Slashdot Mirror


UAE Police Claim BlackBerry Outage Made Roads Safer

An anonymous reader writes "Road traffic accidents in Abu Dhabi and Dubai plummeted last week — and the local police have a theory as to why: drivers' BlackBerrys weren't working. Police in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) have claimed that last week's worldwide BlackBerry outage, which frustrated business people around the world who were unable to communicate with their colleagues, had one positive result — less texting and reading of emails by people who should have been concentrating on driving instead. There could be other factors at play, however. For instance, popular UAE soccer player Theyab Awana was killed in a high speed crash near Abu Dhabi in September, amid claims that he was sending a message on his BlackBerry when he hit a lorry. The football star's father, Awana Ahmad Al Mosabi, made an emotional plea to people not to use smartphones while driving, and a Facebook campaign against the use of BlackBerry Messenger while driving has grown in popularity."

206 comments

  1. "campaign against the use of ... while driving" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Yes, blame BlackBerries and their incredibly difficult to type on keyboards.

    In all seriousness, though, why isn't it a campaign against texting while driving?

    1. Re:"campaign against the use of ... while driving" by jhoegl · · Score: 2

      It is, the Blackberry outage is a proof of concept as it were.

      Much like guns... Blackberries dont kill people, idiots who text while driving do.

    2. Re:"campaign against the use of ... while driving" by the+linux+geek · · Score: 2

      You've never used a full-sized Blackberry (Bold, Tour), have you? The keyboard on my Bold is the best of any cell phone I've ever used, including Droid2, N810, and various virtual ones.

    3. Re:"campaign against the use of ... while driving" by tqk · · Score: 3, Interesting

      You've never used a full-sized Blackberry (Bold, Tour), have you?

      So, it was the fault of them not using full-sized keyboard BBs that was the problem? And you now feel safe texting while driving?

      --
      "Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit ..." -- Pink Floyd.
    4. Re:"campaign against the use of ... while driving" by ctrl-alt-canc · · Score: 1

      The problem is not only about banning texting. All the activities that can distract the attention of a driver should be heavily limited: phone calls, using ham radio/CB equipments, and so on. Some serious accidents happened here in Europe simply because the driver was busy tuning the car radio. Now car radio market is offering DTV/DVD on board: can you imagine the consequences ?!? I don't think that placing a sticker saying "don't use this product while driving" will avoid car accidents, isn't it ?!?

    5. Re:"campaign against the use of ... while driving" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You know you can't get hit when you text on a technological marvel that is the iPhone.

    6. Re:"campaign against the use of ... while driving" by Krneki · · Score: 1

      Yes, blame BlackBerries and their incredibly difficult to type on keyboards.

      In all seriousness, though, why isn't it a campaign against texting while driving?

      Why bother, when natural evolution can solve this problem?

      --
      Love many, trust a few, do harm to none.
    7. Re:"campaign against the use of ... while driving" by Krneki · · Score: 1

      Yes, blame BlackBerries and their incredibly difficult to type on keyboards.

      In all seriousness, though, why isn't it a campaign against texting while driving?

      Why bother when natural evolution can solve this problem?

      --
      Love many, trust a few, do harm to none.
    8. Re:"campaign against the use of ... while driving" by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      qwerty kb needs two hands - AND a new user is likely to look at the kb while typing. those kb's are fast to start typing on though.

      but if you're on the level of blind typing on a 9 pad, the chances are you could actually keep an eye on the road... if not, it's likely you're not even going to try.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    9. Re:"campaign against the use of ... while driving" by squizzar · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Because as someone who also uses the roads I'd prefer not to be selected out of the gene pool by some cunt who has some desperate need to send texts and make calls whilst in the middle of dense, fast moving rush hour traffic. Not all rules are there to protect you from yourself...

    10. Re:"campaign against the use of ... while driving" by uxbn_kuribo · · Score: 1

      because natural selection doesn't take into account the intelligent getting killed off by idiots swerving into their lane?

      --
      No portion of this post may be rebroadcast without the express, written consent of Major League Baseball.
    11. Re:"campaign against the use of ... while driving" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      but if you're on the level of blind typing on a 9 pad, the chances are you could actually keep an eye on the road... if not, it's likely you're not even going to try.

      This was the point I was going to make - I used to be able to blind type on a numeric pad (it came in handy during my brief stint doing telephone tech support, being able to send text messages out of sight of the draconian supervisors), I find it impossible using a touch screen. I wonder if this is a deterrent to people writing messages while driving (the fact that they have to fully divert their attention from the road) or whether they still do it and it just makes them far more dangerous. I know personally I sent a few text messages back in those days, I'd never do it now, I won't even read a text message while I'm driving, the touch screen interface demands too much attention.

    12. Re:"campaign against the use of ... while driving" by delinear · · Score: 2

      That's true, but you can only go so far before it potentially becomes counter-productive. Fiddling with radios, for instance, might lead to accidents. The obvious answer is to ban radios, but how many lives does the radio save by keeping people awake and alert on long, boring road journeys? The answer is to make the interface less obtrusive - I can change volume and station without my hands leaving the steering wheel now. Something like Siri/Google voice controls might eventually do more to save lives than a blanket ban that people just ignore because they feel it too intrusive (we have such a ban on using a phone here in the UK, yet I frequently see bad driving from people who turn out to be using a mobile).

    13. Re:"campaign against the use of ... while driving" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Using any form of handheld mobile device while driving in the UK is an offence, so even changing your destination on your SatNav can land you with a minimum of 3 points on your driving license and £60 fine.

    14. Re:"campaign against the use of ... while driving" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why bother when natural evolution can solve this problem?

      And what happens to the poor sod who gets hit by the idoit texting on the phone?

      It would be natural selection if only the morons were killed, and not innocent bystanders as well.

    15. Re:"campaign against the use of ... while driving" by tinkerton · · Score: 2

      This is why drinking improves road safety: when you're drunk it's much too hard to use those little buttons so at least you have your eyes on the road.

      Hey I have the right to have an opinion!

    16. Re:"campaign against the use of ... while driving" by Krneki · · Score: 1
      Ask God, I didn't make natural selection nor I support it.

      P.S: Apparently God didn't either. You could ask Darwin, but I don't think he is available.

      --
      Love many, trust a few, do harm to none.
    17. Re:"campaign against the use of ... while driving" by Rude+Turnip · · Score: 1

      Bull-shit. The first rule of freedom is that you're free to swing your fist as long as you don't hit someone's nose.

    18. Re:"campaign against the use of ... while driving" by N0Man74 · · Score: 2

      Why stop there? There are other many things that have been proven to be distractions as well.

      We should outlaw children riding in the car, talking to other passengers, and attractive members of the opposite sex sitting in the passenger seat.

      In fact, it's been shown that there is a rise in accidents from male drivers during spring and summer months, which is believed to be due to the increase of females wearing more shorts or other more revealing clothing. We should ban female pedestrians too, to prevent accidents.

      Then we should outlaw scenic routes. You are driving to get somewhere, not for scenery. Scenery is just a distractions.

      Driving in to sunrises or sunsets can cause problems too. We should outlaw the movement of the sun in the sky.

      What else am I missing?

    19. Re:"campaign against the use of ... while driving" by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      Nerds and Geeks should be very careful about recommending Natural Selection.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    20. Re:"campaign against the use of ... while driving" by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      Then we should outlaw scenic routes. You are driving to get somewhere, not for scenery. Scenery is just a distractions.

      Reminds me of one offroad rally I was on, I crested a hill with a great view of the jungle valley below with clouds floating below me and the ocean in the distance. I'm sure it was an awesome sight but I barely had time to flick a glance at it since I was driving flat-out on a crappy narrow road with the cliff with the breathtaking view on the left and trees on the right. I really wanted to look but it wouldn't have been safe.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    21. Re:"campaign against the use of ... while driving" by jhigh · · Score: 1

      Agressive action toward another is a different story. We're talking about one person doing something that you deem threatening, not that is intentionally threatening. Guess what? There are people out there that are worse drivers when they're paying attention than I am when I'm talking on the phone - who gets banned then? This is you foisting your subjective ideas about safety on everyone else, not acting in self defense. Let's ban eating while driving, putting makeup on while driving, talking to passengers, having passengers, etc, etc, etc...the list is practically endless of things that a person does while driving that someone else might consider unsafe. I would bet money that you don't follow speed limits - almost no one does. Why not? Isn't willfully ignoring speed limits, by your definition, you swinging your fist at my face? Of course not. Your analogy is as stupid as these nanny state laws are.

      --
      Social Engineering Expert: Because there is no patch for stupidity.
    22. Re:"campaign against the use of ... while driving" by srussia · · Score: 1

      What else am I missing?

      Eva Herzigova

      --
      Set your phasers on "funky"!
    23. Re:"campaign against the use of ... while driving" by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      I agree with you. We don't need the government making up a new rule to tell us how to live. After all, everyone with more than 1/4 of a brain already KNOWS that texting while driving is stupid, so why do we need to make a law about it?

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    24. Re:"campaign against the use of ... while driving" by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      Nerds and Geeks should be very careful about recommending Natural Selection. Why is that? Nerds and geeks are more likely to make a stable living when they grow up. Sure all the girls want the jocks in high school, but at some point those girls grow up and realize that they want somebody with a job. Besides, as nerds and geeks grow older, they get more distinguished, while the jocks just turn into mush.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    25. Re:"campaign against the use of ... while driving" by Iamthecheese · · Score: 1

      Far fewer than you would think. Loud music makes drivers think they're safe but they fall asleep almost as fast. I can't find the study but there is one.

      --
      If video games influenced behavior the Pac Man generation would be eating pills and running away from their problems.
    26. Re:"campaign against the use of ... while driving" by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      Well, for starters, as in this case, the unintended consquences of that suggestion would put you in danger. Then there's the matter of NS involving survival of brutality and mating. Not sure why I'm explaining this, really.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    27. Re:"campaign against the use of ... while driving" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What gets me are the ones that shouldn't NEED a warning label. Saw a guy reading his Kindle while driving in rush hour traffic once. First time in my life that I was in enough rage that I'm grateful I didn't have something that I could use to kill him - I have no patience for those who can't be bothered to drive, it's a pity that our society basically requires that even the incompetent get a set of wheels. This particular road is already very dangerous - they just scrapped off another poor sap's remains off the asphalt last Saturday. Of course, common sense, science and history should tell people that shooting a bullet straight into the air is a bad idea too...

      How about stupidity? There should be a ban on certain levels of stupidity. I don't care so much if some idiot college kid breaks his leg jumping off his frat's roof but the law should be able to come down on people who endanger everyone because they don't feel like paying enough attention to safely operate a large machine. Especially with how things are now, most major roads have traffic cameras and if you match up the time stamps on those with Billy Bob's phone records, you should be able to get something.

    28. Re:"campaign against the use of ... while driving" by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 1

      In some US states if you need a vehicle to get to your work place you have a "right to work".

