Slashdot Mirror


Quantifying the Risk of Texting Drivers

An anonymous reader writes "More than 5000 people die each year as a result of being distracted while driving, and a new study indicates that teens and cell phones make for the most volatile combination. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration estimates that of all drivers under 20 involved in fatal crashes, 16 percent were distracted — the highest proportion of any age group. 'Shockingly, texting drivers took their eyes off the road for each text an average of 4.6 seconds — which at 55 mph, means they were driving the length of a football field without looking,' said David Hosansky."

57 of 217 comments (clear)

  1. Obligatory YouTube video by Dark$ide · · Score: 5, Insightful
    --

    Sigs. We don't need no steenking sigs.

    1. Re:Obligatory YouTube video by karnal · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I've seen this video a few times; is a true testament to how people get distracted.

      Yesterday I had 4 others in my car, driving to get lunch after running/walking in the Komen race in Columbus. There was a man in a truck beside us, veering into our lane about 1 foot. Not the biggest deal, I crunched myself up against the yellow line (was a 2x2 road). Later on, one of the passengers asked "Is that guy in front of us drunk?" He kept weaving about a foot on each side, about once a minute in an almost rhythmic motion. Would slowly move into either lane and then after about 10 seconds jerk the wheel back. Driver wasn't texting - he was just talking on the cell and not texting. I'd hate to see what happens if he was texting and actually not having his eyes on the road.

      And of course, my personal anecdotes from riding a motorcycle around this city are many. My biggest problem is there is no good way to communicate with another driver to kindly ask them to be careful with your life while you're on the road; most people beep and take it as a sign of aggression - or worse, just jump to the middle finger. My main issue there is that you never know what someone might do; and with me on a motorcycle and them in a car - even if I'm right - it'll still hurt me worse.

      --
      Karnal
    2. Re:Obligatory YouTube video by TheRaven64 · · Score: 3, Informative

      If you notice someone driving dangerously, you can report them to the police. I did this when someone decided to start reversing out of a parking space and drove into my leg. Very low speed collision, so I wasn't injured, but he refused to admit that he'd done anything wrong by reversing into a stationary pedestrian without looking. The police went and had a chat with him about paying due care and attention. Maybe next time, he made sure he checked his blind spot before reversing...

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    3. Re:Obligatory YouTube video by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Somewhat related, there really needs to be a universal "I'm Sorry" hand signal. Right now there's just like "Hello" "Bye" and "Fuck You."

    4. Re:Obligatory YouTube video by Zibodiz · · Score: 2

      I second this. The embarrassed cringe just doesn't cut it-- I think they usually mistake that for an 'oops, you caught me.'

    5. Re:Obligatory YouTube video by St.Creed · · Score: 3, Informative

      In The Netherlands there was a contest on one of the radioshows for this, and the gesture that won was a hand, with all fingers stretched out (open hand) in the air. It's actually quite common to see it.

      --
      Therefore, by the (faulty) logic you're using, you're just a cow with a keyboard - osu-neko (2604)
    6. Re:Obligatory YouTube video by MrL0G1C · · Score: 2

      Fuck sorry, as a cyclist I want people paying attention to what they're doing on the road, most of the time 'sorry' just does not cut it.

      --
      Waterfox - a Firefox fork with legacy extension support, security updates and better privacy by default.
    7. Re:Obligatory YouTube video by BronsCon · · Score: 3, Funny

      Likewise. I can't count the number of times someone on a bike has made a left turn *ON RED* in front of me when I had a green light to go straight. Of course, since I'm paying attention, I know to lay on the horn, flash the brights, and floor it. Maybe after I kill a few of you, you'll learn to obey traffic laws just as you expect us to.

      --
      APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
  2. Inexperienced drivers are inexperienced by _LORAX_ · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Young drives have always been at risk because they have the least experience, only the distractions have changed over time.

    1. Re:Inexperienced drivers are inexperienced by vlm · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Whatever the youth are interested in will be demonized. 60 years ago it was Elvis's hips, 50 years ago rock n roll, 30 years ago dungeons and dragons, 20 years ago it was computers/video games, now its texting. Its basically "children will be seen not heard" extended into very young adulthood.

      30 years ago if a guy was fumbling around with his 8 track player or screaming at the kids in the back seat and got in an accident, eh no proof, probably get a ticket for inattentive driving anyway. Now you can prove with digital precision that the guy was sending a text message. The ability to prove exactly how the guy was goofing off is supposed to invoke moral outrage in me. It fails.

