one thinking the goatse trolls are getting worse lately than they have been in the past five years?"
"Who found a way to monetize goatse at this late date? If we got half the effort of that campaign on real stuff we'd all have better software by now."
"Boy Goatsex is out in force today... - Every topic is littered with them..."
"You can't actually expect the Slashdot users to actually know enough not to respond to a goatse troll, right ?"
"Can we start banning people wh
About the 1984 Steve Jobs part, As we know now that giant screen in the famous Macintosh commercial was not a prop, but rather a real deal space time communicator, where 1984 Steve received orders from 2016 Steve. Also the board removed Steve from his duties shortly thereafter for no other reason than "that communicator thing is really creeping me out"
That is the point. The Police know the people who check this app are going to be the kind of people who decide against DUI. The people who do go drinking and driving don't exactly have a a lot of foresight. If you plan your life enough to check a DUI checkpoint app, you are going to stay home, get a ride or take a taxi.
I assume you're talking about the government officials who are pressuring Apple, right?
I once took an excursion to Reddit, and later HN. Unlimited up/down voting sucks when dealing with a hive-mind.
RIM isn't able to. RIM can remove an application from blackberry world (the BB "app store"), but nothing stops anyone from just putting the application on a website.
RIM doesn't impede what applications YOU install on YOUR blackberry in any way.
I'm at a bar, I've had a couple drinks, but nothing excessive. It's not late and I can safely get myself home as I have done in the past, but there's a plausible chance I'd get busted for a DUI if I got stopped on the way home. I'm a little buzzed and 0.001% over is all it takes. I check my new iPhone app and lo and behold, there's a checkpoint on the only highway between the bar and my house. I don't want to spend the night in jail, so I take a cab instead.
That app would save me money and jail time, save my district a bunch of paperwork, and make the roads safer.
The other side of the argument is that people will know where the checkpoint is and try to drive around it. If anything, this being open should encourage better checkpoint planning. There are plenty of high traffic bottlenecks in every state, so that's a poor excuse. Worst case scenario is the appropriate side roads would need increased patrols.
If you're sufficiently wasted, then you probably don't have the judgment skills to use the app and avoid the checkpoint in the first place.
I just realized we should all be worried not merely about drunks on the roads, but drunks on the road trying to use their iPhones with this app (or any other app... text messaging, I'm looking at you...) while driving. Or even sober drivers, it they're trying to app while driving.
Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
The burden of proof is on the one making the positive claim.
Why does a libertarian like Nick Gillespie want to force a market participant like Apple to carry certain types of apps in its App Store? Last time I checked, the First Amendment was about the government abridging your right to free speech.
If people want DUI checkpoint apps, they can switch to Android or some other phone platform that allows them to run the types of app they want. The market will reward or punish Apple accordingly. Isn't that how it's supposed to work?
In many places the police are legally required to announce when and where they will be conducting DUI checkpoints. So, do you like apples?
Can someone explain how knowing where the DUI checkpoints are lowers the number of drink drivers? I'm not questioning it, it's just that I don't get the logic and I haven't seen any explanation of it anywhere.
Goatse turns me right on every time.
Not good enough.
and all you people need to stop being suprised when apple does something scummy. it's STILL not new.
- is because they plan to use checkpoints for more than just sobriety checks in the future. Say goodbye to the 4th Amendment and hello to FEMA camp abductions under the guise of anti-terrorism searches.
My mobile phone can already share location information via the browser. dart.org's mobile site shows you the closest bus stops, so creating a similar site that shows the closest dui checkpoints is certainly possible ... what would apple do then? ban the site from its browser?
If you're sufficiently wasted, you can't even get into your car. Or [insert almost any activity here] either.
I do not ever drink and drive (nor should anyone, it's just plain stupid and moronic), but I've sure been pretty wasted before. What a person can do while wasted is very dependent on the person. I've most definitely been able to use my phone after leaving a bar in a state that I'd surely fail a checkpoint. A statement like "if you're sufficiently wasted, you can't..." is meaningless, because it can be applied to almost anything. I once stumbled out of a bar and sat on the curb because I could barely walk, and used my phone to find the number for a taxi when my normal cab company of preference had a 30 minute wait due to a busy night. And I didn't even use an app, I had to bring up the browser and use Google to search, typing my query on an on-screen keyboard.
Bottom line: if you're wasted enough that you shouldn't be driving, it definitely doesn't mean you can't use your phone. Maybe for some people it does, but you definitely can't generalize like that.
Quote: Some police departments actually supply the data used in such apps because they reduce the number of drunk drivers on the roads!
You mean drunk drivers on the roads *they are patrolling*. There's the same number of drunk drivers either way. Actually I would argue that there are even more drunk drivers out there because they believe they can avoid being caught.