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-to-work_law

      Right to Work states are generally among those with the weakest laws punishing impaired driving.

    29. Re:"campaign against the use of ... while driving" by Jibekn · · Score: 1

      Of course not. Your analogy is as stupid as these nanny state laws are.

      This is the core of the problem, the laws are 'nanny' laws, when they should be, bubba with the shotgun keeping you in line laws. Get caught while texting? 10 years banned from private vehicles, yes, not just driving, you are not allowed the privilege of entering another vehicle outside of public transport until you get it through your head that they are over sized weapons, and treat them with the respect they deserve.

      There a reason why no one fucking steals in countries that lop off your hand, maybe if all laws were just as draconian, we would have a nice society, and yes im willing to trade freedom for the ability to walk down the street knowing im not about to a) get shot, b) get hit by a drunk/texting driver.

      You may not be able to keep a human in line with idealism with a kind word, but if you smack them with a bat and point a gun in their face. They behave.

    30. Re:"campaign against the use of ... while driving" by Jibekn · · Score: 1

      Did you read your link? That law is Union centric and the wiki article doesn't even touch on driver licensing/banning. The impression i got from reading it, is that is had absolutely nothing to do with getting yourself banned from driving via drunk driving.

      The Right to Work laws seem like a way or basically ignoring a Union. Legally.

    31. Re:"campaign against the use of ... while driving" by danomac · · Score: 1

      Music never did it for me... however, listening to talk radio that is discussing a topic you're interested in helped.

    32. Re:"campaign against the use of ... while driving" by Jibekn · · Score: 1

      He saying that with true natural selection, the jocks would have killed all the geeks around the age 18 mark.

    33. Re:"campaign against the use of ... while driving" by danomac · · Score: 1

      so why do we need to make a law about it?

      Duh, so that when the texter kills someone they can be issued a $200 fine and a slap on the wrist.

    34. Re:"campaign against the use of ... while driving" by LifesABeach · · Score: 1

      One time commuting to work, I was listening to Howard Stern interviewing a women sitting on the speaker of her radio. Things got kind of cloudy then. Amazing. I couldn't blink my eyes.

    35. Re:"campaign against the use of ... while driving" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What else am I missing?
      A clue...

    36. Re:"campaign against the use of ... while driving" by squizzar · · Score: 1

      Nor does the person texting... it is a privilege with certain requirements such as licensing, sobriety etc. Or would you rather we just ditched all the rules regarding driving? No lights, no speed limits, no white lines, no rules and no responsibility? If that's your opinion then fair enough, I can't begin to describe the depths of the stupidity I think you must possess to believe that, but at least you're committed. I'd wager that it's not though.

      You think you are safe when driving on the phone, maybe you are. People think they are safe when they are drunk, tired, incompetent, speeding, have a poorly maintained vehicle and countless other reasons. So given that body of evidence, what are the odds that you only think you are safe - herein lies the problem with being distracted: you don't actually _know_ how you are driving because you are not paying attention - when in fact you are not? Making that kind of rational assessment of one's own abilities, especially related to something as ego charged as driving is difficult and rarely achieved.

      Oh, also since they are public highways I _do_ have a right to be on the road where I live, you fuckwit, and the requirements for the privilege of driving (or any other road use) are that you do not, through intent or negligence, endanger other road users. You are also required to give extra consideration to more vulnerable road users than yourself. Perhaps the laws are backwards where you are, but that's what they are here - of course also texting and non-hands-free calls are also illegal. People also get charged for eating whilst driving, having music on at a distracting volume, and a number of other driving while distracted offences.

      For a reductio ad absurdium: Would you allow someone to drive a car with great big spikes, packed with sensitive explosives, whilst drunk, near a school at chucking out time, taking pot-shots at road furniture with an automatic weapon? As long as no-one gets hurt then no harm done right?

      The thing that irritates me most is that I never see people like you arguing to repeal laws that protect you from people who might be a bit upset when your ridiculous actions endanger them. You want no ban on texting, fine, I want no ban on following you home and smashing up your car, burning down your house and kicking you hard in the nuts when your selfish actions endanger me. That can be the risk you take for driving with unconscionable disregard for others.

    37. Re:"campaign against the use of ... while driving" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because the idiots of the world will nail any thing with a vagina and a pulse and make lots of babies. Educated people tend to have fewer children. so that would mean that nerds and geeks(educated people in this example) will never increase their population percentage relative to the idiots who only get drunk and fuck(un-protected) all the time. So natural selection favors animal instincts over thought in this case.

  2. Pay attention to the road! by msobkow · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Having seen people swerving from lane to lane while talking or texting, there's no doubt in my mind cell usage while driving should be banned.

    But I'm amazed that Abu Dhabi and Dubai have such a high penetration of Blackberries in their country that the outage could actually make a difference in road safety statistics. That's just amazing to me.

    I wonder what would happen to the safety stats if all cell phones were disabled for a day as an experiment? (Not that it'll ever happen.)

    --
    I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
    1. Re:Pay attention to the road! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A few years ago, before cell phone usage was banned in New Zealand, I saw some young punk screaming along the motorway in his Subaru Legacy. He had two wheels in the gravel beside the drainage ditch, two wheels in the lane behind me, and he was doing more than 120KM/h.

      Now that cell phone usage has been restricted (hands free kits only), I see people driving while talking. They're a lot safer, but they don't bother indicating - they can't, their hands are busy holding the phone.

      I think the worst thing I ever saw was a woman reading while driving through rush hour traffic. I can't believe that she didn't hit anyone.

    2. Re:Pay attention to the road! by ooloogi · · Score: 1

      I thought it already was banned in the developed world.

    3. Re:Pay attention to the road! by jader3rd · · Score: 1

      It happened in Ventura County one day about ten years back. A construction worker had hit something and all cell service was down in the county for the afternoon. One of the reason I remember it so clearly was that I got ran over by a car while on my bike and learned about it in the ambulance ride to the hospital. The ambulance system had moved over to primarily using cell phones, but they had backup walkie talkies. But the backup system was overloaded due to a sharp spike in crashes which occured that afternoon and my ambulance didn't get their turn on the channel to tell the hospital we were coming. We ended up showing up at the hospital unannounced.

    4. Re:Pay attention to the road! by hedwards · · Score: 1

      It's banned here, in fact it's a primary offense, meaning that police officers can pull you over for it without any other reason, but I still see plenty of people doing it. And worse, they'll not just talk on the phone, but they'll text. It's one thing to engage in behaviors that might remove the doer from the gene pool and quite another to risk other folks in the process.

    5. Re:Pay attention to the road! by LurkerXXX · · Score: 3, Informative

      I once, swear to god, was passed on the highway by a guy playing a clarinet while driving. Freaked me out. And I'm a driver who is usually going faster than most folks, so he was hauling. There are some nutters out there. I'm sure he'll end up killing someone.

    6. Re:Pay attention to the road! by fj3k · · Score: 1
      The worst thing I've ever seen was on the hilly motorway between Wollongong and Sydney, in rain where I could barely see out of the front wind-shield with the wipers on the fastest setting. I'm usually a faster driver, but I slowed down in those conditions (but was still going about 100km/h ;) ). Coming up behind me was a Land-cruiser doing a much higher speed than I was. They either didn't know or didn't care that they were snaking across both lanes - and sometimes venturing into the stopping lanes. Given the way this car was going, both I and the only other car I could see pulled off the side of the road until it had passed. As it passed I had a look; the lady behind the wheel had one hand holding a phone to her ear, the other was waving around just above the wheel.

      Worst driver ever.

      --
      Two men claimed to have walked into a bar. Only one had the bruises to prove it.
    7. Re:Pay attention to the road! by Belial6 · · Score: 2

      I have seen people swerving from lane to lane while not talking or texting. I will agree that trying to read, whether that is a phone, a book, or a newspaper is a bad idea. The phone rage is just a symptom of neo-ludditism though.

    8. Re:Pay attention to the road! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So then people must not be doing it then? Or is that the joke?

    9. Re:Pay attention to the road! by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 0

      ...neo-ludditism...

      Fucking moron. A 20-something for sure.

      --
      If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    10. Re:Pay attention to the road! by nitehawk214 · · Score: 1

      I often eat breakfast on my way to work. A granola bar or an apple while driving on lightly populated city streets isn't a difficult task.

      Once I was standing at a bus stop and saw a guy come to the intersection eating breakfast while driving. It was bowl of cereal, with milk, and eaten with a spoon while the hand holding the bowl holds the wheel.

      I tried flagging him down to ask him "What the hell are you doing?", but he just sped off when the light turned green, oblivious as to why I might have a problem with what he is doing.

      --
      I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
    11. Re:Pay attention to the road! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now that cell phone usage has been restricted (hands free kits only), I see people driving while talking. They're a lot safer, but they don't bother indicating - they can't, their hands are busy holding the phone.

      Whuh?

    12. Re:Pay attention to the road! by wetpainter · · Score: 1

      Well it is in some places http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texting_while_driving#Laws_by_location Not in the article but it's also illegal in Australia and New Zealand. As for Abu Dhabi or Dubai, well they may have other driver education problems http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BVgltcT1QJ8

    13. Re:Pay attention to the road! by nospam007 · · Score: 1

      "I once, swear to god, was passed on the highway by a guy playing a clarinet while driving."

      Is that code?

    14. Re:Pay attention to the road! by Seyren · · Score: 1

      It's illegal in Singapore too - Traffic Matters -> Handphone Driving. Sadly this doesn't deter people from doing it anyway, I see at least 5 people doing it every day.

      It's a stupid, stupid idea, and I wish people would have a bit more common sense.

    15. Re:Pay attention to the road! by tqk · · Score: 2

      It happened ...

      Please, learn to quote. I had to page up five times just to find out what you were referring to. <quote>blah blah blah</quote>

      Thanks. Much appreciated.

      --
      "Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit ..." -- Pink Floyd.
    16. Re:Pay attention to the road! by tqk · · Score: 2

      I will agree that trying to read, whether that is a phone, a book, or a newspaper is a bad idea. The phone rage is just a symptom of neo-ludditism though.

      Here, it's called distracted driving. You're sharing a road with hundreds of other people all moving at high velocity in multi-ton vehicles. You need all your wits and attention to do that safely, for all involved. Check out the death while driving statistics if you don't believe me. It's far more dangerous than anything else we do.

      You using a cell phone for anything while driving isn't anything we need. Just fscking pull over!

      --
      "Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit ..." -- Pink Floyd.
    17. Re:Pay attention to the road! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      that's interesting. isn't subaru legacy a car for older people?

    18. Re:Pay attention to the road! by Kleen13 · · Score: 1

      Now that cell phone usage has been restricted (hands free kits only), I see people driving while talking. They're a lot safer, but they don't bother indicating - they can't, their hands are busy holding the phone.

      Whuh?

      I dunno. I guessed speakerphone? I paused on reply to OP, and moved on, but you've enticed me to speak.