      Lets try an Einstein-ian thought experiment. Dude runs over your friend and kills them. Do you feel any different about your friend's death knowing dude was texting or trying to eat a fast food burger? We are being extremely heavily propagandized that death from texting is horrifically worse than death by burger/cd/radio/8 track/plain ole daydreaming/being lost/reading a old fashioned paper map/reading a GPS map.

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    2. Re:Inexperienced drivers are inexperienced by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well, after having pretty much all my family in near fatal car crashes, I can definitively say there is a difference.
      With my folks, they got hit by a drunk driver who was driving on the wrong side of a mountain road.
      With my sister, it was a drunk driver.
      With my brother, it was simply a notoriously bad junction he was coming out of.

      Yeah, it sucks to be in the intensive care ward looking at people hanging by a thread, but when you KNOW that someone deliberately did something really stupid to put that person there, you really, really ask yourself a lot of questions about them, and about life, and about things that a illegal.

    3. Re:Inexperienced drivers are inexperienced by dietdew7 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The distraction of texting is not equivalent to that of eating a burger. Texting while driving is extra stupid, I need almost full attention to text and much less to eat. imagine a spectrum of irresponsibility with just listening to the radio on the low end and smashed drunk driving on the other. Texting is right up next to drunk driving for stupidity.

    4. Re:Inexperienced drivers are inexperienced by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You miss the point. Read the article, please, before commenting on it, it really helps. What Elvis, rock&roll, D&D and video games have with driving? Nobody said that accidents caused by texting and driving are worse than accidents caused by eating a burger and driving. What the article does say is that 16% of accidents caused by drivers under 20 is caused by distraction, and specifically that "among the various distractions, ranging from talking with passengers to adjusting the radio, texting while driving was particularly perilous: a 2009 study focusing on drivers of larger vehicles and trucks concluded that texting raised the risk of a crash by 23 times compared with nondistracted driving". It admits also that "even talking proved to be dangerous" and that "the distractions don't stop with cellphones; carmakers are adding new technologies to the dashboard, such as Web browsers and GPS units". It's also interesting that "a poll last year found that 59 percent of adult drivers admitted to talking on a handheld cellphone while behind the wheel, and 37 percent said they engaged in texting". So even the average driver admits that texting is more dangerous than talking on the phone while driving. But you're probably not an average driver. You're a superdriver. Until you crash into somebody while texting.

    5. Re:Inexperienced drivers are inexperienced by WaZiX · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Do you feel any different about your friend's death knowing dude was texting or trying to eat a fast food burger? We are being extremely heavily propagandized that death from texting is horrifically worse than death by burger/cd/radio/8 track/plain ole daydreaming/being lost/reading a old fashioned paper map/reading a GPS map.

      Distractions of any kind increase the risk of having an accident. Texting while driving is a relatively new phenomenon and many people are not yet conscious of how much it increases the odds of having an accident. It's not propaganda to point that out.

      My work is directly related to accidents (I do statistical modelling of extreme events in reinsurance) and believe me that when you have to study "dumb" accidents caused by reckless driving, texting, alcohol or simply excessive speed (1) you fully understand the motives behind what you call "propaganda". People, often kids or young adults which are hit by death, vegetative states, para- or tetraplegia, amputated limbs, ... these are the consequences of accidents and they happen every day. Believe me that when you are exposed to those horrors on a daily basis you see things a little differently. And I have a relative distance between myself and the victims, I can only hardly imagine having to go to the scene of the accident or having to judge such cases all day.

      Those campaigns may be shocking or seen as demagogy, but they merely translate a reality which fortunately most people don't have to be confronted to every day. Its not propaganda, its reality.

      (1) Excessive speed relative to the traffic increases the odds of an accident exponentially and there is also an exponential relationship between speed and the consequences of the accident; reason why the combined distribution is often Pareto-like.

    6. Re:Inexperienced drivers are inexperienced by Capt.Albatross · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Whatever the youth are interested in will be demonized.

      As texting while driving is clearly dangerous, this is irrelevant.

      The ability to prove exactly how the guy was goofing off is supposed to invoke moral outrage in me.

      No, it is the act of putting others in grave danger for no good reason that is considered immoral.

    7. Re:Inexperienced drivers are inexperienced by pla · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What the article does say is that 16% of accidents caused by drivers under 20 is caused by distraction

      Wait - Only 16%? Seriously? And that includes "talking with passengers" and "adjusting the radio"? Wow, way to make exactly the opposite of the intended point, TFA!

