Slashdot Mirror


App Can Prevent Users From Texting While Driving

Hugh Pickens writes writes "Scientific American reports that while laws prohibit texting while driving in many states, many people still find it impossible to resist. Now researchers at Pacific Northwest National Laboratory are studying how software on a cell phone could analyze keystrokes to determine when that phone's user is distracted while composing and sending text messages and combined with GPS and other data, determine when a texter is behind the wheel and shut off texting functions automatically. Such a feature could take the form of a mobile app for any phone—independent of the manufacturer, operating system and wireless service provider. The researchers programmed a cell phone to log keystroke dynamics using a common operating system as a means of determining if an individual was texting while driving, in particular, 'keystroke entropy.' (PDF) when keys are struck at irregular intervals, as an indicator that the test subjects' attention is divided between texting and driving. 'The things that we are measuring, the data never needs to leave the person's phone,' says Mike Watkins, developer of the algorithm. 'But as a parent, you could require your child to have something like this on their cellphone as a way to protect them. Employers could use it as a way to mitigate their liability for accidents on work time. Even insurance companies could use it.'"

26 of 144 comments (clear)

  1. If it works... by Cosgrach · · Score: 2

    If it really does work, why not just put it on all call phones ant make it so that it can not be disabled.

    Seriously, the number of people that I see looking at their crotch while driving is staggering.

    --
    Why is it that most of the people that I encounter seem to have been shat from the Sphincter of Mediocrity?
    1. Re:If it works... by Darkness404 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      How about lets make cars that can't go faster than XX miles per hour? How about we put a chip in the car that automatically finds where the car is via GPS and will throttle the engine so it can't break the speed limit?

      Just because something is technically possible doesn't mean its worth the damage to freedom.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    2. Re:If it works... by EGSonikku · · Score: 4, Funny

      ....while driving...and texting.

      Dangerous, but makes you God anyway so whatever.

      --
      - "Scientia non habet inimicum nisp ignorantem"
    3. Re:If it works... by green1 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      how about completely ignoring what a person is doing, and only punish them if they are driving recklessly, regardless of the cause. We have laws against reckless driving already. don't make up new ones for each thing a person could possibly imagine doing. You'll never get every possible stupid act in a list anyway, and you will punish people who are actually being safe. I now live in a place where it's illegal to glance at the screen of your cell phone while stopped with the gear selector in park waiting for a 15 minute train to go by, and yet driving 20 under the limit in the fast lane on the expressway is perfectly fine. more laws isn't the answer, enforce the ones we already have instead.

      I also wonder how long before we get stuck in a situation where cars drive themselves, but the person sitting in the driver's seat isn't allowed to do anything while there because of outdated laws that rarely if ever get taken off the books.

    4. Re:If it works... by Zibodiz · · Score: 5, Insightful

      How about we put a chip in the car that automatically finds where the car is via GPS and will throttle the engine so it can't break the speed limit?

      If they did that, police would lose a huge revenue stream. Not going to happen.

    5. Re:If it works... by b4dc0d3r · · Score: 2

      Slap "reckless endangerment" and felony imprisonment on texting while operating a vehicle, and I bet the problem will be solved without harming anyone else.

      I will take that bet. We have plenty of laws against doing obviously stupid things, but people still do them. Increased cracking down on drunk drivers has gone into the law of diminishing returns area, people end up in prison despite not having hurt anyone, and people still do it. If the daily mug shot links on news aggregation sites are an indicator, the prostitution business is still around.

      You won't stop a behavior by making it a punishable offense.

      Just the same, any technological solution will have false positives and false negatives. Whoever is selling this idea will probably become rich, while pissing a lot of people off. I can't wait for the inevitable "it failed to stop the death of my child" lawsuit.

      I was a passenger in a Prius, trying to set up Bluetooth audio. This feature is disabled if the car is going above 5 mph. You can use Bluetooth, change all kinds of things about the display, fiddle with the map, but actually setting up the BT is disabled. Up to 2005, it is something the passenger can override, but requires hardware hacking 2006+. So while I may be biased against tech solutions, I do have experiences with them being implemented incorrectly.

  2. won't work. by flogger · · Score: 5, Insightful

    when keys are struck at irregular intervals, as an indicator that the test subjects' attention is divided between texting and driving.

    So the way to get around that, if you are the teen forced to have this app, is to pay less attention on driving and focus on the texting.

    --
    ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
    "First things first -- but not necessarily in that order"
    -- The Doctor, "Doctor
    1. Re:won't work. by Khashishi · · Score: 2

      Well, then you install steering entropy monitor system on your car, and shut down the engine if the car thinks it isn't getting enough attention.

  3. But... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ... if it's measuring keystroke entropy, wouldn't that mean the person is already starting to text? I've seen lots of solutions like this before (flash random letters/numbers, require parroting those letters/numbers, etc), and it's the same issue: you're responding to something someone is doing instead of proactively not allowing the person to do it in the first place. Essentially, the person could already be causing a problem on the road.