      --
      That sinking feeling deep in your gut when you KNOW you screwed up bad summed up with: {head desk} {head desk}
    19. Re:Pay attention to the road! by Belial6 · · Score: 2

      I am well aware that driving is the most dangerous activity that we do. As soon as I meet a single driver that uses "all their wits and attention" while driving, I will give your argument weight. At this point, I have not met a single one. I also highly doubt that YOU use all your wits and attention to drive safely. More likely, you like most drivers have passengers in your car, drive early in the morning, drive late at night, or the most hypocritical of actions, use your car stereo while driving.

      You don't need to listen to the radio for anything while driving. Just fscking pull over!

    20. Re:Pay attention to the road! by idji · · Score: 2

      Blackberry usage there is very high because you could buy a blackberry easily at any supermarket checkout because the telcos were pushing it hard, and because everyone knew that Blackberry Messaging was "uncrackable", and so people felt safer from being watched.
      There are MANY foreigners working there and 11% of mobile phone users where using blackberries to communicate - it was also a cheap and secure way to communicate back to family and friends in India.
      Also remember that Dubai was where the whole fuss started about Blackberry Messaging being accessible by the authorities started after the killing of Hamas' Mahmoud al-Mabhouh where allegedly the killers used blackberries to communicate with each other.

    21. Re:Pay attention to the road! by Rockets84 · · Score: 0

      Having travelled recently through the Middle East and Africa I can tell you I saw a hell of a lot more Blackberries than other smartphones. And BBM was what they were all using. Even when I was near the Congo border in Zambia where most people don't have electricty but they all had a BB or a dirt cheap nokia. In fact I had better coverage with 3 Telco's there than I do at my house in Oz. Crazy.

    22. Re:Pay attention to the road! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is the concentration required to have an active conversation (ie phonecall) that reduces road awareness, and causes accidents. Listening to the radio does not have this effect.

      I could also argue (personal experience only) that listening to the radio on long trips keeps you alert, and reduces fatigue and accidents.

    23. Re:Pay attention to the road! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've been in and out of the UAE over the past month (currently in Dubai) and I was also amazed at how Blackberroes are everywhere. The outage was all over the news and was a hot topic at some of the conferences I was attending (conferences which were nothing to do with tech I add). It's not just that these people choose to use a blackberry, it's that they choose to have a couple of them in many cases.

      Mobile usage whilst driving here is the norm and as far as I can tell hands free kits have not penetrated the market much at all. Coming from the UK where there are penalties for being caught on the phone whilst driving, I find it all extremely unnerving, especially having heard of some horrific pile ups on the main road here in the past.

      It's worth adding that I was here before the outage and the driving was terrible, and I have been here during the outage and seen the same low level of road safety awareness. The average distance between cars on the main road through Dubai is far too close, a proximity that'd make me uncomfortable at 30mph is evident for most drivers at 80mph. The lane structure is not adhered to and you see a constant stream of overtaking and undertaking cars darting between lanes with absolutely no room for braking distances. Add to this the constant last minute lane changes/double/triple lane changes to reach an exit, I am amazed there aren't more frequent accidents. From my observation it seems that some of the problem can be blamed on the Taxis here. Generally driven by poor men from the Indian subcontinent, they often have only a rough idea where they're headed and treat the Sheikh Zayed road as a strange weaving experiment.

      Could the Blackberry outage have had an effect? I won't say no, but I wouldn't draw a strong link between the two events. If you have so many million people using
      the road in such a haphazard way, you're bound to have your accident filled months and your accident light months. The hacks can point fingers at anything as a root cause. Interesting that the weather hasn't been called in as a reason. We're at a point of change now between seasons, is this having an effect on visibility levels due to fog?

    24. Re:Pay attention to the road! by WaffleMonster · · Score: 1

      But I'm amazed that Abu Dhabi and Dubai have such a high penetration of Blackberries in their country that the outage could actually make a difference in road safety statistics. That's just amazing to me.

      The few ME countries I've been to have virtually no signals or lane markers, insanly narrow roads and cars merging from more directions than can be counted on a single hand.

      People beep their horns constantly in traffic not out of anger but to alert others of their presence so they don't get hit.

      If the UAE is anything like this craziness it wouldn't surprise me one bit if this is all true.

    25. Re:Pay attention to the road! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The UAE is nothing like the rest of the ME in this respect... The roads are wide and well marked and signed, loads of speed cameras and people generally obey the road rules; Lebanon on the other hand, sheer chaos.

    26. Re:Pay attention to the road! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I had to page up five times just to find out what you were referring to.

      Parent link broken?

    27. Re:Pay attention to the road! by delinear · · Score: 1

      Same story here in the UK. Over here it's punishable by a fine, which kind of makes people think it's okay to do, especially when they might only get fined one out of every hundred times (probably not even that, I've never personally witnessed a police car pull someone over for talking on their phone). I can't help thinking that if it was a criminal conviction it might be more of a deterrent than a cash boosting exercise.

    28. Re:Pay attention to the road! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But I'm amazed that Abu Dhabi and Dubai have such a high penetration of Blackberries in their country that the outage could actually make a difference in road safety statistics. That's just amazing to me.

      The few ME countries I've been to have virtually no signals or lane markers, insanly narrow roads and cars merging from more directions than can be counted on a single hand.

      People beep their horns constantly in traffic not out of anger but to alert others of their presence so they don't get hit.

      If the UAE is anything like this craziness it wouldn't surprise me one bit if this is all true.

      Not in the UAE. Driving here is not chaos, atleast not like you describe. Honking is frowned upon here. The lanes are a minimum 4 lanes. The highway has 12 lanes!. You want chaos, try driving in India! How do I know? I've driven in both places....

    29. Re:Pay attention to the road! by zippthorne · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Banned, but not enforced. The main goal was revenue, not safety.

      The purpose of traffic laws in the developed world is essentially as an extra tax. Therefore no road laws will ever be sufficiently enforced to significantly discourage the activity they purport to prohibit.

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    30. Re:Pay attention to the road! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You'd be surprised how much market penetration BB has outside US. I'm surprised over and over again how much FUD is coming from US about BB, deserved or not is arguable. Fact stands, Europe and Asia along with Middle East are going well for BB.

    31. Re:Pay attention to the road! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...ceareal killer.

      Awesome :D

    32. Re:Pay attention to the road! by Stormthirst · · Score: 2

      The purpose of traffic laws in the developed world is essentially as an extra tax. Therefore no road laws will ever be sufficiently enforced to significantly discourage the activity they purport to prohibit.

      This is clearly rubbish. In the Canada and most of Europe (both of which most definitely count as developed) have a system of penalty points or demerit points. Accrue too many points and you lose your license. You also get a fine. It could be argued that if you do get a fine then you're paying for them to prosecute you because you're so much of an incompetent fool as to not be able to control your vehicle responsibly.

      I suggest you learn the meaning of the phrase "developed world". If your country doesn't have a system of demerit points, I suggest you are NOT in the developed world.

    33. Re:Pay attention to the road! by Syberz · · Score: 1

      I remember the days where nobody had cellphones and people weren't tethered to the office 24/7... the World still managed to move forwards during that time and people seemed way more relaxed.

      --
      ~Syberz
    34. Re:Pay attention to the road! by jhigh · · Score: 1

      And almost everywhere that has a ban on cell phone usage while driving - this would be legal. This goes to show the stupidity of banning cell phone usage while driving. Enact and enforce distracted driving laws and stop pointlessly singling out cell phone users.

      --
      Social Engineering Expert: Because there is no patch for stupidity.
    35. Re:Pay attention to the road! by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      But I'm amazed that Abu Dhabi and Dubai have such a high penetration of Blackberries in their country that the outage could actually make a difference in road safety statistics. That's just amazing to me.

      What, you think they only have sand, camels and AK-47s? In terms of technology they're in the same ballpark as any first-world country.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    36. Re:Pay attention to the road! by Krneki · · Score: 1
      People will find something else to do while driving. Before cell phones it was a regular custom to read newspapers while driving.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SHFk1TpWOIg

      Hell, I even saw a truck driver cooking pasta while driving on the highway.

      --
      Love many, trust a few, do harm to none.
    37. Re:Pay attention to the road! by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      This is the correct way to play instruments while on the road:

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0zxxM9EYQzY

      Safety first!

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    38. Re:Pay attention to the road! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Parent [slashdot.org] link broken?

      As a courtesy to your fellow slashdotters, never make someone depend upon the UI here. God knows what part of it will be broken on any given day.

    39. Re:Pay attention to the road! by j-beda · · Score: 1

      This is the correct way to play instruments while on the road:

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0zxxM9EYQzY

      Safety first!

      At least the musicians had a driver who didn't seem to be doing anything but driving. The person doing the filming was either sitting in the lap of the car driver, or was in fact the car driver.

    40. Re:Pay attention to the road! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't need to listen to the radio for anything while driving. Just fscking pull over!

      You dont have to look at the radio while you are listening. You have to look at your phone while texting.

    41. Re:Pay attention to the road! by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 1

      The problem is they don't actually make anything, once renewables and oil shale ramp up and the price of oil begins a slide to stability the UAE will wish they'd invested in industrial infrastructure.

      Qatar and Oman will ride the natural gas while the UAE and Saudi Arabia falter.

    42. Re:Pay attention to the road! by danomac · · Score: 1

      Holy shit, that's what that does? I've been using slashdot for probably 10 years and I inferred "Reply to Parent" and never clicked on it.

      Hah, learn something new every day. Sure would've been useful as I'd been using the css lines to track the parent. What a waste of time that was...

    43. Re:Pay attention to the road! by danomac · · Score: 1

      I've seen people argue with the radio.

      This also applies to having a conversation in the car with someone in the passenger seat. It's a distraction.

    44. Re:Pay attention to the road! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is why I keep a car with shitty body and damage. I like to get close to these people and then bump them when they swerve into me. I feel like I am a NASCAR driver. Yee Haw!

      It is also real fun to get along side and when you see them look down to lay on your horn, really loud. Man that freaks the shit out of them.

    45. Re:Pay attention to the road! by danomac · · Score: 1

      It's illegal in BC, Canada as well. They do stings every once in a while and hand out hundreds of tickets at a time here.

      Recently the police released a top 10 excuses list for using their cell phone while driving. They're pretty lame excuses.

    46. Re:Pay attention to the road! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know a girl who claims to have given head while driving. WHILE DRIVING, not "while sitting next to the driver".
      She said she was on I-275 driving around Cincinnati, with her head in the passenger's lap.

    47. Re:Pay attention to the road! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The passenger was probably steering the vehicle.

  3. I smell PR material. by pushing-robot · · Score: 0

    In a week, lousy mobile providers band together and adopt the new slogan: "Our Networks Save Lives".

    --
    How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
  4. Banninate it. by FyberOptic · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Most people accept that texting and cellphones cause accidents. But, most people also think they're better drivers than everyone else, and therefore it's okay for them to do it. Even cops do it. I see them all the time.