      Shouldn't we perhaps worry about the other 84% before we go crazy talking about things like motion sensors to disable cell phones when in motion above some arbitrary speed?

    8. Re:Inexperienced drivers are inexperienced by AngryDeuce · · Score: 5, Informative

      Texting is right up next to drunk driving for stupidity.

      Texting while driving has actually been demonstrated to be worse than drunk driving in some experiments.

      At least the drunk person has the intoxicating effects to blame for their idiocy (although obviously they're the ones that chose to drink in the first place so no sympathy on that count), but most people trying to text and drive at the same time are stone sober and thus have no excuse for their stupidity.

    9. Re:Inexperienced drivers are inexperienced by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And propaganda is dangerous. We need better trained drivers who recognize a distraction as a distraction, not just what they are told is one. So by putting emphasize on one type of distraction you are teaching drivers only to pay attention to this one distraction and the others are okay. That's stupid, no that's insane. Anyways the number 1 distraction, as studies were showing was tired driving, what do we really need propaganda telling people not to grab a pillow while driving?

      Propaganda is why I drive down the road with people who drive 5 mph under the speed limit (because you know speed kills) but can't turn a turn signal nor understand why it's bad to come to a complete stop on the road to either turn or let someone out (stopping on the road is illegal btw.) That's what propaganda gets you, people who see only a small portion of the picture and not the whole thing and end being more dangerous then the original problem you try to solve.

      Instead of playing whack-a-mole with legislation and what each individual distraction is, why don't we better train drivers to do all the things right when they sit behind a wheel.

    10. Re:Inexperienced drivers are inexperienced by Idarubicin · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Most states are discouraging teens from driving at all. Death is better than an empty life.

      Source?

      In any case, the best possible world would be one where "most states are discouraging driving". Build liveable, walkable communities, with proper mixed-use development, green spaces, multi-use trails for pedestrians and bicycles, and good connections to public transit.

      If the only way for a teen to buy groceries is by driving ten miles to a big-box Wal-Mart as the sole occupant of a seven-passenger SUV, then something is fundamentally broken.

      --
      ~Idarubicin
    11. Re:Inexperienced drivers are inexperienced by Biotech_is_Godzilla · · Score: 2

      Except Elvis's hips, D&D and video games aren't generally used to distract you while driving, and therefore don't represent a real risk to life and limb.

      I'd be equally enraged at my friend being killed by someone eating a burger/ playing with the radio/ reading a map or texting while driving because a driver should know that these things are likely to distract them enough to make their driving dangerous, and if they are likely to be distracted they shouldn't be doing these things in a built-up area!

      Maybe texting shouldn't be singled out any more than your other examples - people should try not to drive dangerously however that manifests itself - but don't try and pretend that this justifies trying to text while driving in busy areas. Actually, I think texting should be singled out. The main difference between texting and most of the things you mentioned is that texting (unless you're texting for directions, in which case it'd be safer to phone) isn't going to help you get to where you're going any quicker or more comfortably, and is therefore a completely unnecessary indulgence on your part, whereas "cd/radio/8 track/being lost/reading a old fashioned paper map/reading a GPS map" distractions at least serve a purpose on the trip. The point of the propaganda is to produce social stigma so it changes people's behaviour and they don't take unnecessary risks with the lives of other road users. In this case I'm all for it!

    12. Re:Inexperienced drivers are inexperienced by TheLink · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Texting while driving has actually been demonstrated to be worse than drunk driving in some experiments.

      I'm sure it is worse in most cases - unless you are very drunk...

      Texting requires a higher level of multitasking and most drivers have not been trained to text while driving, nor do they practice (under controlled circumstances!) doing it till they are very good at it. BUT I believe a small percentage of people (not all) can learn to text while driving safely.

      So perhaps they should:
      1) Try to train all learner drivers to text and talk while driving, and have them fail under controlled circumstances. Whether they get good enough or not they will be more aware of how dangerous and difficult it is (especially after killing many dozens in driving simulators).
      2) Then have two different driving exams and licenses - if you want the license to text and drive you have to pay more, and you have to pass a very difficult exam (paying for each try!) involving texting while driving (pass = zero spelling mistakes, zero driving mistakes, and not take too long for both driving and texting) and similar difficult stuff. If you pass, you get a different driving license and get to put a special sticker on your car (like the "handicapped" sticker except we're handicapped compared to you ;) ).

      With that license if you do crash while texting, and it's your fault, you still get the same penalty as everyone else. But the cops can't book you if you do not crash or break any other laws while texting or being on the phone. They can pull you over if you do not have that sticker on- just show them your license. So drive safely and you'll be fine.