    In other words, it's an interesting piece of academic work that I'm sure has applications elsewhere, however it's not going to solve the problem of texting behind the wheel.

    1. Re:But... by icebike · · Score: 2

      Good point.

      Fishing the phone out, opening the texting screen and starting to text is probably the most dangerous time, whereas entering characters slowly while attempting to watch the road is probably not quite so dangerous (although still dangerous enough since you pretty much can't text on a touch screen one handed).

      I suspect that the design here is to make it futile to try to text, thereby extinguishing the urge to do so.

      I also wonder what some of the predictive keyboards such as Swiftkey that can predict not just words after a couple characters have been typed, but entire words that typically occur together. Such keyboards deliver entire words in bursts to the text message, followed by a couple characters followed by more entire words (selected from the suggestions). That has to mess up the cadence.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
  4. Public Transport by p0p0 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So basically they are taking it upon themselves to ban you from texting in a public transport, or as a passenger. Many rides are bumpy enough and anyone carrying on a conversation might seem distracted enough for the app to trigger.

    All this is going to do is force drivers to pay MORE attention to the phone as they don't want their message to be cancelled by the app.

  5. What a pain! by jittles · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The GPS built into my car has this capability already. What was the first thing I did when I got the car home? I took the damn thing apart and disabled the system that prevents you from using the GPS while driving. Why? Because I like to have passengers in my car. Its perfectly safe for a passenger to use the GPS all they want while I am driving. Hell they can even watch a DVD in the surround sound system in the car while I drive. I don't care. I'm not distracted by it, so what does it matter? (Though I will say in most jurisdictions just being able to see the movie is grounds for a moving violation, so be careful.)

    Anyway, this software is likely to think that a passenger who is texting while talking to other people in the car are distracted drivers as well. Why don't we just give up on using technology to babysit people in these areas and start teaching people responsibility? If there is a way to disable texting while driving, someone can re enable it by rooting/jailbreaking their phone and modifying the software. What is the point in entering this arms race? People need to learn to make intelligent decisions, and not have intelligent decisions forced upon them.

    1. Re:What a pain! by mlts · · Score: 4, Informative

      The Ford SYNC system does this already. If the car is going more than 3 miles/hour, you can't do a lot of functions, including look through an address book unless you use the voice features.

      The problem is two things: Bad drivers, and sue-happy people. If a wreck happens, the attorneys involved want to go after the people with the deep pockets, not the party at fault. So, this is why Ford and other makers have to put this brain-damaged crap in their vehicles, just so they can claim they did their due diligence in dealing with the idiots.

    2. Re:What a pain! by jittles · · Score: 2

      I'm sure you can disable that if you want. They always leave a way to do so, it seems like. They know that some people would not pay for a factory system that cripples them when they could buy an aftermarket system that has no such limitations. The handsfree in my car is tied to the GPS system, and once I cracked that thing, I was able to do whatever I want with the phone while driving. Though my car doesn't have the voice commands. I really liked the SYNC system I played around with.

  6. Horrible in practice by Bogtha · · Score: 2

    Heuristics like this might be interesting on a theoretical level, but they won't be anywhere near as reliable as other approaches. I don't want my phone to have its functions disabled because I'm halfway through typing a text message and I sneeze or something. Phone integration with cars is only going to increase. Link cars with phones via Bluetooth and have the cars tell the phones when they are in motion.

    --
    Bogtha Bogtha Bogtha
  7. Only while in motion by tepples · · Score: 4, Informative

    The article says the error rate would be combined with GPS. Only erratic typing while driving or while riding public transit would result in a block.

    1. Re:Only while in motion by Knuckles · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The article says the error rate would be combined with GPS. Only erratic typing while driving or while riding public transit would result in a block.

      Or erratic typing while on a car's passenger seat, Anyway, preventing erratic typing while on public transport seems like a rather large problem to me.

      --
      "When I first heard Daydream Nation it quite frankly scared the living shit out of me." -- Matthew Stearns
    2. Re:Only while in motion by icebike · · Score: 4, Informative

      The article says the error rate would be combined with GPS. Only erratic typing while driving or while riding public transit would result in a block.

      Or erratic typing while on a car's passenger seat, Anyway, preventing erratic typing while on public transport seems like a rather large problem to me.

      When reading the linked article, (I know, this is slashdot), they seem to suggest that the typing patterns and cadences are unique to driving:

      After evaluating the sensitivity of the keystroke entropy indicator against the number of keystrokes recorded, the researchers found they could accurately and relatively quickly identify when a test subject had been both texting and operating the simulator. They found normal texting took on more rhythmic patterns.

      I suspect that even on the bus sitting next to some random dodgy character you would type in a more normal cadence, even allowing for a bumpy ride. You could probably type a whole sentence in your normal text-speak without more than one or two breaks in rhythm as opposed to pauses mid-word.