    The only solution is making it illegal internationally. But considering the U.S. alone only bans it in a handful of states, we have a long way to go of convincing people that their ego doesn't make it okay.

    1. Re:Banninate it. by dark_requiem · · Score: 3, Insightful

      As a quick aside, cops in general seem to be pretty shitty drivers. Had a couple incidents where cops who were simply talking to their partners nearly swerved in to me.

      But, more to the point, it's a slippery slope issue. Eating in your car is also distracting. Do you solve it by banning drive-throughs? Reading in your car is a distraction. Do cops issue tickets if they see an atlas or a copy of the local newspaper on the seat when they pull you over? How about if you jotted down directions to where you're going, and a cop sees you check the paper to see if your exit is coming up? How about unruly kids in the back seat? Quite distracting, but you don't hear calls for kids to be anesthetized before getting in a car (although...).

      Point is, if the government takes it upon themselves to enact a new rule, regulation, or prohibition for every danger in the world, then there's nothing you can do freely. There are laws against swerving dangerously from lane to lane in traffic. There are laws against running people over, or slamming blindly headlong into a telephone poll. Some people can multitask to the point where they can talk on the phone and drive. Some people need a hands-free device to achieve the same result. Some people (and I'm in this category) would rather stammer through a conversation and lose their train of thought because their primary focus is on driving, not talking. Some people just can't pull it off at all. You, like most statists, are proposing a one-size-fits-all solution to a problem that doesn't have one. At its core, what you suggest is no different than solving alcoholism or other forms of drug abuse through prohibition.

    2. Re:Banninate it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I agree a ban is a bad idea.

      However...

      Some people can multitask to the point where they can talk on the phone and drive. Some people need a hands-free device to achieve the same result. Some people (and I'm in this category) would rather stammer through a conversation and lose their train of thought because their primary focus is on driving, not talking. Some people just can't pull it off at all.

      95% of drivers out there drive like shit without the phone. They don't give driving the attention it deserves. They don't know the rules of the road. They don't understand how to control their vehicle. They can't cope with emergency situations. They don't look and plan ahead. They have no 'escape route'. They have no feel for the road. They think their horn is either a weapon or some kind of force field.

      For the remaining 5% of drivers, no, they cannot multitask to the point where they can talk on the phone and drive. It can't be done. You might be able to pull it off and still drive better than the remaining 95%, but that's not saying a whole lot. You might be able to pull it off and never get in an accident, if you are also not unlucky. Your capacity for driving diminishes when you get on the phone. You may not notice it, but the drivers around you do. That's why there is so much popular support for a ban even though everyone still wants to talk on their phones and drive.

      The same thing happens when you are dealing with your kids, fiddling with your radio, plugging in a nav address, except that with a phone - especially a phone in your hand - you are no longer mentally in the car. "Oh, but I am." No, you're not. The very fact that you believe you can 'pull it off' shows that you are clueless when it comes to how your driving changes with a phone in your hand.

    3. Re:Banninate it. by rolfwind · · Score: 1

      Why shouldn't distracted driving be an offense? You talk about specific rules (like banning food) but just like fraud, you can make the generalized cases illegal and not have to think of every form of it.

      Look, I'm tired of speeding being the most enforced rule on the road. From what I experienced, speeders are focused on their driving, and less likely to put others around them to sleep. Yet, I never seen cops pull over people for failure to use turn signals or any other offense.

      It's time to clamp down things other than speeding for once. Shit that leads to accidents. Just like drunk driving began to be taken more serious in the 70s and after.

    4. Re:Banninate it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      EVERYBODY thinks they are a fantastic driver, who could easily compete on the pro racing circuit, if they only had the time and resources.

      But the sad fact is that almost EVERYBODY drives like a blind 9-year-old girl on LSD, and only a very small percentage of the driving population have real skill and ability.

      The funny thing is that EVERYBODY who just read that told themselves that they are one of the few who really is a fantastic driver.

      You're not.

    5. Re:Banninate it. by TubeSteak · · Score: 2

      But, more to the point, it's a slippery slope issue. Eating in your car is also distracting. Do you solve it by banning drive-throughs? Reading in your car is a distraction. [blah blah blah]

      It really isn't a slippery slope though.
      Your asinine argument seems to ignore the reality that we haven't already banned those things since Henry Ford brought cheap cars to the masses 97 years ago.

      And yet here we are, with safety experts and organizations consistently endorsing legislation that singles out cell phones.

      You, like most statists, are proposing a one-size-fits-all solution to a problem that doesn't have one.

      Oh please. 99% of us are statists.
      The only difference is how and where we think think the state should be acting.

      P.S. Banning *anything* while driving is not the same thing as a general prohibition. You're dumb for making that argument.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    6. Re:Banninate it. by rolfwind · · Score: 5, Insightful

      To add to the last post:

      Some people can multitask to the point where they can talk on the phone and drive. Some people need a hands-free device to achieve the same result.

      A lot less than many people think. Most overestimate their abilities:
      http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=95256794

      Which is a very American trait, I noticed:
      http://desicritics.org/2006/10/20/012720.php

      Kind of like how those people who "work" 12 hours a day, brag about it, and lag behind people who work an honest 8 hours a day in productive because they spend most of the time at the watercooler or on the internet. Seriously, when you're driving, please drive - stop overestimating your abilities when they really get reduced by not paying attention. If you don't want to do that, either carpool with someone who doesn't have that problem and is willing to drive, or use mass transit.

      But stfu because you can't stop diddling with your smartphone for 30 seconds and want to bullshit the rest of us that you're just as good with it as without it.

    7. Re:Banninate it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only solution is making it illegal internationally.

      Let me guess - you work for the US Government?

      How 'bout just showing a little self restraint and not using phones while driving. There are far too many restrictive laws already - no matter which country you're from.

    8. Re:Banninate it. by FyberOptic · · Score: 1

      If showing a little self restraint was a viable solution to problems, then thousands of people wouldn't die every year from distracted or impaired drivers.

    9. Re:Banninate it. by peppepz · · Score: 1
      Don't know in the USA, but in my country eating while driving is of course prohibited; that doesn't apply to drive-throughs because in that case you're driving in a private road. And children in the back seat must be secured in safety seats. It's possible that a minority of people could relatively safely text (eat, watch tv, be drunk, ...) while they drive very carefully, but then it's also possible that some children could drive a car better than many adults can, and it's not a reason to let children drive.

      This doesn't fall in the "nanny state" category, as the State has all the rights to make laws that prevent people from putting other people's lives in danger. In particular, it should do so when a particular behaviour has been reckoned to be a major cause of death or injury of innocent people. It has nothing to do with alcohol prohibition: you don't directly become dangerous for other people by drinking; you do if you drink and then drive a car, and in fact driving while you're drunk is prohibited.

    10. Re:Banninate it. by TapeCutter · · Score: 2

      Agreed, many people think they have super human abilities, especially young men. Turning ones eyes upward while thinking is a very common behaviour that basically shuts out whatever else is going on, most (if not all) people do it unconsciously. When mobile phones first became popular in the 90's I would talk on mine while driving with no apparent problems, however one day I realised that I was turning my eyes upward to think about the answer to a question the caller had asked. I suddenly realised what I was doing and it scared the shit out of me, I haven't used a mobile while driving since that realization.

      As a 35yr vetran of the road, my advice is that if your mobile rings while your driving either pull over or (heaven forbid) ignore it.

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    11. Re:Banninate it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only a very small percentage of the population can actually multi-task properly (5-10%), even though most people think they are pretty good at it.

      As far as driving an using a cellphone, most countries already make the concession that using a handsfree is okay, even though most studies show it to be just as dangerous as holding the phone. Having an active conversation is the distracting part.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_phones_and_driving_safety

      Your comparison to prohibition is just plain silly. The equivalent here would be to make cellphones completely illegal because people might drive while using them.

    12. Re:Banninate it. by msobkow · · Score: 1

      It's illegal in many districts, but the law is ignored by many. Their personal convenience is more important.

      One of the most shameless examples is the mayor of Toronto, who has been repeatedly been caught by the citizens of Toronto yapping on his cell phone while driving. You'd think he would lead by example and avoid the bad publicity, but he's too narcissistic to learn his lesson.

      --
      I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
    13. Re:Banninate it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Simple--they need to enforce the laws they have. They don't need new laws.

      If you are talking on a phone, eating, fiddling with your stereo, jacking your music so you don' t know the traffic situation, and have an accident, and it's remotely material, CHARGE THEM.

      Funny thing this /. story is here. Earlier this afternoon, I was rear-ended. I was the 2nd vehicle waiting for a red light, no vehicles behind me. Complete stop, must have been there about 30 seconds. What ended up being about 10-15 seconds before the light went green, I noticed a minivan approach. Then it seemed to be slowing awfully slow, then it had my full attention looking at it from my side view, noticed the lady talking on the phone, not quite slowing right, probably will suddenly brake, then oh shit, wham, she just didn't stop.

      NO EMOTION WHATSOEVER registered on her face AS SHE CONTINUED TO TALK ON THE PHONE.

      I'm a little peeved at this, still watching her, had my passenger pull the registration and insurance, paper and pen, I pull my license from my pocket.

      I exited my vehicle, waited at my rear bumper. I pulled my cell phone out to note the time of the accident. And waited. And waited. I waited more than 2 full minutes (minutes change 3 times), WHILE SHE LOOKS AT ME AND CONTINUESD THE SAME PHONE CONVERSATION. She never hung up, pressed buttons on the phone, just kept talking. No, she wasn't calling the police, that came later when she wouldn't hand over her driver's license so I could confirm her insurance information. In fact, she didn't stop talking until I got ticked because people were looking at me like it was a road rage incident (think about it--front vehicle driver has exited car staring at rear vehicle)--so I walked up to her vehicle, she's still talking, and said "Come on, get off the phone." She looks at me irritated, like why am I here, continues to talk, 20 seconds later, she hangs up, and says "Are you okay?"

      Other crap ensued (apparently, she thought this half Asian was an illegal because I wanted to see her license to confirm/verify her pic matches her and the license address matched the the insurance info). Officer finally shows. I hand him my info, she sees that, and calls me a "citizen." I tell them what happened. She admits she was talking on the phone. No charge for careless driving for her.

      The police--they don't phracking care even when they CAN do something.

    14. Re:Banninate it. by thegoldenear · · Score: 1

      You think the _US_ should be the one to be convincing _others_ of this? In the UK it's already illegal, it's the _US_ that needs to learn this from other countries.

    15. Re:Banninate it. by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      being distracted while driving is actually illegal in most countries.

      doesn't matter what the reason is.

      but adding specific distraction laws is supposed to underline some distractions.. but actually it's hurting the general concept, because people will then label everything else as ok.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    16. Re:Banninate it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      [,,,] or slamming blindly headlong into a telephone poll.

      "And how often do you use your telephone?"
      "Oh, abou- *CRRRASSSH*

    17. Re:Banninate it. by Inda · · Score: 1

      I have a friend who's the absolute best at Forza on the 360. Out of all of us, best lap times, always coming first... Until we talk to him or he's had a couple of shandies.