      People might say it's elitist, but if you are good enough to pass such a test, the rest of the drivers on the road (including me) will be a greater danger to you than you to us!. I would be very happy if more drivers on the road could drive that well. In contrast I see many drivers who can't even stick to their lane when they're not even on the phone or doing anything else but driving.

      p.s. some jealous people would probably key your car if you display the sticker...

      --
    13. Re:Inexperienced drivers are inexperienced by smpoole7 · · Score: 2

      > Whatever the youth are interested in will be demonized. 60 years ago it was Elvis's hips

      Two points.

      First, the unfortunate thing about the article is that it implies that teenagers are the worst. ALL texting while driving is dangerous. I don't care how good you think you are, either, if you're texting, there is NO WAY you could react in time if someone should change lanes in front of you at the precise instant that you're looking down, trying to find the "X" key.

      My wife and I were almost run into a ditch the other day by a middle-aged man, staring down at his smart phone, while he flew at 75+ MPH down the interstate. The guy was weaving all over the place. Hey, I'm an older guy now, and the problem is that my eyes aren't as good as they used to be. I'd have to stare at the phone for a second, then look up and let them readjust to the road. This guy apparently didn't realize that.

      Second: your argument is invalid anyway. Elvis' hips, rock and roll, and Dungeons and Dragons did not, as a general rule, involve a distracted driver in a ton of steel and glass flying down the road. Simply put, Elvis' Evil Hips(tm) didn't generally kill people.

      (Except possibly for old ladies who experienced "the vapors" while watching him gyrate, but that's as may be!!!)

      --
      Cogito, igitur comedam pizza.
    14. Re:Inexperienced drivers are inexperienced by History's+Coming+To · · Score: 4, Funny

      I can drive safely while texting. The process goes like this:

      1: Pick up phone.
      2: Try to find "text" button while keeping my eyes on the road and fully concentrating on possible hazards.
      3: Realise that's impossible.
      4: Pull over.
      5: Text.

      --
      Please consider this account deleted, I just can't be bothered with the spam anymore.
    15. Re:Inexperienced drivers are inexperienced by ClioCJS · · Score: 2

      Yup! I sure remember a lot of youths being demonized for causing fatal car accidents while playing Dungeons and Dragons in their car. #Moron

      --
      -Clio
      Karma: Bad (mostly from not giving a fuck)
      Blog: http://clintjcl.wordpress.com
    16. Re:Inexperienced drivers are inexperienced by ClioCJS · · Score: 3, Insightful

      A certain amount of accidents are not preventable. Shit actually does happen. Texting is preventable. Having the best driving skill is not.

      --
      -Clio
      Karma: Bad (mostly from not giving a fuck)
      Blog: http://clintjcl.wordpress.com
    17. Re:Inexperienced drivers are inexperienced by misexistentialist · · Score: 2

      It's not the driving itself, it's the sex in the back seat!

    18. Re:Inexperienced drivers are inexperienced by PapayaSF · · Score: 2

      only the distractions have changed over time

      The original driving distraction controversy was the car radio. There were a number of attempts to ban them. More.

      --
      Q: What does the "B." in Benoit B. Mandelbrot stand for? A: Benoit B. Mandelbrot
    19. Re:Inexperienced drivers are inexperienced by Carewolf · · Score: 2

      jesus christ did someone actually use 'exponentially' correctly on the internet

      Nope. The energy involved in the crash which determines the damage done increases quadratically with speed. Similarly the safety margin for errors decreases quadratically with speed. So while it is super-linear, it is not anywhere near or related to exponentially. I am sorry; you will have search harder to find someone use 'exponentially' correctly on the internet :(

    20. Re:Inexperienced drivers are inexperienced by Ihmhi · · Score: 2

      Well, here's what would help:

      Make it legal to pull over to the side of the road for any reason whatsoever.

      Some businesses require live (or nearly live) communication with drivers on the road. Some people are so goddamned tired but they can't pull over, put down a couple triangles, flip the hazards on, and take a nap because they'll get ticketed and they (stupidly) would rather risk driving tired. Some people have the occasional urgent call or text that they need to take.

      What are these people supposed to do here - take an exit off the highway, find parking in whatever town or city they pulled into, finish their business, and then get back on the road?