      So it might well be able to distinguish bus and passenger seat users from drivers.

      I could see that a passenger engaged in watching the scenery might actually text as distractedly as a driver, but they have a choice of texting or watching, and could modify their texting style to "git er done" in one go, which is an option the driver doesn't rationally have. (To the degree that rationality enters the discussion).

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    3. Re:Only while in motion by e3m4n · · Score: 5, Insightful

      the unforseen consequence is that people will likely give even less attention to the road and focus more attentively on texting to make sure their text doesnt get disabled. In essence it might save some, but others will pay even less attention to the road and they will make up for any gains of the few you save from mistakes.

    4. Re:Only while in motion by Knuckles · · Score: 2

      My command of the English language was confused for a moment. OK so we are talking about he regular seats I can buy tickets for to rinde on the train. In that case I still don't understand your commnt, "Since it combines GPS motion detection, you would have to be reading that interesting book on the train/bus/car passenger seat." Yeah, so?

      Regarding, "for you it might not work until after you collect your thoughts to the point where you can complete a word before becoming distracted":
      1. That's certainly not for my phone to decide
      2. I may be texting in a foreign language. There are endless situations imaginable where this can legitimately happen. And if it's just because of being stoned or something - then point 1 still applies.

      --
      "When I first heard Daydream Nation it quite frankly scared the living shit out of me." -- Matthew Stearns
    5. Re:Only while in motion by JeffAtl · · Score: 2

      Or erratic typing while on a car's passenger seat, Anyway, preventing erratic typing while on public transport seems like a rather large problem to me.

      Especially in a hostage situation

  8. Ah, the old "for the children" ploy. Run away. by zephvark · · Score: 2

    "But as a parent, you could require your child to have something like this on their cellphone as a way to protect them..."

  9. No! by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 4, Funny

    I would never install an app that detected when I was driving and shut

    --
    (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
  10. Riiiiight by future+assassin · · Score: 2

    Forget about teaching your children not to do it, we`ll just create another useless device to offset parenting skills and common sense. So tell me genius what keeps the kids from having a second phone and switch the sim card.

    --
    by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
  11. Until the first lawsuit hits... by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 4, Interesting

    People that have been kidnapped have texted from the trunks of cars alerting others to what is going on. Imagine if those texts were blocked because you were in a moving vehicle and you were not typing normally?

    --
    "But this one goes to 11!"
  12. Why we have technical driving offences by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 2

    how about completely ignoring what a person is doing, and only punish them if they are driving recklessly, regardless of the cause. We have laws against reckless driving already.

    I've often wondered about this. Why don't we just have basic, universal laws against things like dangerous or inconsiderate driving?

    After a while, I realised it's because these laws invariably leave a gray area right around the point that the people who we're trying to discourage from doing dumb things are actually doing those dumb things. Worse, those people are often in denial about their problem. Just look at the number of past Slashdot discussions where numerous people claim they can phone/text/whatever and drive, despite overwhelming evidence that only a tiny subset of the population are actually supertaskers. They don't think they're guilty of dangerous driving, so having a generic dangerous driving offence isn't going to affect them.

    On the other hand, an objective standard, while inevitably imposing some limitation on the few people who really are good drivers and capable of doing more, leaves no room for the potentially dangerous people to escape. Text and drive, get caught, we crush your car. Simple. You didn't accidentally text, if you've got a driving licence you should know very well if the law says texting is illegal, and there are exactly zero emergency situations where a text would be more appropriate than, say, calling 911 (or whatever your local version is) unless you start getting into conspiracy theories that belong more in Hollywood movies than legislative debates. In short, there is no excuse, and having a black-and-white technical offence on the books makes prosecution an open and shut case.

    My happy karma glasses see it this way. I know that I probably am safer on the road than the average driver, based on objective measures and peer review/training, and that I probably could handle my car at speeds some way above a lot of limits without compromising safety. However, I would surely complete my journeys even faster and in greater safety if the drivers at the extreme other end of the spectrum were consistently discouraged from doing dumb things or totally removed from the road. The impact they have through bad driving and the consequences of accidents surely causes a far greater delay on average than me driving say 20% slower than I'd ideally choose to do so that I stay within a legal limit.

    It's always important to be wary of arguments that limiting someone's freedom is OK because it's also limiting the freedoms of hypothetical Bad People. However, in this case, the risk from bad drivers is not so much hypothetical as measured in thousands of human lives lost every year. On the other hand, the limitations on freedom for the rest of us are almost zero since no responsible driver would ever be texting and driving anyway, and obviously there is scope for making exceptions if, for example, a doctor certifies that a patient should be exempt because of a legitimate medical condition that means restricting their phone would affect them in unintended ways when they're not driving.

    So after reflecting on this subject for a long time, I've concluded that technical road laws like banning texting while driving are a net win, as long as they are enforced impartially and regularly enough to actually be a deterrent.

    --
    If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.