      He needs full consentration, or he's just average.

      It's doubly scary when I think of him driving his tangable car while talking on his phone.

      --
      This post contains benzene, nitrosamines, formaldehyde and hydrogen cyanide.
    18. Re:Banninate it. by delinear · · Score: 1

      The only prohibition that's really needed is against driving dangerously. The real issue is enforcement - typically most people don't drive dangerously while they're around police cars, so in order to minimise bad driving we look at the most common factors that cause them. I think the thing that's likely to change this in the next ten years or so is going to be cameras fitted to cars. We're at the point now where we can fit cheap, high quality cars facing in all directions to cars for a cost that's cheap enough that an incentive in the form of cheaper insurance (since it's easier to prove you are not at fault) would be enough to make it widespread. Suddenly bad drivers aren't just worried about the police spotting them, anyone can record their bad behaviour and report it later. That might lead to more convictions for people driving badly and less need for blanket prohibitions that affect good drivers (eating an apple while driving, for instance, isn't inherently dangerous).

    19. Re:Banninate it. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      I have never understood why anyone with money would WANT to hold their cellphone while they're driving. I installed a car stereo with bluetooth cellphone integration in my car for under $200 and I've got a little microphone sprouting out of my dash. (For another $30 or so I could get something that would blend with the interior, but eh.) My phone goes in the center console and I run it from the stereo. If you have zero dollars for stuff like that I understand why you'd hold your phone, but seriously.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    20. Re:Banninate it. by delinear · · Score: 1

      True, but given the number of people I see still using their mobiles while driving in a country that has a blanket ban, I'd argue that new laws aren't doing a great job either. If someone is driving dangerously, there's laws to cover that already. Do we really need a new law for each new piece of technology that comes along when they all really equate to the same thing? I could understand if I saw officers in unmarked police cars constantly pulling people over for driving while on the phone that it might act as a deterrent for the times when people think they won't get caught, but in reality I've never witnessed this, it feels more like another way for the government to collect cash or for police forces to inflate their crime solving statistics.

    21. Re:Banninate it. by Candid88 · · Score: 1

      Cellphone driving bans of one type or another are present in most developed countries. http://www.cellular-news.com/car_bans/.

      You are right, although researchers in the USA were amongst the first to document the danger of cellphone usage whilst driving, the USA is a relative late-comer in banning its occurrence, no doubt due to the usual "my voters don't care what science says" attitude of US politicians.

    22. Re:Banninate it. by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      Forget banning talking while driving. Where is my g'dang self-driving car, already...

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    23. Re:Banninate it. by LavouraArcaica · · Score: 1

      Look, I'm tired of speeding being the most enforced rule on the road. From what I experienced, speeders are focused on their driving, and less likely to put others around them to sleep. Yet, I never seen cops pull over people for failure to use turn signals or any other offense.

      That's true. Speeders are, usually, drivers who pay lots of attention to what they are doing. However, IF they do something wrong, it will be WAY worst. Anyway, speed tickets are a lazy and inefficient way of making roads safer.

    24. Re:Banninate it. by dkf · · Score: 1

      Some people can multitask to the point where they can talk on the phone and drive.

      But I bet you're not one of them. Not and drive safely. (Drive like a drunken homicidal maniac, that I'd accept.)

      Driving safely requires attention. Really. For everyone, everywhere, because it's always possible for something random to happen that's not your fault. Doesn't matter. Pay attention and you'll (usually) have enough time to deal with it. Distracted, and you lose that opportunity.

      If you're not giving it your full attention as a driver, you're not safe for yourself, for your passengers (if you've got any) or for everyone else on and around the road. Yes, there are other kinds of distractions (though phones are particularly bad for some reason) and many people are idiots, but that doesn't give you any kind of excuse. What's more, in this case the law is just telling you to obey proper common sense. It's a shame that common sense is so damn rare, but there you go. Don't be a stupid ass. Don't text while driving. THAT MEANS YOU.

      --
      "Little does he know, but there is no 'I' in 'Idiot'!"
    25. Re:Banninate it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, but Cops on the whole have much higher training and actually *are* better than the average driver.

    26. Re:Banninate it. by ToasterMonkey · · Score: 1

      Kind of like how those people who "work" 12 hours a day, brag about it, and lag behind people who work an honest 8 hours a day in productive because they spend most of the time at the watercooler or on the internet. Seriously, when you're driving, please drive - stop overestimating your abilities when they really get reduced by not paying attention. If you don't want to do that, either carpool with someone who doesn't have that problem and is willing to drive, or use mass transit.

      But stfu because you can't stop diddling with your smartphone for 30 seconds and want to bullshit the rest of us that you're just as good with it as without it.

      You know, we can be more objective about this. The parent was talking about talking on a phone while driving with and without a headset. Simply having a conversation while driving can lower your response times, and having one free hand during that puts you at a stupidly high risk for what you're accomplishing. Still, you can mitigate some of the risk by choosing carefully when and when not to have a conversation in the car. Some people even turn the radio down when driving gets tense. I might accept a short call on the highway but not even consider using a phone driving through an intersection, phone or no phone, it's important to know when to tune everything out but the road around you.

      Things that divert your eyes from the road for seconds at a time, that's a whole other league of risk that I doubt anyone would argue. There's different levels of risk in all this, starting when you turn the car on.

      None of this means banning X while driving is the best way of changing people's behavior though. This sort of sounds like abstinance vs. sex education to me... with a ban you might only be setting yourselves up for higher contrast between poor decision makers and good ones rather than reducing number of bad decisions.

    27. Re:Banninate it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The government taxes that which it can measure.

    28. Re:Banninate it. by mjr167 · · Score: 1

      So what you are saying is that it should be illegal to loose control of your car and crash it into a solid object? Or that it should be illegal for me to be listening to the radio while driving in a perfectly safe and reasonable manner because my attention is not 100% focused on the road? Or should it be illegal for my 18 month old daughter in the backseat to be having a screaming fit because she threw her Pooh Bear on the floor? No one argues that cell phones don't cause accidents. But then again, no one argues that scissors aren't dangerous weapons that can be used to kill people. We don't make scissors illegal. We don't make using them illegal. We don't make using them around small children illegal. We make it illegal to stab a person with them. The end action you are attempting to prevent should be the crime, not the multitude of factors leading up to it. This is evident already in most parts of the criminal code that are generally uncontested. Murder is illegal. They do not spell out all the various ways you can accomplish this goal. The statute simply says intentionally killing another person is illegal. It does not differentiate between running them over or shooting them or poison or stabbing or piano dropping.

    29. Re:Banninate it. by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      I am a highly skilled driver and I tried texting and driving once.

      It was the most dangerous and stupid thing I ever did in a vehicle. I'll never do it again. Dialing a number and driving is quite nearly as bad. I suspect car stereos are pretty bad too but I never use them.

      I can do a lot of things with cars that would make most of you shit yourselves, often while talking with a navigator, but I can't text and drive. So any average driver who confidently proclaims that they can do it is an absolute moron. A total brainless idiot. I'm not sure there's even hope for rehabilitation of someone so staggeringly stupid.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    30. Re:Banninate it. by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 1

      Driving safely requires attention. Really. For everyone, everywhere, because it's always possible for something random to happen that's not your fault. Doesn't matter. Pay attention and you'll (usually) have enough time to deal with it. Distracted, and you lose that opportunity.

      Absolutely! On a typical stretch of road, I'm quite able to drive & drink/eat/fiddle with the radio. However, I could be just one corner away from a heavy traffic or even a wreck that requires 100% of my focus to avoid. Driving is my #1 priority. If I need to use the phone, I can pull over.

      --
      Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
    31. Re:Banninate it. by dark_requiem · · Score: 1

      And my advice is: Please, for the love of all that is logical, get the hell off the road and stop driving! Seriously, you can't conflate the fact that you have some weird habit of dazing off and staring in to space with the notion that everyone does that. I don't. My friends don't. That's very odd, and not exactly a common trait amongst our fellow humans, so far as my powers of observation serve me.

      That aside, its very good that you recognize this limitation you have. Its wonderful that you make appropriate choices in response. Which is, of course, exactly what I'm advocating. You took an objective assessment of your ability to drive and talk, and made the appropriate choice. Doesn't mean it applies to everyone, though. Hopefully you have enough sense to realize that "Well, if I can't do it, no one can." is not a reasonable argument.

    32. Re:Banninate it. by dark_requiem · · Score: 1

      Okay, see if you can follow me on this one: Forza is a game. A racing game. A game where you drive really, really fast. Much faster and on much more difficult tracks than you would encounter driving down a typical highway. And, unless he's invested in a wheel, a gamepad is not a steering wheel, R1 is not a clutch, and you don't shift with buttons. You can't compare a game with unrealistic controls where you're supposed to drive fast and take risks to driving in real life under normal circumstances (unless you're a formula one driver, in which case, yes, please get off your phone during the grand prix).

    33. Re:Banninate it. by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      Most people accept that texting and cellphones cause accidents. But, most people also think they're better drivers than everyone else, and therefore it's okay for them to do it.

      And most people are oblivious that they're making themselves plainly obvious to what they're doing.

      Anytime you see a car that's not keeping up with traffic, hell, doing 20 under the limit on a clear day with dry roads, or suddenly braking at a green light... you know the guy's on the phone.

      Hell, in a mob moving the same direction, the same applies to the person walking slower than the rest who's not elderly. They'd be walking at a snail's pace with their eyes glued to their phone while a crowd of seniors overtakes them on both sides. In walkers. And nevermind going down stairs - they can't stop looking at their phone for 30 seconds to march down the stairs.

      About the only surprise I have for people walking is they haven't dropped their phone from people bumping into them as they try to get around.

    34. Re:Banninate it. by dark_requiem · · Score: 1

      As far as driving an using a cellphone, most countries already make the concession that using a handsfree is okay, even though most studies show it to be just as dangerous as holding the phone. Having an active conversation is the distracting part.

      Right, good point. We shouldn't ban cellphones, we should ban conversations. If the police see you talking to your passenger, or yelling at your kids in the back, why, they should pull you right over. Probably best if they beat you, too. Just to ensure you get the message.

    35. Re:Banninate it. by FyberOptic · · Score: 1

      While I understand the point you're trying to make, since they're required to take driving courses and all, the fact remains that I know of at least two incidents of cops running into civilians in recent months, when not on calls, because they were talking on their cell phone. One of these incidents happened on the corner near my house just three days ago, and the woman in the car had to be taken to the hospital.

      I think this is pretty conclusive evidence that even a trained driver is severely impaired when using a phone.

    36. Re:Banninate it. by RustyShackleford007 · · Score: 2

      Point is, if the government takes it upon themselves to enact a new rule, regulation, or prohibition for every danger in the world, then there's nothing you can do freely.