And I would much rather the drunk drivers be on the main thoroughfares where they would more likely to get caught, then to have them cut through my neighborhood in an attempt to not get caught.
I actually leave Trapster running with my phone in it's GPS cradle. Then it beeps and lets me know that I am approaching a traffic enforcement point, school zone or red light camera or any of the other helpful warnings it also gives me. It acts as a great safety mechanism to help me watch out for potential road hazards... including the police.
HTC EVO 4G LTE w/ CM 10.2 | NookColor w/ CM 10.2 | Samsung Epic 4G w/ CM 10.1
And anyway, I don't see how these apps would help people avoid DUI checkpoints. If you're sufficiently wasted, then you probably don't have the judgment skills to use the app and avoid the checkpoint in the first place.
There is a huge gap between the legal alcohol limit where driving is impaired due to lower reaction times and being so blotto that you can't use an iPhone app. If you can't use an app then you probably can't get the key in your ignition either.
I have known people who take back streets to avoid likely checkpoint areas (making it a more complicated route to navigate) because they knew that they would be over the limit. Being drunk doesn't instantly make you stupid, it starts by making other people look more attractive.
Call them donut Connoisseur conventions, problem solved.
Say, somebody DUI comes towards you... Can you shoot such person in self defence?
Privacy is terrorism.
Yeah, but both sides are making claims
It looks like he just asked for a citation.
and both sides are disavowing any responsibility to meet any burden of proof.
Neither of them said anything about doing that.
Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
HEY DONT MENTION MY FRIEND THE HOSTS FILE TROLL, OK? - Rachel
Why does the lameness filter stop me from posting the above, but will allow others to do it? HTML entities for capital letters? Maybe this will balance it out...
This tagline was transcoded to result in at least one smirk. If you experience failure to smirk, please consult your Gen
Don't confuse the idea of "free markets" spoken of in the realm of economics with the idea of "free" markets where buyers and sellers have the freedom to do whatever they want.
In fhe former, buyers and sellers always act rationally, that is to say sellers always sell at the maximum price that they can get for a good and buyers always buy at the minimum price they can pay for a good. The equilibrium between price taking and price setting is supposed to produce the most efficient price.
Contrast this with a market where sellers act against their economic interest as the result of various other interests. For example, a shop keeper might want to refuse serve customers whose skin hue is a particular shade. Another shop keeper might want to refuse to stock merchandise by a manufacturer that implicitly (or explicitly) supports certain political causes. And then, there are the buyers. Some consumers might choose higher priced items that are functionally equivalent based on ideological reasons. Other consumers might choose to buy products based on advertising campaigns rather than on whether the product actually meets their needs. The market where this sort of thing is "free" in the laissez-faire sense of the term. But it is not the "free market" of Neoclassical economics.
Ultimately, libertarians have to decide whether the freedom of the seller to sell (or not to sell) takes priority (or not) over the freedom of they buyer to buy (or not to buy). Some try to argue that there is no tension in these freedoms. They are deluded as the lunch counter boycotts of the sixties demonstrated. Libertarians that are not deluded sometimes come down on the side of the sellers and sometimes on the side of the sellers. And, very infrequently, on the side of neither in support of the "free market" of Neoclassical economics.
Huge gap? Not really. You don't know what the limits really are
Go get a good testing device. Get drunk to 0.11%. You'll have trouble finding your keys. It's scary, and why most states moved the limit down to 0.08%.
There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
The scariest part of these apps for me is that they may allow someone to drive home impaired without being caught. Possibly driving further than they normally would to avoid the checkpoint. Possibly getting into an accident.... If even one person does this, it's one too many.
R.Y.O.F.A.
Just in case someone really believes it's not a fact...
I work for "the media" and receive emails from my city's police department .. oh, every couple weeks .. telling me exactly when they're going to have a checkpoint and in what neighborhood. Really. These are emails from the police, days in advance. I don't know if this includes every DUI checkpoint, though it might.
My understanding (which could be wrong) is that if they didn't do this, the checkpoints would would be illegal (or "more" illegal in some people's view). If the public (theoretically) knows where the checkpoints are, then people must be "choosing" to drive to those checkpoints, rather than getting randomly searched for no reason. At least I think that's the logic. But the notices directly from the police are very real.
You know how Bart Simpson tells his sister Lisa that he's going to swing his arms around and if she gets hit, it's her fault? And then he does it? Something like that.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
No, states moved the limit down to 0.08% because the feds made them do it (on pain of losing highway funding). The feds did it because the neo-prohibitionist lobby groups like MADD waved the bloody shirt until they did.