    21. Re:Inexperienced drivers are inexperienced by omfgnosis · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This is rubbish. Texting while driving is being vilified because it's extremely dangerous and extremely common. That an extremely dangerous driving habit correlates to a "youth activity" (never mind that older adults do this as well) is probably a function of youth being less experienced drivers on average; less experienced drivers are more likely to engage in distracting activity while driving.

      Do you really think "the media" (as if texting while driving would otherwise be accepted by the countless other drivers, cyclists, pedestrians who've been endangered by it) would downplay a rash of "crossword puzzling while driving" by 50-somethings?

    22. Re:Inexperienced drivers are inexperienced by omfgnosis · · Score: 2

      From TFA:

      of all drivers under age 20 involved in fatal [subset] crashes, 16 percent were distracted -- the highest proportion of any age group.

      Among the various distractions, ranging from talking with passengers to adjusting the radio, texting while driving was particularly perilous. A 2009 study focusing on drivers of larger vehicles and trucks concluded that texting raised the risk of a crash by 23 times compared with nondistracted driving.

      The article doesn't discuss what makes up the other 84%, but it's not a stretch to imagine that a large portion of it is covered already by existing laws and enforcement, as in failure to follow safe driving procedure. But the figures for texting, as well as talking on a mobile, are staggering. If reducing distraction while driving could reduce accidents by anywhere approaching 16%—particularly distraction from activities that are wholly unnecessary and inappropriate like texting/mobile talking—why not do it?

      What possible argument is there for texting or speaking on a cell while in motion on a public road? It shouldn't be causing 1 accident, because there's no fucking reason to do it at all.

    23. Re:Inexperienced drivers are inexperienced by omfgnosis · · Score: 2

      I'm forced to agree: texting while driving is safer than not texting while driving! That's some sound reasoning you've got there.

    24. Re:Inexperienced drivers are inexperienced by omfgnosis · · Score: 3, Informative

      That's probably not safe to do while driving either.

    25. Re:Inexperienced drivers are inexperienced by hairyfeet · · Score: 2

      Well you could do all that OR...you could teach them not to be a dumbass and that no stupid text is worth risking their life and health over.

      One of the first things I drilled into my oldest boy's head was to NEVER talk on the cell or text while driving. I know the owner of one of the local salvage yards and had him point out a few of the wrecks where they had been using the cell phone or texting and it was a VERY sobering sight, cars twisted and mangled and obvious places where someone's head had hit or even a little splatter left on the interior, really nasty stuff. I know this worked because just the other day I saw my oldest pulled over in a parking lot sitting on the tailgate of his truck and asked if he was having a problem and he said "Nope, everything is fine, I just got a call and a text and pulled over to reply", needless to say i handed him a $20 right there and told him its nice to see him so responsible.

      So I'd say instead of going through all that trouble just 10 minutes in any junkyard ought to do the trick. No video can compare to seeing the results right there where you can touch it, to see the results of such stupidity.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
  3. Texting drivers have no shame by Tim+the+Gecko · · Score: 3, Interesting

    When cycling home I was passed by a driver texting on her phone. A few hundred yards later there was an intersection with a long red light and I asked her to keep her eyes on the road. She carried on texting and had to make an effort to look up every so often to check if the light was still red. Presumably she was texting "lol cyclist tld me to stp". It seemed like an accident waiting to happen.

    1. Re:Texting drivers have no shame by CrashandDie · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Just wait 'till you meet this guy on your commute home: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FxZxjgKcsPE

    2. Re:Texting drivers have no shame by blackest_k · · Score: 5, Funny

      previous comment cut off due to approaching intersection ...

    3. Re:Texting drivers have no shame by blackest_k · · Score: 2

      That can also be said of the car radio, some of the more interesting stations can be quite distracting if they are making you think, maybe that's why most are inane drivel. To be honest I believe most of us at sometime are distracted by our own thoughts at times, even if all we are thinking about is what to have to eat later when we get home.

      It's even worse if your thinking about how to find a solution to a problem. If you receive a text from someone is it worse to briefly look at it or spend time wondering what it says and who it's from.
      Sometimes it is really difficult to find a suitable place to pull over which is the sensible thing to do.