      This is the main problem, yes. This is why I quit trying to improve the system by voting. In the end, natural selection occurs and natural evolution corrects issues. With our laws limiting so much, there is really no solution in sight. Not everyone will agree on what should and shouldn't happen; bans and regulations inspire more opposition than they do safety.

      --
      Guns don't kill people, regulation does.

    37. Re:Banninate it. by danomac · · Score: 1

      It still requires concentration to think of an answer for the question the caller asked. Concentration in that circumstance would mean taking away concentration from driving.

      Humans do not multitask. We task-switch at best. Nobody is immune to that, and it does apply to everyone.

    38. Re:Banninate it. by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      That would be a fun experiment. Get somebody to play Gran Turismo or Forza and find their average lap time. Then try talking to them while they do some more laps and see how they do. Then hand them a cell phone and talk to them on the phone and see how they do. Then start texting them and getting them to text back and see how they do.
      I would bet that the undistracted lap time is 5 times better than the texting lap time.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    39. Re:Banninate it. by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      Well, if you had a headset and microphone installed in your car, then when people looked at you, they wouldn't be able to see you holding a phone to your ear and therefore would not be able to know how IMPORTANT you are.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    40. Re:Banninate it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was one of those people who thought I could multitask. Was coming home from a concert one night (I was sober) and was texting my friend to tell her how awesome the show was (as she liked the band but had a previous engagement). I sent the message and then looked up...and found my Honda almost under the wheels of a tractor trailer.

      I have never texted and drove again. In fact, I mute my phone so I am not tempted to do it when I hear the familier "ding" of a message arriving.

    41. Re:Banninate it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      *snort* and I expect you think they're good at handling their firearms too?

    42. Re:Banninate it. by mjwx · · Score: 1

      As a 35yr vetran of the road, my advice is that if your mobile rings while your driving either pull over or (heaven forbid) ignore it.

      Agreed.

      Calls go to voicemail, I can check that when I've parked.

      I fully support fines for using your phone (yep, that is a traffic violation in Oz, in my state it's 3 demerit points and $250). Same with speeding fines, seeing as I dont speed or use my phone in the car I'm happy that these people are paying the state govt so I dont have to pay state govt taxes.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    43. Re:Banninate it. by virg_mattes · · Score: 1

      No one argues that cell phones don't cause accidents. But then again, no one argues that scissors aren't dangerous weapons that can be used to kill people.

      The failure in this comparison is intended use. When one uses a cell phone for its intended use while driving, it causes a stistically significant increase in accidents. When people use scissors for their intended use, it doesn't cause a statistically significant rise in murder. Establishing a law that prevents cell phone use while driving increases public safety. Banning scissors would not do the same. Your comparison therefore fails as a parallel.

      Virg

    44. Re:Banninate it. by mjr167 · · Score: 1

      It is the intended use of automobiles to drive at high speeds through populated areas. Automobiles driving through populated areas creates a statistically significant increase the number of deaths/injuries related to automobiles. Therefor we should just ban all automobiles. We would no longer have automobile related fatalities and would all be much safer. Alcohol usage has a statistically significant relationship towards domestic violence incidents. Thus we should ban all alcohol usage. Hunting has a statistically significant relationship to increased gun accidents, so we should ban hunting... The list of activities/things that have direct correlations to deaths in their intended usage is rather large. Should we ban them all indiscriminately in the name of public safety? Who gets to decide what is "safe" and what is "unsafe"? Perhaps grapes should be illegal because they have a direct correlation to small children choking to death...

  5. Don't Ban the whole US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I live in central Nebraska and I can tell you that using a cellphone while driving here is much safer than in the big cities. I don't text and I don't build model airplanes while driving. Please take common sense into consideration before making a generic law which bans cellphones for everyone. Thank you!

    1. Re:Don't Ban the whole US by hedwards · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's still dangerous even if you are in rural Nebraska, even if it isn't as dangerous as it is in the cities and there's ultimately no reason why one should be talking on the phone without at least a headset.

    2. Re:Don't Ban the whole US by Sarten-X · · Score: 1

      Compared to fully-attentive driving, using a cell phone while driving in Nebraska is no safer than anywhere else in the world. Text while driving, and you give X% less attention to the road. Being in central Nebraska just means you have less stuff you're likely to hit, so all driving is safer.

      Think of it this way: If it's reasonably safe to drive in Nebraska while using a cell phone, imagine how safe it'd be if you didn't!

      --
      You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
    3. Re:Don't Ban the whole US by neonmonk · · Score: 1

      False sense of security. There may be less obstacles on the road but a deer is far less likely to run out in front of the car in a big city.

    4. Re:Don't Ban the whole US by sitkill · · Score: 4, Informative

      False sense of security.

      There have been studies, and more well known, mythbusters did an episode on something very similar (is talking on a cellphone while driving just as bad as drinking and driving), and while mythbusters is a bit hollywood science at times, they confirmed the myth. Texting isn't that far off. And in other studies, is just as bad.

      But don't take my word for it, take a look at all the studies and materials.

      There's a reason why texting/talking on the phone is rapidly becoming illegal while driving. But hey! Maybe in Nebraska, facts and truths aren't the norm!

    5. Re:Don't Ban the whole US by dr2chase · · Score: 1

      And wear a condom while you drive, you'll be that much safer.

    6. Re:Don't Ban the whole US by Pentium100 · · Score: 1

      Texting isn't that far off. And in other studies, is just as bad.

      Wouldn't it be even worse because when you are talking you are still looking at the road, while when texting you are looking at the phone?

    7. Re:Don't Ban the whole US by rolfwind · · Score: 2

      The headset is nearly useless. Talking over the phone is more distracting than a car passenger, because passengers realize when to stfu because of situational cues, and you aren't pressured to keep the conversation going when the situation demands all your attention since a passenger realizes this, but a phone participant doesn't and keeps on going.

      http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2002374605_cellphones12.html

    8. Re:Don't Ban the whole US by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      The headset is nearly useless.

      I'll see you one useless and raise you a dangerous.

      With a normal phone other drivers have a decent chance to notice the person with their hand up to their ear and give them a wider berth. But with the various handsfree laws in many states there is basically no way to distinguish between a normal driver and one who has half their mind on the other end of a telephone conversation.

      The only study to ever show a significant improvement in safety with a handsfree phone versus a handheld phone was commissioned by Plantronics - maker of phone headsets. These handfree laws are just another case of "This situation is terrible! Something must be done! The wrong thing is something! So we must do the wrong thing!"

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    9. Re:Don't Ban the whole US by tqk · · Score: 1

      And wear a condom while you drive, you'll be that much safer.

      Darwin principle in action, ya gotta love it. Please use a telephone pole, not some innocent bystander to do it. Bye.

      --
      "Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit ..." -- Pink Floyd.
    10. Re:Don't Ban the whole US by Ihmhi · · Score: 1

      The only place I would disagree with cell phones being dangerous while driving is exactly that sort of place. When you have a hundred miles of practically straight country road ahead of you and nothing but grass plains on either side, it's pretty hard to swerve off the road, run into someone, or hit something bigger than a prairie dog.

    11. Re:Don't Ban the whole US by delinear · · Score: 1

      Not to mention in rural Nebraska it should be even easier to find a spot to pull over if you need to make/take a call than it is in the middle of a busy metropolis, so there's even less excuse.

    12. Re:Don't Ban the whole US by delinear · · Score: 1

      My guess is that it's as bad or worse, it just doesn't show up as much in the statistics because, well, how do you prove someone was texting when they crashed unless they admit it after the fact? It's much easier to pull their call logs and show their phone was actively engaged in a call at the time, with texts it's much harder to prove unless you can show a pattern of behaviour over the preceeding minutes, and even then it's not nearly as conclusive.

    13. Re:Don't Ban the whole US by hedwards · · Score: 1

      It is something and a hands free phone is somewhat better than nothing, you then have two hands on the wheel, making it less likely that you'll lose control of the vehicle due to losing your grip on the wheel. The problem with banning headsets as well is that you're never going to know who is and isn't using one, they're already small enough to be covered by ones own hair without having to be a hippy.

    14. Re:Don't Ban the whole US by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      Texting isn't that far off. And in other studies, is just as bad.
      Texting is at least an order of magnitude more dangerous than talking on the phone. You have to take your eyes off the radio for seconds at a time. At highway speeds, texting means missing hundreds of feet of action.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    15. Re:Don't Ban the whole US by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      "This situation is terrible! Something must be done! The wrong thing is something! So we must do the wrong thing!"

      It is something ...

      LOL

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
  6. Easily settled... by Ed+Peepers · · Score: 2

    Duh, just look to see if accidents increased again when service was restored.

  7. Nonsense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    People would be constantly checking their phones to see if they're working again. At least with a working device you only bother with it when it notifies you.
     
    While I agree that they're a distraction, I just don't see them as less of a distraction if people keep checking them to see if it's working again.

    1. Re:Nonsense by gstrickler · · Score: 1

      Uh, no. If their phones notify them when they receive a message, there is no need to constantly check even during an outage.

      --
      make imaginary.friends COUNT=100 VISIBLE=false
    2. Re:Nonsense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're assuming the people think that way. It's a very false assumption. I guess you either don't spend any time around end users or you don't realize what mistakes you're making with your own technology. Either way you're a fucktard and a cunt. Shitbag!

  8. Solution by Geak · · Score: 1

    Here's a simple solution that could be built in - a gps check to see if the phone is travelling too fast to be a human on foot - and disable the keypad.

    1. Re:Solution by fermat1313 · · Score: 1

      Here's a simple solution that could be built in - a gps check to see if the phone is travelling too fast to be a human on foot - and disable the keypad.

      That would also keep passengers from using their devices, including people in taxis, trains and buses. It'll never fly. You take away one of the top use cases for mobile devices in urban areas.

    2. Re:Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      GREAT! Now every passenger inside a commuter van or public transportation can no longer use their phones.

    3. Re:Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What if a passenger wants to use his phone? Of course, it might not be that bad if it can keeps rude individuals from shouting into their cellphones, annoying everyone else on the bus (or train car).

    4. Re:Solution by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, because last summer when I was working from the back of our car during a nation wide road trip with my wife and son was SOOOO dangerous. That and It is definitely safer for people to try and read paper maps while driving than it is for them to have turn by turn directions coming out of their phone. After all, it's a phone. It must be dangerous. Right?

    5. Re:Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      passengers and bus riders

    6. Re:Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't you know better than to argue against a religious belief? Much like belief in AGW and the evils of secondhand smoke, belief in phone danger! has reached an irrational fever pitch. Just wait until they start tallying "cell phone related accidents" using the same intentionally disingenuous methods they use to count alcohol-related car accidents.

      You will be lucky to avoid "reeducation" if you stay this vocal. Anon for obvious reasons.

  9. I believe it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Texting while driving is stupid and irresponsible. What is so important that it can't wait til you arrive at your destination? I would say let them all die and weed their genes out of the gene pool, but too many innocent people would be injured as well.