A BAC of 0.08% is low enough to make the classic "2 beers" illegal in many people. The idea isn't to prevent drinking and driving; it's to prevent drinking by making it impractical to get home from the bar without risking jail time.
Out of curiosity, at what point does the existence of the checkpoint itself count as "published by law enforcement?" At the very least it would be at the point where the first ticket was written, since the ticket is a public record and it contains the address closest to the infraction. Right?
What bothers me about this is that Apple has, essentially, banned an app for publishing a certain class of facts. Is there any way that this sounds OK once it's been framed that way? I get the motivation but I'm just not willing to advocate for censoring facts unless you prove to me that there's no viable alternative.
if (SteveJobsIsAGiantFlamingVagina = true)
{
int buyandroid ()
}
else
{
SteveJobsIsAGiantFlamingVagina = true
cout "Duh!";
break;
}
I for one welcome our new Twitter banning overlords
In 1984 Steve Jobs replaced the fabulously open Apple ][ with the incredibly closed Macintosh.
Apple's 1984 campaign was clever marketing not a presentation of Steve Jobs' personal philosophy. Jobs has always been a slick character. He only played the freedom card in to serve himself. He hasn't changed a bit.
Nick Gillespie should know better. Perhaps he's being disingenuous to try to get some shame leverage here. But he ought to know Jobs has never given a damn.
He hung out with people who blueboxed AT&T. Now he's partnered with them. He made PCs for the masses. Now he controls tiny little PCs used by the masses.
Revolutionaries have a bad habit of ending up worse than what they revolted against. This makes Woz that much cooler, since he didn't fall into that trap.
Saying it's "stupid" somehow makes your argument look lame, kind of like calling that someone you don't like a "big poopy head".
Flat out, it's police-state anti-democracy in action. Apple caved to political pressure placed upon it by sleazy politicians pandering to police organizations/unions.
I'm positive that god doesn't exist.
The FACTS are that DUI checkpoints are only legal in the U.S. if the police department informs the public in advance where and when they will be. So, in order for a DUI checkpoint to not be considered a violation of the Fourth Ammendment, the police department MUST provide such data to the public.
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
FTA: Somehow, I'm thinking that Steve Jobs circa 1984...would have told U.S. senators sending threatening letters about computer-based info sharing to take a hike.
All companies that go public will eventually drop or morph core values when these conflict with shareholder value (variously defined as profit or share price). Apple are no different.
Backward%20compatibility%20is%20over-rated
Talking about search points which are legal yet unpublished. This pretty only things these guys are talking about. It has nothing to do with DUI; http://www.frtv.org/2010/06/constitution-free-zone-border-patrol-security-search-and-seizure-laws/
You're only reading the charts that tell you that. Try it in real life.
Go get drunk to 0.11%. See if you'd feel safe driving a car.
There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
Does it occur to the writer that the only people that would use these dui avoidance apps are intoxicated, driving and actually need to avoid dui checkpoints? And the only people who are upset by this app ban are the people who need to use the apps, who should also be calling a cab? It might not occur until someone smashes into you or a friend, who shouldn't be driving because of alcohol.
Right .11% is kind of a pointless number. It's .08% that is easy to hit without drinking much.
Belief? Hope? Preference?The Existential Vortex
I think you can cut out a few words from the title: "Why Apple is stupid?"
Most geeks spend so much time in basements that being at ground level gives us^H them vertigo.
What's more, they're so physically uncoordinated that if you put them on a pedestal we, umm, they'd fall off.
Luckily, most geeks are smart enough to know that and take active steps to avoid pedestalization.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
.11% used to be legally drunk (over .10) which is why I used it, and as an example of why they lowered it. You are drunk at that point.
There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
How about a different hypothetical situation. One where I am driving home completely sober. I happen upon a DUI check point and the PIGS there are being their usual piggy selves. So I swipe one of their guns and blow them all away. Wouldn't there have been less death and destruction if I had checked the app and taken a different route home.
These hypothetical situation stories are fun!
-- ssoorrrryy,, dduupplleexx sswwiittcchh oonn.. -Quote found on actual fortune cookie.
There's two sets of charts. The ones they trot out when lobbying for reduced BAC levels, which are based on 12 oz of 3.2 beer or something similar. And the ones they trot out after they've gotten the laws passed, which are based on 16 oz of 5% beer. It's the latter that show that two beers put me right at the limit.
Which makes no sense at all. Shouldn't they be happy that Apple is free to do whatever the fuck they want?
Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
GMHOWELL's an ADMITTED TROLL: HIS OWN WORDS PROVE IT HERE http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1907528&cid=34543612 You're online trolling trash gmhowell, period. Nobody takes your "kind" seriously online. Get used to it.