    4. Re:Texting drivers have no shame by SJester · · Score: 2

      There are significant differences between thinking about a text and reading or replying to one. Two comments above nailed it - there's a spectrum of distractions, and also spatial concepts really pull the mind away. Other types of thoughts and activities also drag attentiveness down, too. I'd also add that people are very bad at assessing their own attentiveness, and I can demonstrate this in a laboratory. (I'm a neuroscience grad student.) When we perform activities like texting, recall, or speaking in a foreign language, we reuse neural circuits that would otherwise be devoted to something else. Look at people with hemisphere neglect - not only can they not see things in their right visual field for example, they cannot even describe things in their right visual field from memories stored before the damage. In some cases, they cannot even be made aware that they're missing half the world. They just don't believe you, or explain it away. In that case clearly the memory recall is trying to use a damaged visual circuit, not just loading a memory from a hard drive. There's lots more about this - I can show you studies where neurons light up when something enters their visual receptive field, unless the subject is instructed to ignore them - and then the neuron acts like the stimulus is almost not there, like you failed to load the right drivers. Ever have an old computer insist the keyboard is not connected when it is? The upshot is twofold - attention can be directed and cannot be effectively split, since brains are a limited resource, and also we are very very bad at even realizing we're bad at it. I'm guessing one of the problems with the young drivers is not simply the amount that they text, but also they are inexperienced and less capable of recognizing the effect that texting has on them.

    5. Re:Texting drivers have no shame by DavidTC · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There are three types of distractions in a car.

      First, there's the plain 'Thing is happening' distraction, which can be anything from listening to the radio to talking on a hands free cell phone to another passenger. Luckily, not only are such distractions pretty minor, but in a lot of cases are actually helpful, as opposed to highway hypnosis and falling asleep and whatnot. The only real problem occurs when the other person isn't in the car, aka, they're on a cell phone, and thus they don't realize when they need to shut up and let you just drive for ten second.(1)

      Second are eye distractions. Looking away from the road.

      Third is hand distractions, where your hand is busy. Note this is the only 'distraction' that is built into cars, like the window control and the radio, which are designed to operate without eyes. Also eating is one of these. (This isn't really a 'distraction' issue as much as a 'control' issue. It makes dangerous situations worse, but only if they're already happening.)

      The real problem is that texting is all three of these. It requires looking while you read and reply, it requires one hand all the time (cell phones do not float in midair), and it also requires some actual thought as to what to say.

      It's pretty much every possible distraction rolled up into one. It's hard to think of something that could be worse. Seriously, just call the damn person, even without hands free. At least then you can watch the road.

      1) Which is why everyone should really get in the habit of saying 'Hold on a sec' while they're driving and talking on the phone. All the time. No, it's not rude in any way, and people who are talking to drivers need to understand that anything might be happening. (Of course, when I mean 'driving and talking on the phone', I mean 'using hands free'.)

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    6. Re:Texting drivers have no shame by SJester · · Score: 3

      You're completely right, but there's an invisible component I tried to describe before drinking coffee. A bit post-coffee now, I meant that certain behaviors -and I am confident that texting is one of them - also take your mind elsewhere. Distraction isn't just failure to point your eyes in the right direction. During certain activities your eyes can be pointed perfectly fine, and your conscious mind will simply not register. Your sensory systems were told to be quiet and they just won't signal. Or the circuit's busy because it's used for something else. Ever watch the basketball selective attention test? It's on Youtube, don't read the comments before watching. Or during saccades - look into your own eyes in a mirror. Look at your left eye, then your right, then your left... You know your eyes are moving but you don't see them move. Have someone else do the same, and you can see their eyes move. We suppress vision during saccades - and no one notices! Lots of reasons why distraction short-circuits our systems, but the key is it happens without us knowing. Our brains cheerfully lie to us. Works fine when you're concerned about rubbing sticks to make fire, or not getting eaten by a saber-toothed tiger, but it's shit at high speed in traffic. I'll bet a texting person shuts down certain necessary percepts.

  4. Touchscreens just as bad as texting by finlandia1869 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You know what else is equally dumb, but has gotten a free pass? Touchscreen interfaces in cars. I make it a point to buy cars with physical controls so that I can do things by touch alone. Plus, the designers always seem to make it a point to bury settings in nested menus; this only makes it worse. 4.6 seconds is probably how long it takes some people to change the station on the radio. And of course, they have to look down at the screen to do it.

    1. Re:Touchscreens just as bad as texting by itsdapead · · Score: 5, Interesting

      You know what else is equally dumb, but has gotten a free pass? Touchscreen interfaces in cars.

      Not just touchscreens - UI design for cars in general, especially any sort of "multifunction" button that requires you to look at a display in order to know what it is going to do.