    Sent from my iPhone (while driving)

    1. Re:I believe it! by siddesu · · Score: 1

      Doing anything else while driving is stupid and irresponsible, but people keep doing it. I don't drive all that much and I've seen people: texting, talking on the phone, fiddling with their navigation system, fumbling with stuff in the locker, receiving blowjobs, giving blowjobs, checking diapers, changing diapers, counting money, reloading a shotgun, shooting with a shotgun, choosing music, changing the car radio presets, sending shit from their iphones even. That is why the responsible measure against violators should be a preemptive Darwin award.

    2. Re:I believe it! by Pentium100 · · Score: 1

      What is so important that it can't wait til you arrive at your destination?

      If it is important, just stop and then text/call. But the people who text while driving are probably part of the group who will overtake a car just to arrive at a red light (that they saw before overtaking) one second sooner.

  10. Data or It Didn't Happen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    TFA says "Road traffic accidents in Abu Dhabi are said to have dropped by 40%, and there was a 20% reduction in Dubai in the past week." But that could have been totally spurious noise that coincidentally aligned with the Bberry outage. If accidents had been higher instead, would they have ignored it? If you only ever make note of coincidences and ignore non-coincidences, then life can seem pretty magical when really all you have is a filter that shows you what you'd like to believe. Bottom line: please share the data and let us all judge for ourselves whether there is cause-and-effect going on here.

    1. Re:Data or It Didn't Happen by Khashishi · · Score: 1

      Agreed. Rare incidents like car crashes generally generate Poisson distributions. Without knowing how many accidents typically occur in a week, there's no way to know if a 40% change is statistically meaningful. The standard deviation is just the square root of the mean count. The value 40% is suggestive of a total count of 5 or 10, though of course any multiple of 5 would work. If it's a change from 5 to 3, it's not meaningful.

    2. Re:Data or It Didn't Happen by _0xd0ad · · Score: 1

      Without knowing how many accidents typically occur in a week

      Um, IIRC the accident rates in the UAE, per vehicle, per mile, are something like the highest in the world. I can't find that statistic, but I did find that in 2009, in the city of Dubai alone there were almost 9.8 accidents PER DAY, about 6.29% of which were fatality crashes. And in 2008 it was substantially worse (10% more accidents, 23% more fatalities).

      And it also has this delightfully encouraging bit of advice:

      The death toll on Dubai roads is one of the highest in the world per head of population, no doubt this is exacerbated by the prevalence of powerful expensive cars and opportunities to drive them fast. It doesn't help that 80% or more of Dubai is expatriate with a wide range of nationalities represented - anyone who has travelled out of their home country will immediately notice that driving standards and habits vary the world over. Assume that every bad habit you've ever seen is imported into Dubai and you'll get the idea.

  11. Theyab Awana by kbahey · · Score: 1

    Yes, very likely.

    A famous football player there was killed in a car accident.

    His father made a plea for people not to use smart phones or Blackberry devices while driving.

  12. Without a Doubt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    From where I live .... drivers around here are doing many other things except ... driving.

    Where I live there is a joke. 99% of Drivers are Drunk. Of the rest ... 99% do not have a license. Of the rest ... 99% are sexting.
    What does this add up to. One big fuck'n problem even if you are waling down the street on the sidewalk with all the cars fly'n off the road this way and that way. People who ... or once had houses along the main roads are moving out ... pronto.

    An what about the louts drive'n their lorries through shopping center and school buildings just to get a piss off.

    The End of Civilization.

       

  13. Alberta's new law by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Here in Alberta, we've recently enacted a distracted driving law which covers talking/texting while driving (holding the handset. Hands free devices allowed), fiddling with mp3 players and GPS units while moving, applying makeup and personal grooming, using a laptop, watching movies in the front seat on a hacked DVD player, etc.

    The fine is $172 per infraction and yet I still see people doing all of the above. Hell, I was pulled over just after an intersection because the cop thought I was driving while distracted until he found out my truck has a manual transmission and I was just shifting gears!

  14. celebrity example by KingAlanI · · Score: 1

    If it takes a celebrity example of the problem to get peoples' attention, so be it - whatever works, and focus on celebrities is channeled into something positive for once. (In this case, it's the circumstances surrounding the soccer player's death)

    --
    I listen to both RIAA and non-RIAA stuff if I like the music, tangential business/politics nonwithstanding.
  15. Playing violin on interstate by jbov · · Score: 3, Insightful

    My family and I were traveling on I-95 in the US and saw a woman playing a violin while driving. No joke. Presumably, she was steering with her knees. In disbelief, I wanted to get a better look, but I wouldn't risk being in the lane adjacent to her. I think we need a campaign to ban playing musical instruments while driving.

  16. Mythbusters: Deeper conversations impair driving by jbov · · Score: 1

    To expand on this, the Mythbusters confirmed that the poor driving resulted regardless of using a hands-free device. The greatest component in the loss of driving abilities was the amount of concentration required by the discussion. They had people drive obstacle courses while having conversations three ways, 1) holding the phone 2) using a hands free device 3) with a passenger in the car.

    The tests concluded that while having a casual conversation, the obstacle course was navigated well. When asked to solve simple math problems while driving, such as 56 divided by 8, the participants failed miserably. This was with a person in the back seat asking the questions.

    I used to have my passenger read the letters from the Jumble puzzles to me while driving to pass the time. I thought I was safe as long as I had two hands on the wheel and I wasn't reading them myself. I don't do that anymore.

  17. Don't imagine this is primarily cell phone related by liquiddark · · Score: 1

    Both my parents have lived in Qatar for 10 years and have visited most of the countries in the region. Text or no text there are a huge number of shitty drivers in the form of careless nationals driving over there who can get away with literally anything up to and including totalling hundred thousand dollar cars and face minimal or zero prosecution for doing so, even though they endanger other drivers in the process. Check Youtube for videos of young stupid bastards driving up on two wheels. This is something my dad's seen first hand. There is a huge sea change in traffic law enforcement required to make the roads safer in that area of the world. Being smug about cell phone usage doesn't begin to tap into the problem they're actually facing.

  18. Blackberry is evil! by metalmaster · · Score: 2

    Remember folks, this is the same RIM/Blackberry that wouldn't grant UAE and a few other countries a private BBM server so they got pissed and shut down the service. This article holds a little more than bias. The summary could read "The evil blackberry services were shutdown and our country is safer for it" and the overall message would remain the same.

  19. Effin's science confirmed that in episode 2 by NotesSensei · · Score: 1

    While to the best source for scientific accuracy, Effin's science did a similar experiment in episode 2, where texting detoriated attention even worse than drinking. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/It's_Effin'_Science

  20. Yes, I believe it by jaweekes · · Score: 2

    Yes, the drivers here (in Abu Dhabi) really are that bad. Blackberry's are not illegal here as other posts have said; they have huge billboards advertising the latest ones all over the place (Blackberry's were banned at one point, but RIM have let the UAE government to see the traffic, as has happened in many countries recently). The cars are also heavily tinted because of the sun, so it's almost impossible to tell what people are doing in their cars.

    You also have a good mix of Indian, Pakistani, Arab, European and African drivers who all have different ideas about driving. It is not unusual for the middle lane on a 5 lane road to turn left in front of everyone else going straight.

    But the most common accident is being rear-ended by drivers using their phones and not looking at the road. And I can say that over the last week I have seen less accidents, so the numbers actually sound right.

    1. Re:Yes, I believe it by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Having very recently spent some time in the UAE again it amazes me that people are able to survive at all. Where I come from a lane ending means that you put on your indicator and merge when traffic permits. In the UAE it seems to be a competition of slam your foot on the gas and see how far in front of all the other cars you can get without mounting the curb.

    2. Re:Yes, I believe it by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      "The cars are also heavily tinted because of the sun, so it's almost impossible to tell what people are doing in their cars."

      No not because of the sun, because it's trendy and because of cultural factors. heavily tinting your car windows does NOTHING to control temperature inside, black adsorbs heat and after the 60% tints it's useless to tint further and will actually create more heat, they all ride around with 5% limo tint because it's trendy, and not seeing in the car keeps others from looking at you and seeing inside your "private space".

      Your car is not insulated, so even black windows will let the car get up to the same temperature as clear windows while it sits. Tinting is for looks, claims by tint sellers to any other benefit are just lies to get you to buy their product.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    3. Re:Yes, I believe it by Xacid · · Score: 1

      I don't think you quite understand how tint works.

      Give this a read: http://www.ehow.com/how-does_4597153_window-tint-work.html

      Basically blocks out a percentage of the visible spectrum as well as infrared and UV.

      So yes, it would actually reduce the temperature the car would be w/o tint.

    4. Re:Yes, I believe it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You also have a good mix of Indian, Pakistani, Arab, European and African drivers who all have different ideas about driving. It is not unusual for the middle lane on a 5 lane road to turn left in front of everyone else going straight.


      Sounds just like driving in the Washington, DC area.

    5. Re:Yes, I believe it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      if your education is from ehow than I feel bad for you.

      Window Glass on it's own blocks 99% of UV.. any claim that window tint does is total marketing bullshit. Lumpy is actually right except for Ceramic based films designed to provide a Low-E effect to glass do SLOW heat gain.

      90% of all car tints do not use this. and are just for looks.

      Also, take two cars, one with tint and one without sitting in the sun, both will hit the same temperature in 2 hours. Anyone telling you otherwise is a liar. the color of the paint on your car has more effect than a dark tint.

      Now a reflective tint, that is another story, but illegal on cars.

    6. Re:Yes, I believe it by Alan+R+Light · · Score: 1

      Yes, very aggressive drivers in UAE. It is dangerous even to cross the street on foot, when the cars are all stopped and have nowhere to go because they're in the middle of a traffic jam.

      There are only a few countries in the world that I refuse to visit again - UAE is second only to Thailand with its aggressive and plentiful thieves.

    7. Re:Yes, I believe it by Xacid · · Score: 1

      Didn't you know, I earned my degree from howstuffworks.com.

      Anywho, a car will reach ambient outside temperature if it's outside - sure. But the car in the sun will exceed that.

    8. Re:Yes, I believe it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Basically blocks out a percentage of the visible spectrum as well as infrared and UV.

      So yes, it would actually reduce the temperature the car would be w/o tint.

      Unless you meant to say "reflects", then no, not really. And the only benefit to blocking infrared and UV is to your eyes, which sunglasses will accomplish just fine.

    9. Re:Yes, I believe it by Xacid · · Score: 1

      From the perspective of the interior of the vehicle a reflection outward would be blocking.

      And blocking/reflecting IR/UV doesn't just benefit the eyes. UV, for instance, has a tendency for breaking down materials. IR hitting a material causes heating (though much of the light spectrum has this same effect in varying degrees).

    10. Re:Yes, I believe it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      From the perspective of the interior of the vehicle a reflection outward would be blocking.

      Not in the least. Blocking radiation is very different from reflecting it and the two words shouldn't be used interchangeably. Tint that blocks light makes your car get hotter. Tint that reflected light would not. Anyway, as the other guy said, tint doesn't reflect any light, it just absorbs it, hence why it looks "dark" from the inside and the outside. By the way, you have seen reflective tint: one-way mirrors. They don't look dark, they just look reflective. But they can't be used on automobile windows, mostly because cops want to be able to see you when they approach your vehicle.

      UV, for instance, has a tendency for breaking down materials

      Your windshield already has UV-blocking built into it. It doesn't have to block visible light to block UV.

      IR hitting a material causes heating (though much of the light spectrum has this same effect in varying degrees)

      Yes, and that's the point. Any IR that's blocked by the tint just makes the car hotter. Unless the glass is designed to have very low heat transfer rates and radiates heat well, it just heats the inside of the car. But the inside of the car would be heated anyway because that light would have hit something inside the car anyway. So there's really no gain in tinting your windows (and no loss either, other than the fact that it's hard to see through).

  21. This is all very unscientific by troll+-1 · · Score: 1

    20% and 40% seem like suspiciously rounded figures. I wish people wouldn't make claims without publishing the actual data including the control data and standard deviation. Have the rates ever varied as much during other 3-day periods when there was no phone outage? The story about the soccer player is anecdotal and establishes neither correlation nor causation as it's not even conclusive he was texting and a sample space of 'one' is meaningless.

    1. Re:This is all very unscientific by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the UAE 40% official statistics might be inaccurate.

  22. Idea. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Kill a famous soccer player a week and legalize texting while driving. No net loss.

  23. Amid by Anynomous+Coward · · Score: 1

    Who is Amid, and why does he claim that he was sending a message on his BlackBerry when he hit a lorry ?

    --
    I'm not a coward by any name.
  24. The phone & text services were not affected by lostdistance · · Score: 2

    ... BlackBerry outage, which frustrated business people around the world who were unable to communicate with their colleagues, ...

    Unable to communicate? Despite the fact that the phone & text services were not affected?

  25. Flintstones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Did you know that the people in Dubai don't like the Flintstones, but the people in Abu Dhabi do?

    Thank you, I'm here all week ;-)

  26. Re:Mythbusters: Deeper conversations impair drivin by delinear · · Score: 1

    The key thing is having a passenger who is aware of the situation outside the car. A passenger can keep you alert and active on a long, tedious drive, and can therefore be a good thing. In reality if you are navigating tricky obstacles, most passengers will shut up until you're out of danger, not throw maths questions at you :) That's why the phone is worse - the person on the other end has no way to read the driving situation and adjust their level of engagement accordingly.

  27. If you text and drive.... by Lumpy · · Score: 1

    Stop it. Or spend some money and buy an android phone that will do Text to Speech and Voice to Text for you, Or buy a ford with Sync if you cant deal with your OCD and let an incoming text sit until you can check it safely. I am even O.K. with you talking on the phone and driving if you have a headset. I have a bluetooth helmet and it is very safe to carry on a conversation while driving with a headset.

    As a motorcyclist, I have resorted to mounting TWO 180db air horns to my bike. On 3 occasions I have had to blow those horns to get the attention of the idiot 20 something that is busy texting his/her BFF about some stupid thing instead of fricking driving and staying in their lane. Previously I have ridden 190,000 miles and 20 years without having to blow my horn except for one time when a 90 year old lady that should not have been on the road tried to run me off the road. Drivers that text are worse than a 90 year old blind woman with senility. I can easily spot them also on the highway on my daily commute easily, they are erratic and suddenly slow down and then speed back up.

    Honestly, they need to make texting while driving a $10,000 file with 30 days in jail giving $1,000 of the fine to cops as a bonus to encourage them to go texter hunting.

    I am tired of people risking my life so they can do something stupid, Either fine the stupid people hard, or let me start carrying large bolts to throw at their cars.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  28. accidents? by Syberz · · Score: 1

    Some people call it accidents, I call it natural selection. I'm sorry, but if you're dumb enough to text and email while driving then don't be surprised when you hit a pole.

    The sad thing in all of this are the innocent people that get rammed into by these idiots.

    --
    ~Syberz
  29. I Ban Them on a Regular Basis by Phoenix666 · · Score: 1

    Blackberries and the like are the bane of productive activity. Every meeting takes 5x as long and is 1/5 as effective because the idiots are tapping away on their phones instead of paying attention and contributing to the discussion; you wind up repeating everything multiple times and it still doesn't sink in because their eyes are glazed while thinking about how their friend just tweeted "OMG that hot guy totally checked me out."

    There are a couple instances when it is useful to whip out your phone, like when you're lost and need directions or you're waiting for a bus and want to kill time. Or when you want to restart a server remotely. But those times are far outweighed by the inappropriate times.

    --
    Do what you can, with what you have, where you are.
  30. Block texting services for devices on roads by shpoffo · · Score: 1

    If SMS, BBM, and FB blocked messaging when a phone was traveling on a road then lots of the problem could go away. Road GPS routes can be determined without much difficultly at the network level, and data like from the UAE shows that it will save lives.

    Only audio interfaces should be permissible for drivers. I can safely use the phone with hands free voice dial and a headset while driving. I slow or pull over if it's business and I need to focus heavily on the discussion. Otherwise, I'm just sending notes or scheduling tasks. An audio UI for email nav, dictation, and TTS would be a killer killer app. no one will make it, though, except the big email providers because every other business model is DOA. Google, why you no do shit people want?

    1. Re:Block texting services for devices on roads by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 1

      "Road GPS routes can be determined without much difficultly at the network level, and data like from the UAE shows that it will save lives."

      My office is 3m from a major road in the Anchorage CBD, under your proposal the messaging would be blocked with GPS.

      The accuracy of civilian GPS varies from plus or minus .5 to 6.7 meters.

      So I could sit at work and have all my SMS blocked because of the inherent inaccuracy of the system.

  31. bad drivers by Alan+R+Light · · Score: 1

    I can believe this. I visited Abu Dhabi (UAE) in 2008. Worst drivers ever. Aggressive.

    I've visited about 60 different countries and all 7 continents, so I have a few examples to compare it with.

    1. Re:bad drivers by mjwx · · Score: 1

      I can believe this. I visited Abu Dhabi (UAE) in 2008. Worst drivers ever. Aggressive.

      I've visited about 60 different countries and all 7 continents, so I have a few examples to compare it with.

      Dubai is worse, not only do you get the kind of drivers that the GP mentioned, you also get bad drivers from all over the world who dont have to sit decent driving tests. You've got people following the road rules from a dozen different nations and then you've got those that just make them up as they go along.

      Also if you see a white Merc SUV with the number plate "1", get the fuck out of the way, that's the Sheik Moh.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
  32. banned cell phones while driving by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well in Washington State, USA they banned ALL cell phone use while driving a few years ago (primary offense: a cell phone spotted in a drivers hand), so now we regularly follow a car down an open road, and people will slam on their brakes and swerve halfway off the road before stopping (still sticking partway into traffic) in order to catch the call before they hang up. It is a little unnerving on freeways. The truth is, if people put that much importance on answering phones/texts/etc. they are not going to be safe drivers no matter the laws in place.

    It will be a problem until phones are location aware enough to not ring/place calls while in the driver area of a car... And I don't see that selling well.

  33. while driving by mjwx · · Score: 0

    What else am I missing?

    A clue.

    In fact the only thing you're not missing is a strawman.

    In order to change the song on my CD/MP3 player it takes one hand off the wheel for all of 3 seconds and because I know where the buttons are it takes 0 eyes off the road. If I write a text on my mobile I take 2 hands off the wheel, 2 eyes off the road and 1 mind off the job. This is why I dont text, hell, I wont even bugger around with my radio when I'm on the freeway.

    Also, I've lost count the number of times I've almost been side-swiped by some dingbat in a beat up old Excel talking on the phone. It's a good thing I was not on the phone and distracted like these utter tossers as that would have resulted 4 accidents in the last 3 months for me. The only reason wankers on phones dont have more accidents is because of other drivers who have a clue performing emergency manoeuvres to avoid them.

    --
    Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    1. Re:while driving by N0Man74 · · Score: 1

      I didn't use Ad Hominem either, but I'll leave that one for you.

      Listen, I'm not suggesting that texting and driving isn't distracting, or can't have a negative impact on driving. Of course it can. So can many other things. Many of these have been determined to be higher risk activities.

      Looking at objects (or people) outside the car has been found to pose a greater risk than talking on a phone (the offense that you specifically appeared to be indignant about). Though dialing a phone is riskier than eating, eating is more risky than using a phone. Inserting or retrieving a CD is between eating and dialing.

      And maybe you are right, and that you can fiddle with your CD or MP3 player in a few seconds, but my car has a 5 disc MP3 on DVD player that doesn't support playlists or random play, but does support browsing directories. On the other hand, I can send a text using my phone's microphone and text-to-speech. It is illegal for me to use speech-to-text in extremely slow moving traffic, yet it's legal for me to search for the right file, in the right folder, on the right DVD, with an extremely badly designed user interface, while driving 75 MPH.

      Also, not all phones require 2 hands. Not all of them even require looking. Some people, on some phones, are able to type completely blind while keeping their eyes on the road.

      There have been studies that show no reduction in crashes after banning phones while driving, even though phone use will driving did decrease. One has to wonder whether making it illegal means that some people will try harder to hide it, taking their eyes even further away from the road as they conceal their phones out of plain sight, such as down near their lap.

      Studies show that hands-free devices aren't really any safer than holding it. Analysis suggests it is believed that the mental workload of holding the conversation is what increases risk, not the act of holding a phone.

      While I think it is a bad idea to talk on a phone or text on it while driving, I am just skeptical of the legitimacy of the moral outrage for it, and wonder how other risks compare, and am skeptical of the need of additional legislation (or at least, the types being created).

      But go ahead. Say I don't have a clue, just because I am not rushing to join the "there ought to be a law!" crowd.

    2. Re:while driving by mjwx · · Score: 1

      But go ahead. Say I don't have a clue, just because I am not rushing to join the "there ought to be a law!" crowd.

      This is the reason you dont have a clue. You didn't read my post and just substituted it with whatever you needed to in order to paint me as an alarmist. What I said was, there is good reason we ban phone use and not radio use.

      Also, not all phones require 2 hands. Not all of them even require looking. Some people, on some phones, are able to type completely blind while keeping their eyes on the road.

      This is also why you dont have a clue.

      A lot of people think they can drive and text, in reality they can't. Please see Dunning-Kruger for an explanation.

      It is impossible for a person to use a phone and concentrate on the road because a person only has one set of eyes and one brain. In order to do both activities at once these functions need to be time shared and doing that whilst driving is an incredibly dangerous thing to do.

      But go ahead, twist whatever I have said because it doesn't fit in with your view, It wont change the fact that using a phone whilst driving is incredibly dangerous.

      Further more, I've passed defensive driving which is required to hold an MVDIL (Motor Vehicle Driver Instructors License), meaning I teach others how to drive safely, so I know a bit more about this then the average A to B commuter.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.