      Pretty much all car audio design is crap in that respect. Personal favourites that I have run in to (or have nearly made me run into things) include:

      • Radio with 25% of the limited facia space occupied by big shiny bezel around a big doomsday-grade button for... toggling the audio enhancement mode. Buttons for selecting the source, changing channel etc. were scratty little things.
      • One radio that started beeping when it lost its auto-tune lock on a station. Not just any beep but a beep that got louder, louder, louder and LOUDER... forget avoiding those pedestrians and oncoming traffic because THE RADIO HAS LOST ITS AUTO-TUNE LOCK! My god, man, you're driving without the aid of soft rock and unhelpful traffic information - do something!
      • Anything with blue LED illumination. There's a reason why they use red lighting in submarine movies, morons! The device in question did have two brightness settings: blinding or merely dazzling. (See also other people's xenon headlights)
      • Anything without a volume knob.
      --
      In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
  5. Re:drunk drivers don't sober up while drving by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 4, Insightful

    During those seconds, maybe more than a few, there is at least a small chance the drunk driver is actually paying attention to driving. The same can't be said for texting. Either way, I don't think needlessly risking the lives of others should be legal.

  6. Darwin by rossdee · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Never mind the drivers that are killed, because they are texting etc, what about those that are killed or injured by them, who are innocent? (ie the pedestrians and people in the vehicles they collide with. ) They are the ones we should be concerned about.

    1. Re:Darwin by Rakshasa-sensei · · Score: 3, Funny

      I have a better idea, one that has a much lower ratio of intelligent people needing to die.

      It involves handing out guns to cyclists and giving them permits to shoot any fucker texting. Even if there's a few fake positives it will be much lower than the number dying due to texting drivers.

  7. Adjusting radio averages 3 seconds. by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 3, Funny

    I did some testing and adjusting the radio takes me about 3 seconds.

    But I can control when I adjust it.

    I'd be more concerned about people reading a text that arrived at a risky time than scanning the road, then texting.

    I could not text and drive safely.

    --
    She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
  8. Re:drunk drivers don't sober up while drving by mosb1000 · · Score: 2

    You may be shocked to learn that cars are not necessary for transportation. Better ban them while you're at it, because only a relatively small fraction of accidents are the result of distracted or drunk driving.

  9. Being distracted while driving is dangerous. by mobby_6kl · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Film at eleven.

    Meanwhile, Turn signal neglect results in over twice as many crashes as distracted driving, but nobody gives a shit because it's not a new scary technology used by the damn kids ruining everything.

    1. Re:Being distracted while driving is dangerous. by Idarubicin · · Score: 2

      but nobody gives a shit because it's not a new scary technology used by the damn kids ruining everything.

      I'm pretty sure that failure to properly signal turns and lane changes is actually illegal in more states than using a cell phone or texting while driving. So this must the be some newfangled we'll-fine-you-heavily-and-raise-your-insurance-rates kind of "nobody gives a shit".

      --
      ~Idarubicin
  10. What fraction of Rhode Island does that equal? by pla · · Score: 2

    First, let me say that I consider it nothing short of suicidally (or even homicidally) stupid to text while driving.

    That said...


    which at 55 mph, means they were driving the length of a football field without looking,' said David Hosansky.

    Why does any car-motion reference need to point out distances in multiples of football fields, as though that means anything? On a highway, you can see many times that distance around you, and unless something drastically changes, 120 yards really doesn't mean much. You already know about everything within that range, so merely measuring distance doesn't say much of anything.

    More usefully, can a deer reach the road from the trees in 4.6 seconds? How long does it take for someone with a blowout to swerve into your lane? Will you hit the car in front of you (also moving at a similar speed, so absolute distance means nothing) within 4.6 seconds if it slams on its brakes for no particular reason?

    I get the idea that most people probably have a good idea of what it feels like to walk the length of a football field; that sense of "big"ness simply doesn't meaningfully apply under highway traffic conditions.

  11. Teens today lack basic driving skills . . . by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 5, Funny

    Back in the 70's a teen could drive 100 mph in a 25 mph zone, while simultaneously smoking a joint, snorting a line of coke off the dashboard, fingering his squealing girlfriend and not spill a drop from the glass filled with Jim Beam held in his one hand on the steering wheel.

    So obviously, texting has distracted them from learning these important core driving skills, and is to blame.

    Actually, you can't ban every foolish activity while driving, because fools are so ingenious, and will always find a foolish way to distract themselves while driving.

    --
    Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
  12. None of this specific stuff should be illegal by bradley13 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    What should be illegal is being impaired while driving. Outlawing individual distractions is an endless task, and opens the door to wrongful prosecution.

    Sure, texting while driving is stupid. On the one hand: Just how is a cop going to prove that is what you were doing? Maybe you were looking at a map. On the other hand, by outlawing it, cops can accuse you of texting any time they see you with a phone in your hand, or see you looking down rather that at the road.

    Here's another example: why should it be illegal to have an alcoholic beverage open in a car? If you are not intoxicated, what difference does it make if you choose to drink your after-work beer on the way home? Why is this more dangerous that drinking it in a bar and then driving home?

    The law ought to be: if you are driving safely, fine. If you are not, you can be pulled over. If you are in an accident, and were provably distracted (by anything), this may play a role in the assignment of fault.

    --
    Enjoy life! This is not a dress rehearsal.
    1. Re:None of this specific stuff should be illegal by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 2

      What should be illegal is being impaired while driving.

      Which is what you're doing if you're holding a phone in one hand and looking at it instead of the road.

      On the other hand, by outlawing it, cops can accuse you of texting any time they see you with a phone in your hand

      They don't need to in the UK - just holding the phone is enough (rightly so in my opinion).

      The law ought to be: if you are driving safely, fine.

      Good luck defining "driving safely". Isn't it for that very reason that we have driving laws in the first place? If you could define it, we wouldn't need speed limits, signals, laws against using a mobile phone...

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
    2. Re:None of this specific stuff should be illegal by Brian+Feldman · · Score: 2

      and yet every GPS for a car comes with a windshield-oriented mounting kit....

      --
      Brian Fundakowski Feldman
    3. Re:None of this specific stuff should be illegal by bradley13 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Speed limits, with the possible exceptions of highways, are supposed to be set to reflect the road conditions. Traffic lights are supposed to improve traffic flow. Etc, etc. Of course, there are plenty of cities and towns that have forgotten this, and turned traffic laws into revenue generators.

      You literally cannot enumerate all the possible things that might distract a driver. What about eating a hamburger? hat about the animated billboards along the road? What about having your girlfriend flirt with you? Women putting on their makeup? Guys shaving? Trying to make a law to cover each and every possibility is just stupid. Moreover, what is distracting to one person or in one situation may be perfectly fine in another. Looking at your mobile phone while driving is dangerous? What if you are stopped at a traffic light?

      What's more, TFA can't even justify the anti-texting law. Only 1/6 of the accidents of the drivers most vulnerable to distraction (the under 20s) were due to distraction. TFA doesn't even attempt to figure out how many of those 1/6 were due to texting - it simply assumes that texting must play a big enough role to deserve its own, special law. The study - at least, the freely available excerpts - is no better, leaping from 5000 traffic deaths per year (total due to distraction) to the assumption that outlawing one specific behavior is somehow useful.

      Reality: this is another "feel-good" law that legislators will pass, so that they can be seen to be "doing something". Meanwhile, they continue to deliberately ignore the real, important issues they ought to deal with.

      --
      Enjoy life! This is not a dress rehearsal.
  13. sharing the road by epine · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You might factor into your model of the mainstream media that few people find the behaviour patterns of decrepit old farts newsworthy.

    Youth are early adopters, and many youth and young adults lack the judgement to step back from the new stupid. Also known as a sex drive. A young adult using text to A) get laid, or B) indulge in the fantasy that you might someday get laid is not worrying that taking a driving license away from an 80 year-old widow with failing eyesight and reaction times deprives her of her last vestige of independence. "Get out of my way, old bird, I'm trying to get laid. #horny"

    SMS accident template

    Two young adults are stuck behind some slow-moving great-grandmother, but neither notices initially since they are both busy texting and the slower speed makes it easier to divide attention. The man is writing a shorter text and looks up first, sees that he's going to miss a major light because of the slow-moving old bird two cars ahead, but has just enough time to make an abrupt lane change into an open space and gun the intersection. Young women in front finishes her text moments later, decides to make the same move (with less testosterone) sees the same gap, but doesn't take into account the asshole multitasking male who was driving behind her one seconds ago careening into the same opening with twice the acceleration.

    Asshole male finishes his abrupt shoulder check and swings his head forward just in time to sense his impending impact with the young woman making the same lane change in front of him. He tries to protect his precious chrome bumper by swinging yet further around rodeo style and clips a bicyclist in the oncoming lane who had moved inside for an upcoming left turn.

    It's a lot like wifi spectrum. If you're the only driver on the highway who texts, you enjoy the protection of every other driver having their eyes on the road. But then other cheeky drivers start to behave the same way, and soon you experience packet loss. The problem on the road is that some packets are more fragile than others. How come the car wash is out of service? Because the drain is clogged again with little strips of Lycra.